One of the weirder spectacles the Deplorables have gone in for is the allegedly “ironic” use of pro-choice slogans to defend their morally indefensible refusal to get vaxed:
This use of the common slogan is supposed by the MAGA cult to somehow mock those who defend abortion while also defending the contempt the Cult has for the obviously morally right demand to get vaxed and “own the libs”.
It prompts a question: What’s the difference between the MAGA “prolife” murder/suicide cult and pro-choice advocates?
Most pro-choice advocates believe they are trying to protect women from a host of threats and dangers to their welfare and freedom. They are not bloodthirsty monsters who just love killing unborn children. They are people who do not believe that unborn children are persons. They are, I think, wrong about those children, but their wrongness depends in large measure on acceptance of a number of metaphysical principles rooted in the Christian tradition and, without them, there is little reason to expect them to agree with me. From their standpoint, they are trying, according to their best lights, to consider the good of other people–namely, women in crisis pregnancies. Say what you will but they are not hypocrites and they do have the good of other human beings in mind, however imperfectly.
Meanwhile, the MAGA “prolife” murder/suicide cult, claiming to know and observe the Christian tradition better than anybody else in the whole wide world–including the Pope himself–could not care less if the people they know to be persons die–including the unborn children in the wombs of women with COVID. All that matters to them is themselves. They are motivated by radical, narcissistic selfishness.
In short, the MAGA “prolife” murder/suicide cult, bent on spreading pandemic, have become the monsters they accused pro-choice advocates of being for years.
Another achievement of the Cult where accusation is always confession.
Advertisement
24 Responses
The problem you are facing is that even if we accepted your metaphysical principles in regard to the issue, the actual implementation of those principles is just not feasible. What are we going to do, have the TSA conduct pregnancy tests at airports? Put women in prison for having a miscarriage? Because the latter already happens in places where they take those principles to their logical conclusions, and these places are basically hell on earth for the women who live there.
“The law is made for man, not man for law”, remember that?
The current judicial standard we have regarding abortion is a compromise. It is allowed, up to a point. States can regulate and restrict it, after the viability threshold. The point of this, is to address the actual needs of people’s lived experiences, not to cater to an ideology crafted by people who have no skin in the game and are completely divorced from the facts on the ground.
The reason we decided to do it the way we do is because we already tried it your way and it wasn’t working out. I’ve heard stories about what it was like before, where hospitals across the US had entire wards filled with young women who were just left to die, all in the name of “saving the unborn”. I’ve got the feeling that if the “pro-life” movement gets its way, we’re just going to come back full circle, and get reminded of how we got to where we’re at in the first place.
Catholic blogger Rebecca Hamilton makes a similar point in this piece from almost a year ago, titled “The Court Should Overturn Roe Soon. We Need to Move Forward from There.”. However, I don’t share her optimism that threading the needle in the manner she suggests is even possible, especially with the current conservative political leaders at the helm.
To me, the ironic part in all this, is It that given the way the Church has approached other issues in the past with a balance of idealism, pragmatism and the hard earned wisdom granted by history and experience, I honestly think that it would’ve reached a similar conclusion to what I’ve laid out here; unfortunately for the Church and humanity at large, it has bound itself and painted itself into a corner by its own rules about past doctrinal statements, rendering itself incapable of admitting to, much less owning up to, making a mistake.
This ties into you previous article, in the sense that I believe the same critique can be applied to other contentious issues as well. The commonality they share is that they are instances in which the Church has stubbornly insisted on “following the rules” over looking out for the well being of individuals or the common good. I feel like the Church should know better, but it has decided for whatever reason to set these particular rules in stone, to its own detriment.
@ 3vil
Not to mention, to the detriment of the objects of its disaffections.
But yes, all of what you wrote is exactly to the point.
“The problem you are facing is that even if we accepted your metaphysical principles in regard to the issue, the actual implementation of those principles is just not feasible.”
Yup. I am pro-choice, not because I am dogmatic about my belief that the unborn are not human, but rather because I know that a free country cannot enforce an abortion ban and remain free.
– joel
@ joel
And a country which declares itself a beacon of freedom, secular, with separation of church and state and neutral towards religious claims, cannot remain free if it starts enforcing purely theological concerns on people who may not share them.
Bring on more heartbeat bills, I say. Liberal totalitarianism will not suppress a sovereign citizenry.
I did a little personal study on the history of abortion. Doctors have always done abortions for money since ancient times. The hippocratic oath says, I will not do an abortion. Before the advent of modern anesthesia and antibiotics, abortion was very dangerous. Women died because the procedure was so dangerous.That is why abortion was illegal since the days of ancient Greek doctors. Then with the advent of modern drugs, it became safer to do an abortion. Then people figured out they could do abortions,without killing women, for money. Abortions became legal for that reason. Now with the advent of better technology, like ultrasound, there is less desire for providers to do abortions. The liability and undesirability makes abortion unprofitable. There is really no medical reason to do abortions for convenience. I predict there will be more restrictions because fewer providers are willing to do the abortions. That is why New York was trying to get nurses to do abortions. Imo that is not safe at all.
As for Bishop Neophytos, who dismissed his illness after he recovered, the Archbishop said that, “Everyone can do what they want, as long as they don’t mislead others and go against the teachings of the Synod,” which means they can’t do what they want.
“If he doesn’t want the vaccine, let him not get the vaccine. If he wants to die, let him die, but there is no reason why he should be able to mislead others, risking more victims,” said Chrysostomos.
—
The (Orthodox) Archbishop of Cyprus has run out of patience.
https://www.americamagazine.org/gloria-purvis-podcast
Excellent podcast on abortion, women’s rights, justice and so on, from a Catholic perspective.
Both Helen Alvaré and (she is mentioned in this podcast) Erika Bachiochi are amazing!
jj
“their wrongness depends in large measure on acceptance of a number of metaphysical principles rooted in the Christian tradition and, without them, there is little reason to expect them to agree with me.”
Thank you for this formulation.
We as Catholics have not remotely convinced the World of those metaphysical principles, thus people do not equate a child to 64 dividing cells to a child. I confess to struggling with that, myself – I’m not convinced but I accept it. It’s a crazy thing to expect people to just accept, absent faith.
Oh and @Artevelde — when you cheer on the heartbeat bill, are you endorsing the very early deadline, or the provisions of the Texas law that work via a network of informers?
Lise,
I support a deadline from the moment of conception. If anything, six weeks is too late. As for the provisions, they are a bit of a trick to get around constitutional concerns, it seems, but I don’t see any particular legal or moral problem with it.
As for the ”we first have to convince” argument, I find it rather suspicious that this only applies in this particular case. I rarely hear a progressive Catholic defense of the death penalty, in the sense of keeping it until the opposition is convinced. In some cases, simple majorities will do just fine.
And my last point: if those who don’t agree with me wish to honestly discuss social policy, maternal leave, medical care and childcare, I’m more of a ”socialist” than most Americans can stomach. I’m open to that debate, but I’ll probably just hear … crickets.
Our society simply doesn’t value children until they are old enough to pay taxes. The guilt for the violent act of abortion is on everybody. But it’s on some people, way, WAY more than others.
Men:
At six weeks of pregnancy, many women start to feel really, really sick. It’s like a six week stomach flu that never lets up (think of your worst hangover guys.) It’s starts messing with your head and your feeling of hope. It’s like trudging through thick mud in a dark tunnel with a pinpoint of light,miles and miles away. Think about what it would feel like if a warm shower was your only relief left, and all of the little pleasures in life suddenly evaporated.
If you have never had morning sickness, babysat, cleaned up projectile vomit,changed multiple diapers, pushed an eight pound object through your you-know-what, had your hair fall out after being tortured for an entire day, seen blood in your infant’s mouth from your cracked nipples, seen your belly look like a sand bag that has been violently emptied out, bled for two straight months from your you-know-what, been woken up multiple times per night for a year straight, had breast milk suddenly leaking into your underwear and down your leg, felt a panic attack in the grocery store coming on because your infant is wailing with colic, had urine sprayed in your face, watched feces spray three feet across the room and into your drapes, had nosy prudes frown at you for nursing in a restaurant, found yourself breastfeeding on a public toilet, had a toddler inclined to sudden temper tantrums, had a child screaming and hanging on to your leg while you are trying to cook or empty the dishwasher because your husband is working late, studied the grocery store parking lot to see how you can navigate your wild three-year-old who is prone to break free and dart between cars while you are clutching an infant…
and
AND have dared to hold a picket sign in front of an abortuary, while never EVER advocating for higher taxes –to give families that are already stretched thin government help for food, loss of wages, and nursery school…
YOU DON’T GET TO HAVE AN OPINION.
PERIOD.
*YOU* are the problem, and *You* are driving up abortion rates. Live with your guilt.
(Aimed at nobody in particular. You know who you are.)
@Taco,
I don’t think anyone who falls into that category, visits this blog :).
That’s okay. It was kind like scream therapy to write it out.
Maybe I should just print it out and post it in the back of the Church where the know-it-alls go.
@ Taco
You should add, that, since we all value motherhood and the unborn so much, we should reserve every position in the parish administration that is not strictly liturgical, for Catholic pregnant women and mothers.
@Artevelde
What is the literary device called when someone, –let’s say a refugee camp survivor–calls out the comfortable “expert” who deems themself worthy of being a spokesperson against something that has never caused them the least amount of discomfort, lists off all of the reasons why they really need to step aside. I don’t know why the British royal family comes to mind. They might think they are humanitarian ambassadors but I’s say that most people kind of give them a polite smile, and think “God,really?”
What i am protesting are the “soapbox” warriors who don’t have any skin in the game. Obviously my husband, who is an upright man, deserves an opinion. He is about to launch his sixth child into college, and has paid some real dues. Even so, he will be the first person to step aside and say. “I can’t even imagine what it was like…”
The Fr. Frank Pavones of the world make my skin crawl, and the paid mercenaries are…well, I won’t say it. They need to get a real job.
@ Taco,
The literary/rhetorical device is some form of shaming, I suppose. The logical arguments you use are some form of applying to credentials, which is a tricky one. One has to be very precise about the argument at hand, and the exact credentials required. Does the matter of abortion require motherhood, a good understanding of moral theology, both of them, or maybe something else entirely as well? I don’t think your argument is as strong for abortion as it is for, let’s say, someone mansplaining how to breastfeed, though I wouldn’t discard it either.
More broadly, I find it a dangerous approach within the workings of a democracy. Taken to its logical conclusion, only a technocracy would have validity.
Anyway, I’m a simpleton in these matters. I’m neither a mom nor an expert in moral theology. Not too great at formal logic either. Just a citizen, not even of your country.
Maybe Jesus said it best: “Never boast of something that hasn’t tempted you.”
And I’ve never been tempted to abortion no, not for a half second–buuuuut I had parents who bankrolled me to a certain extent, which allows me to afford some hired help and had sisters in the same boat to vent with and swap the burden with. There was a true symbiosis there for a while despite the debilitating and downright torture at times of being pregnant and having a new baby. Our faith made sense of the crucible. When I moved away with five kids under 14, I was on my own with a husband that worked long hours for an unjust man. It was my grand comeuppance.
Sometimes God opens our eyes only to the extent that we can bear the truth. I softened in my judgement for those that I considered failures in moral stamina when I was tried.
Is there a connection with that stress, and my long string of miscarriage after miscarriage after miscarriage? Did the cortisol in my blood contribute? Did the sociopath my husband worked for contribute? Government taxes and indifference for the middle class? The fact that I couldn’t afford hired help anymore, had no family to speak of to help me.. that I couldn’t afford a two day a week preschool despite my husband being a top 10% income earner?
It’s true that I would go to my grave before I’d cause the demise of another human being, but I’ve had SO many “spontaneous abortions” I’ve lost count.
The atheist might taunt and say, (and I’ve heard them say it) “so God is the biggest abortionist of all…” No. He is love. Pure love. And he doesn’t discriminate between those souls. Love goes back to its source. And in the end he will sift through all of the evidence and allow the proper remedy to be applied for those who failed in love, so they can be healed– and eventually become love incarnate like He is.
There will be so many surprises about who was the most upright–I don’t think it is ANYTHING like the way we judge.
*sorry–I don’t really edit. :/
“It’s the internet, not my thesis”
Could we say the same thing about racism? To get past the normal human inclination towards triablism “depends in large measure on acceptance of a number of metaphysical principles rooted in the Christian tradition[.]” If you have not accepted Galatians 3:28 as a metaphysical principle, then you cannot be expected to see that all men are brothers. Indeed, the understanding that racism is evil is more dependent on Christianity than the understanding that abortion is evil. While some civilizations restricted abortion long before Christ (see the Hippocratic Oath, somewhere between 500 and 200 B.C.), Jesus had to deal with tribalism among his own people during His ministry. So perhaps racists aren’t any more evil than pro-choicers. They just don’t have sufficiently developed Christian metaphysics.
I actually do not think this is the case; I think that Natural Law makes the evils of both abortion and racism apparent, even without revelation. Christian metaphysics certainly helps the arguments, but is not necessary to get there.
But I really must ask: If the evil of abortion is dependent on Christian metaphysics, then should it be restricted at all in a secular state? Are you adopting the “personally pro-life” position pioneered by Mario Cuomo? Or do you seek, as I do, to impose your Christian morals on non-believers, because murder is murder, whether someone believes it or not?
You get that the people defending and excusing racism–including you, is my guess–claim to be Living Instantiation of Truly True Christians, right? While many who defend the right to abortion do not claim to be Christian at all. Your arguments are the typical bullshit conservative Christians offer in defense of the evils they are wedded to.
I wrote in my second paragraph: “Natural Law makes the evils of both abortion and racism apparent[.]” Your guess that I am “defending and excusing racism” is incorrect.
My argument is: If you give a pass to non-Christians for being pro-abortion, you must give the same pass to non-Christians for racism. Of course you should criticize racist Christians! But racist non-Christians don’t have Gal 3:28 to guide them, so you must give them a pass.
I remain interested in whether you believe the United States should prohibit abortion, given that you have explained that the anti-abortion position is principally dependent on the belief that Jesus of Nazereth was the Son of God.
The servant who does not know the master’s will and does not do it will be beaten with few blows. The servant who knows the master’s will and does not do it will be beaten wit many blows. Those to whom much is given, much will be required. – Jesus of Nazareth
When you guys claim to be the Greatest Christians of All Time, you don’t get to indulge yourself in this moral equivalence bullshit. You make it your especial brag to know the gospel. You don’t get a pass in your racism and you don’t get to whinge “NO! THEM!”. Own your responsibility, liar.
@ morte
“ Or do you seek, as I do, to impose your Christian morals on non-believers, because murder is murder, whether someone believes it or not?”
And there it is. Freedom of conscience and freedom of religion is for me. Freedom to do what I tell you is for you.