Skip to main content

I'm Pro-Life. Now What?

I recently had a chance to participate in a fundraising gala for a pro-life organization I really believe in. Several friends and I really enjoyed it, were inspired, and gave what seemed right, as we were able.

At the same time, you note I'm sure my disaffection with the current forms of even mainstream "conservative" ideology. I'll never be "the Left," as it were. There is no David Brock-like conversion coming. Yours truly might make a big change over the course of years or a decade, but I'm a writer and an extrovert; I'm gonna telegraph it, if so. I digress. The point being, personhood won't change. No sob story rooted in consequentialism would make even one abortion acceptable. No other heart-wrenching identity crisis makes any anti-human (thus, anti-Catholic) ideology tolerable. Yet I'm reminded of something Archbishop Sheen said, in paraphrase: If a person listens to the Church, he can believe dozens of foolish things besides, without fault. On the other hand, many people use that freedom to enforce of kind of vincible ignorance concerning our social doctrine.

(Sorry, Tony Esolen.)

So I'll just get to it: I'm not a one-issue voter.

In fact, all options are on the table, in terms of voting.

And yet, I cannot disregard the present state of the Democratic Party with respect to abortion. It needs to be said in words: Until major leaders and voters and platform writers understand the basic scaffolding of the pro-life position, and make room for it, and stop denigrating it, they don't deserve to be a majority party that wins elections.

(Nor do their putative opponents deserve to win anything, but that's another post.)

You know, I wasn't too comfortable with the pro-Trump sentiment in the room that night. I don't think it's morally acceptable to treat any immigrants of any kind with the kind of blatant hostility that this administration has. Add to that the violations of international law with respect to seekers of asylum, and too many other things, and yeah, voting against this xenophobia, this flagrant racism, tolerance for violence against the innocent, is a live option for any reasonable person. (And that doesn't even touch general unfitness!)

And yet, I know Joe Biden's or Liz Warren's HHS wouldn't help this pro-life organization like this HHS has. Quite the opposite. I know that none of the Democrats would keep the Supreme Court as an aid to the rising pro-life momentum. This is not news, or it shouldn't be.

To put a point on it, I might say--and have said--"You won't be buying me off with judges!" but that doesn't mean I want progressive judges. If I act against Trump, I must consider the ways that even unintentionally, I would be acting against the things I say I want.

And let us dispense with the false notion that anyone in the so-called "New Pro-Life Movement" is being persecuted for being pro-life in a different way. Weiss and others deserve criticism, if and to the extent that their actual opposition to abortion and willingness to face public criticism for it, is not at all clear. I could agree to turn America into a democratic socialist paradise, but if I don't sign my name at some point to measures actually making abortion less accessible, my opposition deserves to be put into question. The present state of things--in which many politicians oppose any restrictions at all--is morally unacceptable. One is not permissibly working incrementally by standing still.

So here we are. Until I run for office, I feel a bit stuck. How about you?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...