Vice President Kamala Harris recently called for the elimination of the Senate filibuster in order to pass federal abortion legislation. This proposal raises significant concerns, not only about the sanctity of life but also about the foundational structure of our government. By proposing to remove the filibuster, Harris is not only attempting to solidify abortion access but also undermining a critical mechanism of our legislative system that ensures the voice of the minority is heard.

The Moral Question: The Sanctity of Life

At the heart of this issue is a fundamental moral question—should the unborn be protected, or should the government sanction abortion as a right? For Christians, the sanctity of life should be non-negotiable. The Bible teaches that all life is created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and this includes the unborn. Harris’ push to end the filibuster in order to protect abortion access flies in the face of this core belief.

Abortion is not merely a political issue—it is a moral and spiritual one. Ending a life in the womb is a profound violation of God’s law, and we must stand against efforts that make it easier for this tragedy to occur. A decision to strip away a procedural tool like the filibuster in favor of codifying abortion rights nationally is deeply troubling. It suggests that expediency in advancing a progressive agenda trumps the moral imperative to protect the most vulnerable among us—the unborn.

The Filibuster: A Shield Against Radicalism

The Senate filibuster has long been a safeguard of deliberative democracy. It ensures that major changes to the nation’s laws cannot be made without some degree of consensus. While not part of the original design of the Constitution, the filibuster evolved as a means to ensure that the Senate remains the “cooling saucer” of our democracy, as George Washington is said to have told Thomas Jefferson. It forces debate, compromise, and consideration of minority viewpoints.

Harris’ suggestion to “nuke” the filibuster in order to pass legislation protecting abortion rights is a slippery slope. As Philip Klein points out, someone who supports such drastic measures cannot be trusted to uphold constitutional norms. Once the filibuster is removed for one piece of legislation, the door is open for it to be abolished entirely. What happens next? Could we see sweeping changes in other areas, such as the erosion of voter ID laws or efforts to restructure the Supreme Court? The precedent set by removing the filibuster would dismantle the safeguards that prevent radical elements of any party from passing extreme measures without broad support.

A Nation of Extremes: The Consequences of Dismantling the Filibuster

Democrats may see the filibuster as a barrier to achieving their legislative goals now, but as Ruth Marcus warns, what happens when they lose power? The consequences of removing the filibuster would not stop with abortion legislation. Once eliminated, every interest group within a party’s coalition will demand that its agenda pass with a simple majority, whether that be statehood for the District of Columbia, labor laws that erode right-to-work protections, or sweeping environmental regulations.

This kind of power shift invites further division and instability. The filibuster encourages debate, forces compromise, and tempers extreme policy initiatives. Without it, our legislative process becomes one where whichever party holds a slim majority can pass legislation without considering the views of nearly half the country. Is that really the kind of nation we want to live in—where every two to four years, we see radical swings in policy depending on who is in power?

A Call to Preserve the Senate’s Role and Protect Life

At its core, the debate over the filibuster is about more than just procedural rules; it is about the kind of country we want to live in. Do we want a government that seeks to impose a radical, progressive agenda on issues like abortion, or do we want a system that protects the rights of all Americans, including the unborn? The Senate filibuster plays a crucial role in protecting the voice of the minority and ensuring that important issues, like abortion, are given the time and consideration they deserve.

We must remain vigilant in defending both the unborn and the structural integrity of our government. The filibuster is a vital part of that integrity, and we cannot allow it to be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. By seeking to eliminate it for the sake of advancing abortion rights, Kamala Harris is pushing a dangerous and radical agenda that threatens both our moral values and our democratic norms.

Let us pray that our leaders will be guided by wisdom, that the Senate will retain its vital role as a deliberative body, and that our nation will continue to protect the sanctity of life.