Blind Justice and the Pro-Life Failure
Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely. Proverbs 28:5 (ESV)
Perhaps the most recognized symbol in the history of Western law is that of Lady Justice, often depicted blindfolded, holding a sword in one hand and a balance (scales) in the other. The personification of justice in this way goes back to the ancient Romans, with Emperor Augustus (27 BC — AD 14) introducing Justitia, goddess of justice, into the Roman pantheon. Today, her statue sits atop courthouses and government buildings all across the globe, particularly in more “westernized” nations. Her sword is generally viewed as a sign of authority, and the scales (obviously) represent the idea of “weighing out” evidence to determine the result of a case. Her blindfold, on the other hand, has a more complicated history. For a long time, it was unknown the actual origin of Lady Justice being depicted with a blindfold, but recently it has become popular to believe that it originated as satire- a critique of the justice system being blind to corruption- however, over time the blindfold has taken on a more positive meaning, as symbolizing impartiality in justice. It is this latter virtue which we will be examining in this article- first, we will unpack the Biblical basis for this concept, where in doing so we will get a clear understanding of what it means to be impartial in judgement, and secondly, a glaring example of partiality is our own day.
The Biblical Basis
“God shows no partiality” — Romans 2:11
It is well known that, while the Enlightenment undoubtedly had a tremendous influence on the American founders, the Bible (and Protestant thinking in general) permeated throughout the thinking of our first 13 colonies, and hence had a heavy influence upon the founders as well, with the book of Deuteronomy being one of the most frequently cited sources in their political writings. And since the virtue of “blind” or impartial justice is deeply Biblical, it is no wonder that this concept helped form our own judicial system- and hence blindfolded lady justice is permanently featured in the architecture of our own Supreme Court’s building. It is this Biblical Basis which we will now address.
The Law of Moses
God’s law serves as a reflection of His own holy character, and since God Himself “shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:11) it is no surprise to see that He commanded His people in the Old Covenant to observe impartiality in justice.
“You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice, nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit”. — Exodus 23:2–3
“You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor”. — Leviticus 19:15
“You shall not be partial in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God’s. And the case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it”. — Deuteronomy 1:17
These are just a few examples from the Law of Moses where God’s people are explicitly told not to be “partial” in judgement (all citations from the ESV). In examining these three sections, we see not only that God frowns upon partiality, but we are given examples of what is meant by partiality. The texts cited from Exodus 23 and Leviticus 19 both mention being “partial to the poor”. A just judge ought not look at a poor man, and out of compassion for him rule in his favor when it is not fair to do so. On the opposite end, a just judge ought not “defer to the great” and be intimidated by their power, esteem, influence or even a bribe (Deut. 16:19). What God’s law has to say, is that in judgement you are to “hear the small and the great alike”.
Looking closer at the original language, the phrase translated as “You shall not be partial” in Lev. 19:15 and Deut. 1:17 is the Hebrew לֹֽא־תַכִּ֨ירוּ פָנִ֜ים (lo- tikkaru panim) which literally means “you shall not regard one’s face”. Later books in the Hebrew Bible will use a phrase that means to “lift up the face” (for example, 2 Chronicles 19:7) to refer to partiality. Sometimes you will hear the phrase “respect of persons” in reference to this- the idea being communicated is that we recognize one person (one face), and we defer to that face over against another. And so, in the context of justice, to regard one’s face or show respect of persons is to give one individual preferential treatment, or favoritism, not based upon weighing out facts, evidence or witnesses (think about the balance, or scales, in Lady Justice’s hand) but instead because of either compassion, or intimidation, on behalf of who that person is. In other words, justice must be blind.
To give a modern example wherein this precedent can be seen, in the State of Ohio (where I live) you cannot serve on jury duty for a case in which you are less than four degrees of separation (by blood relation or personal affinity) to either party, or either party’s attorney. This is because we recognize the high likelihood that if you see someone you know or love, you will regard their face and show partiality to them when giving a verdict.
New Testament Ethic
While the New Testament writers were not composing legislation in the same way Moses was, whose writings were to be the statutes for a physical nation, they were inspired by the same God- and hence, we see a consistent continuation of impartiality as a moral virtue in guiding the way Christian believers are to live their lives.
“My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?… If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors”. — James 2:1–9
In the context of the local church, Christian people are forbidden from showing partiality, or favoritism, towards wealthy people- showing them preferential treatment, giving them nice places to sit, so on and so forth. Every Christian believer must heed these warnings in Scripture, and strive to be impartial towards all people they meet, fulfilling the royal law to love your neighbor as yourself.
In closing this section on the Biblical basis for “blind” or impartial justice, we see that this noble principle which has been recognized by our western forefathers, is firmly Biblical in its origin- finding its roots in the eternal, unchanging character of Holy God.
A Glaring Example of Partiality In Our Own Day
“… a second victim of the abortion industry”
Meet Kristan Hawkins, current President of one of the largest pro-life organizations in the United States which seeks to organize college students across the country to get involved with the pro-life cause. In June of 2023, she appeared on a livestream debate alongside President and founder of Live Action Lila Rose against the popular left-wing streamer Destiny. In response to an audience submitted question (around 1:24:22) on whether or not a woman whose had an abortion should face legal penalties, Kristan revealed a major inconsistency in the popular pro-life position, where we get a chance to see a glaring example of partiality in our own time.
“I believe that those who commit murder, so the abortionists, those who would be assisting in the abortion could be tried with a crime- and actually we’ve written laws at Students for Life Action that do make committing abortion a criminal offense. We do not believe that a woman should go to jail from abortion because sadly for 50 years in our country we have told women that it’s not murder, and it’s not killing, it’s simply a removal of meaningless blobs of tissue that [doesn’t] have any consciousness yet, which we know is false, and so we actually see her very much as a second victim of the abortion industry”- Kristan Hawkins, President, Students For Life of America
Kristan’s inconsistency in these words is obvious (Destiny, her debate opponent, points this out to her immediately), she wants to say (rightly) that abortion is murder, and even that the abortionist should be criminalized, but then she regards the face of the mother and seeks to present the idea that not only should she not be punished, but Kristan puts forward the rather incredible notion that she is herself a victim!
What is behind this? Well, in our culture, we have been taught to always view women in this compassionate way, whether it is justified or not.
You may remember the recent #MeToo phenomena, in which we heard many cases about women who were victims of sexual abuse. And in many instances, this was true and what happened to these women was heartbreakingly tragic- however, very quickly we saw a fly in the ointment. We would start to hear about cases in which women were claiming to be victims of abuse at the hands of highly prominent men, but when you actually looked into the facts- you found out that they were not victims at all, but rather willing participants in these sexual affairs. You see, the narrative that we were taught to believe, was that even though these women consented to these acts, there was a “power dynamic” involved because the men were more famous, had money or whatever it may be. The end result is that we have essentially been trained to believe that women cannot be held responsible for their own actions.
Kristan Hawkins shows us that this “woke” mindset has infiltrated co-called “conservatism” as well. Although she says abortion is murder, she will not call the woman who procures for herself an abortion a “murderer”. Her argument, that women believe it isn’t murder due to pro-abortion propaganda, can be easily dismissed- as we continually see video after video online of women at abortion clinics admitting that it’s murder, and not caring. Nobody truly believes the fetus is just a “clump of cells”, that is a lie used to suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Nobody is unaware of what abortion is, therefore, everyone responsible should be held accountable.
Let me make an illustration with our image of blindfolded lady justice- put a blindfold over Kristan Hawkins’ eyes- and set on one side of the scale the evidence that points to the fact that someone has unjustifiably taken the life of another human being. The evidence being weighed (yes, if she was blindfolded she obviously couldn’t see, but it’s just an illustration), she determines that murder has been committed, and the individual responsible should receive the full penalty of the law (which according to God’s Law, murder would be a capital crime; see Genesis 9:6, Exodus 21:12,14, Leviticus 24:17, Numbers 35:30). All of a sudden, the blindfold falls from her eyes, and she regards the face of the mother, and in a state of weak compassion, determines that no penalty should be put forth.
Although this may be attractive to our current culture, we have already examined the Bible to determine what God says about showing partiality in justice. (As someone who joined the Roman Catholic Church in 2015, and claims that her faith serves as a motivator for her, this demonstrates a great ignorance of God’s standards of justice).
The Failure of This Approach
The ultimate reason why it is wrong to say that women who have abortions should receive immunity and impunity from the law is because of God’s standards of justice- this alone should be enough. But we should also recognize that if we do not legislate abortion as a crime, with a penalty attached, it will continue in our land indefinitely. To quote the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen,
“The binding force and authority of any particular commandment always lies in its penal threat; if no punishment is to follow the violation of a law, then the law is merely a suggestion. A person is not demanded to act in a certain way unless his disobedience is followed by the application of a penal sanction”, Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, pg. 421.
According to the Pew Research center, the majority of abortions performed in the United States are “medication abortions”, meaning that they are done with pills. Their statistic says 56%, but when you remember that pills can be purchased online with no way to statistically track how many abortions are performed, this number could be much higher. What this means, is that you could close down every abortion clinic, every planned parenthood, execute every abortionist tomorrow, and abortion would continue legally and at high-rates, unless the actual act of abortion was criminalized for the mother.
What About the Gospel?
The Christian message is that Jesus came to die for the sins of His people, that they, being granted repentance and faith, would turn away from their sin and follow Him. The only way we can communicate this message, is by telling sinners that they are guilty of their sin. The law convicts us before we can truly seek to observe it. But if we tell women that they aren’t guilty, then we have put a roadblock in between them and the transforming, redemptive power of the Gospel.
Controversy Amongst Conservatives
Kristan’s position, which is emblematic of the “pro-life” movement as whole, has come under sharp criticism in recent years by a rising group of anti-abortion Christians commonly referred to as “abolitionists” (whose position is succinctly defined here). Leaders such as Jeff Durbin and T. Russel Hunter have sought to present a consistently Biblical approach to the issue of abortion and have routinely called out the partiality demonstrated by Hawkins and others like her. This movement of abolitionists has caused (and continues to cause) controversy within conservative circles, often being labelled as “extremists” for believing that women who have willingly murdered their own child should be penalized. But if believing we should be impartial in justice is extreme, then all faithful Christians are called to be extremists.
In Conclusion
Christian believers, who recognize their need to be salt and light (Matthew 5:13–16) in our current unsavory, and dark culture must learn to love what God says concerning justice and showing no partiality. In the first part of this article, I set forth these Biblical principles in general, so that we would understand them on their own merit. In the second portion, I demonstrated one glaring example of partiality in the pro-life movement that Christians must speak against. I am thankful to have worked with many in the abortion abolitionist movement who actively seek to defend a more consistently Christian approach to the issue of abortion. But this is not the only example of partiality that Christians should speak to. We should labor to exemplify impartiality towards every civil issue, and especially in our own personal lives. We serve a Holy God, and as He is holy, so are we commanded to be.
For more information on this topic, view a sermon I preached where I go into detail explaining what the Christian stance on abortion is, and further discussing penalty, and answering common objections: