God, Choice, and the Meaning of Moral Responsibility

by Rev. William M. Brennan, TH.D. 

The idea that God is “pro-choice” is often misunderstood, especially in modern political discourse. In Scripture, God undeniably affirms human choice—but not in the shallow sense of moral neutrality. Rather, God grants choice as a weighty, soul-shaping responsibility, one that always unfolds within a clear moral framework. Choice, in the biblical sense, is never detached from truth, consequence, or accountability.

From the beginning, God places human beings before decisive alternatives. “Choose life,” He urges, and then immediately asks, “Why should you die?” This is not the language of indifference. God does not say all options are equal or morally interchangeable; He pleads with humanity to choose rightly. The freedom He gives is real, but it is ordered toward the good. Choice exists so that love, obedience, and faith may be genuine—not coerced—but it never redefines evil as good.

This is especially clear in the central Christian claim that each person must decide whether to put faith in Christ or to reject Him. That decision is often described as a “choice,” yet no serious Christian would call apostasy a morally neutral option. To reject Christ is not merely to select an alternative lifestyle; it is to choose separation from God, with eternal consequences. Scripture consistently treats this choice with gravity, warning, and sorrow—not with celebratory language about personal autonomy.

When this theological understanding of choice is applied to abortion, the moral tension becomes clear. Those who describe themselves as “pro-choice” insist that the central issue is the right to choose. But the question is not whether choice exists—clearly it does—but what, precisely, is being chosen. If abortion involves the deliberate ending of an innocent human life, then the “choice” in question is not morally analogous to choosing a career or a belief system. It is a choice about whether to commit an act of lethal violence against the most vulnerable.

To call this stance “pro-choice” rather than “pro-infant homicide” is therefore deeply disingenuous, at least from a Christian moral perspective. Language matters because it frames moral reality. We do not describe theft as “pro-property redistribution,” nor do we describe adultery as “pro-relationship choice.” In each case, euphemism serves to soften or obscure the gravity of the act itself. Likewise, calling abortion “choice” shifts attention away from the child whose life is at stake and centers it instead on the autonomy of the stronger party.

God’s affirmation of choice is never an endorsement of every possible decision. He permits human beings to choose evil, but He never blesses that choice or pretends it is morally neutral. His question—“Why should you die?”—reveals His heart: permission without approval, freedom without moral confusion. Divine love warns, exhorts, and calls people toward life, even while respecting their capacity to reject it.

In this light, the claim that God is “pro-choice” only makes sense if the term is stripped of its modern political meaning and restored to its biblical depth. God is pro-choice in that He allows human beings to make decisions with eternal consequences. He is not pro-choice in the sense that He redefines evil as a legitimate option or cloaks acts of injustice in morally sanitized language. True choice, in the Christian worldview, always stands before a stark reality: life or death, faith or rejection, obedience or rebellion. And God’s counsel has never changed—choose life.