"Why White Evangelicalism Is So Cruel," by Chris Ladd, does what so many other articles have done before it: take a point and stretch it into error in the opposite direction. It goes too far.
Southern Baptist Fundamentalists of the "right-wing" variety conveniently select text and overly apply their so-called literal interpretation. It doesn't mean that the Bible not using the express term "abortion" means abortion is sanctioned by omission by the teachings of Jesus. The same applies to same-sex sexual behavior.
"If all you knew about Christianity came from a close reading of the New Testament, you’d expect that Christians would be hostile to wealth, emphatic in protection of justice, sympathetic to the point of personal pain toward the sick, persecuted and the migrant, and almost socialist in their economic practices." What does he think "close reading" means? What else is he trying to do with that in the whole context of his article, his theme, his agenda? Is he suggesting in any manner that the failure of the specific Fundamentalists suggests that we don't learn the figurative understanding that calls one to apply the spirit and teachings consistently, which means extending it all to the conceived but yet unborn?
If Jesus were to come to me right now saying that he's okay with abortion-on-demand, I'd argue against his stated position using his own other words quoted in scripture. I can't for the life of me see how I could lose that argument. It's why I don't believe he would ever take such a position in the first place.