J+M+J
Proposition 26, a ballot initiative in the State of Mississippi that would have amended that State’s Constitution to define the term “person,” was defeated on Tuesday night, and it wasn’t nearly as close as expected. Here is the text of the proposal:
"Initiative #26 would amend the Mississippi Constitution to define the word 'person' or 'persons', as those terms are used in Article III of the state constitution, to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof."
I was very surprised to read analysis today, (like this on CNN) indicating that women “weren’t even sure how far-reaching [the amendment] would be because the language was so ambiguous.” Ambiguous?
We (you, me, Americans in general) have lost the ability to be honest with ourselves. There is nothing ambiguous about the proposed amendment. It is something like a first principle: a thing that is either true or it is not true; something with which you can either agree or disagree. There’s nothing ambiguous about first principles. The State Constitution either should, or should not, define the term “person” to include human beings from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or their functional equivalent.
We are dishonest because it is easier to let ourselves believe that the language is ambiguous, rather than face the fact that we know the truth, and we don’t like it - perhaps because we have violated the principle.
I can understand a person voting no because they do not think that a fertilized egg is a human being; I certainly don’t agree with it, but I understand it. If they really, truly think that, then they are being logical. But I think that a great majority of those that voted no on the proposal think that a fertilized egg is a human being from the moment of fertilization. They lied to themselves.
No, the proposed amendment was not ambiguous; not even the repercussions of the proposal are ambiguous. We can agree, for example, that an adult woman is a person. There is no ambiguity contained in that sentence (she either is or isn’t). Neither is there any ambiguity in the repercussions of that statement: violating (that is, killing, hurting, stealing from) a grown woman is wrong, and society recognizes that by punishing someone who does it. So, if a fertilized egg is a person? The same repercussions follow: that hurting or killing a fertilized egg is wrong and should not be allowed! Of course, there are particulars to every case; if a person is being attacked and defends himself, society recognizes the subjective specifics of the situation, and does not punish the self-defender. (Would a woman who experiences a miscarriage be put on trial? Really?)
I think voters are hiding behind feigned “ambiguity,” simply because they don’t want to address the real question that an honest vote raises: Do my actions reflect my beliefs? We all put blinders on to our wrongdoings; we find ways to trivialize them, justify them… or we ignore them altogether. Modern science - and those who package it and provide it to us - is great at allowing us to focus on exactly what we want to focus on, and to ignore everything else. To be clear: for a woman taking the pill, there is a chance during each cycle that a fertilized egg will be flushed from her body - prevented from implanting by the direct working of the pill she takes to suppress ovulation every day. But she doesn’t see that, she doesn’t feel it. There’s only the possibility of it - she might not even know about it (except for the publicity this amendment has given to this very likely possibility). It’s so much easier to ignore.
So let’s be honest:
Do you believe that a fertilized egg is a person? In your heart of hearts… when no one is looking… what percentage of people can really, honestly say “no” to themselves?
If you believe that a fertilized egg is a person, and you knew that taking a pill could (and over the course of taking the pill for ten years, almost certainly will, more than once) force that person to be flushed from its temporary home, how can you go on taking that pill?
As many as 70% of women of child-bearing age use the pill. I ask you to look inside your heart and ask yourself: do you believe that a fertilized egg is a human being, with a soul imbued by God? Do you understand that it is a medical fact that the pill acts by preventing fertilized eggs (humans with souls, unless you really think otherwise) from implanting in the uterus and forces them to be flushed out? Can you really go on doing this to your babies?
We don’t need laws or constitutional amendments to tell us what’s right and what’s wrong; more of us need to stand up and do the right thing, regardless of what society tolerates. What we must do is pray: pray and do what we know in our hearts to be right, and help our friends and family to do the same. If enough of us do that, maybe then we can change the world. Change will not come from the top down; no politician cares enough to change the world. It has to start with us.
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Not the Death of a Hero, but the Death of Heroism: Part I
J+M+J
What a world of contradictions we find ourselves in today. As basic human rights, once considered fundamental, become increasingly threatened, abused, or discounted by our modern society, the common rhetoric enveloping the abortion issue has become evermore warped and manipulated to promote the prevalent thinking of the day. Last month’s attack upon the life Dr. George Tiller, an emblem of the pro-abortion movement and a provider of the still highly controversial (at least, for the moment) late-term abortion procedure, has once again brought this issue to the forefront, leaving the American public to navigate the murky and muddled waters of the popular lexicon.
In the days following his death, Dr. Tiller has swiftly been catapulted into the stratosphere of secular “sainthood,” acquiring titles such as “Tireless Supporter of Women’s Dignity,” “A Man Who Honored Women,” an individual of “Extraordinary Courage.” While no reasonable and just individuals are condoning the violence which claimed Dr. Tiller’s life, his ascension to the status of hero betrays our modern culture’s lamentable loss of the concept of true nobility and valor. Our society is witnessing the death of gallantry, as supporters of abortion, including the brutal and grotesque partial-birth abortion, have successfully equated abortion with compassion, and convinced many that self-interest supersedes self-sacrifice.
When one conjures up the concept of heroism – or, I should say, traditionally, when ones conjures up the concept of heroism – images of complete self-denial are evoked: the fire-fighter who bravely darts into a burning building, without thought for his own safety, or the individual who courageously confronts his fellow’s attacker, despite the personal danger which threatens him. It seems safe to say that, even in our largely self-centered world, had a person, such as our aforementioned fire-fighter, shrunk from his impulse to rescue another in order to safeguard his own well-being, he would have simultaneously forfeited his right to be called a “hero.” Moreover, it is likely that this individual, after refusing to offer his aid to another, would be labeled cowardly: after all, how could a compassionate individual deny a man in his greatest hour of need? Yet, we live in a culture that supports a woman’s “right” to terminate her own child’s life should she deem it necessary for her physical, spiritual, financial, or emotional well-being. In the greatest of ironies, we expect strangers to make greater personal sacrifices for others than we expect parents to make for their own children.
In this topsy-turvy world of ours, self-preservation is paramount. No longer is self-sacrifice heralded; in fact, it is now something to be avoided – no matter what the cost. Not even parenthood, which should be the near pinnacle of selflessness, is exempt from this distorted mentality. For a mother or father to be complicit in the murder of their child seems utterly nightmarish. Nature itself revolts against such a notion. Yet, when abortion advocates assert, as Dr. Tiller himself did, that “…abortion is about women's hopes, dreams, potential, the rest of their lives. Abortion is a matter of survival for women,” people unhesitatingly rally behind such “noble” words, all the while forgetting the innocent children left in the destructive wake of abortion.
True parenthood is the embodiment of self-sacrifice. If, say, a truck was racing toward a child, undoubtedly, in an effort to rescue him, his parent would race headlong into the street, regardless of whether death appeared imminent for parent, child, or both. The possibility, no matter how remote, of saving a life - particularly that of one’s own child - should always trump considerations of personal interest or well-being. Though the physical, emotional, or financial challenges confronting a pregnant woman may seem insurmountable, her willingness to confront those difficulties, should they even threaten her very life, attests to true heroic virtue.
This is not to belittle the heart-wrenching tragedies faced by some pregnant women. Dr. Tiller’s supporters often point to extremely uncommon, though none-the-less devastating, stories of women whose unborn children are diagnosed with a host of incurable diseases or abnormalities, which make their survival outside the womb almost certainly impossible. But, I ask, is true heroism found in turning away from challenging, if not outright terrifying, circumstances? Or is it recognized in the gallant determination to do what is morally sound, regardless of personal cost? Can we really elevate a man to the status of hero, when his life’s work consisted in regularly taking a child’s life (however grim its chances of survival were) to “safeguard” the life of its mother?
Unfortunately, life is often rife with disappointments, sorrows, heartache, and, occasionally, even disaster. These are inescapable components of the human condition. True heroism is found in meeting these adversities with courageous dignity, marked by sacrificial love and devotion to principle. As supporters of Dr. Tiller point out, many women and their families face truly heart-wrenching tragedies surrounding their pregnancies. Yet, no matter how tragic the circumstances they face, it can never justify the outright killing of an innocent human being. Everyday, men and women across the world encounter extraordinary challenges, but by meeting and overcoming these obstacles with moral character and fortitude, they show themselves to be heroic champions over the evil or misfortune that oppresses them. Furthermore, in this heroic triumph over tragedy, men and women often discover a dimension of strength and tenderness within themselves that few people are ever able to comprehend. It is this self-sacrifice that truly exemplifies love and raises the individual above the evil and selfish tendencies often pervading our culture, and, moreover, demonstrates the best there is in humanity. Throughout history, heroes - often themselves ordinary people -have done this: individuals, who, in order to maintain their personal safety or comfort, could have merely stood by and watched their fellow neighbors die, have instead rushed into burning buildings, defended the helpless, or opposed tyrants. As truly valiant and compassionate defenders of those in need, we should champion the cause of all human life (particularly the lives of the most vulnerable among us) and commit ourselves to charitably aiding the women who face these challenging situations, so they may make decisions, which, although difficult, are praiseworthy and truly heroic.
M.K.
What a world of contradictions we find ourselves in today. As basic human rights, once considered fundamental, become increasingly threatened, abused, or discounted by our modern society, the common rhetoric enveloping the abortion issue has become evermore warped and manipulated to promote the prevalent thinking of the day. Last month’s attack upon the life Dr. George Tiller, an emblem of the pro-abortion movement and a provider of the still highly controversial (at least, for the moment) late-term abortion procedure, has once again brought this issue to the forefront, leaving the American public to navigate the murky and muddled waters of the popular lexicon.
In the days following his death, Dr. Tiller has swiftly been catapulted into the stratosphere of secular “sainthood,” acquiring titles such as “Tireless Supporter of Women’s Dignity,” “A Man Who Honored Women,” an individual of “Extraordinary Courage.” While no reasonable and just individuals are condoning the violence which claimed Dr. Tiller’s life, his ascension to the status of hero betrays our modern culture’s lamentable loss of the concept of true nobility and valor. Our society is witnessing the death of gallantry, as supporters of abortion, including the brutal and grotesque partial-birth abortion, have successfully equated abortion with compassion, and convinced many that self-interest supersedes self-sacrifice.
When one conjures up the concept of heroism – or, I should say, traditionally, when ones conjures up the concept of heroism – images of complete self-denial are evoked: the fire-fighter who bravely darts into a burning building, without thought for his own safety, or the individual who courageously confronts his fellow’s attacker, despite the personal danger which threatens him. It seems safe to say that, even in our largely self-centered world, had a person, such as our aforementioned fire-fighter, shrunk from his impulse to rescue another in order to safeguard his own well-being, he would have simultaneously forfeited his right to be called a “hero.” Moreover, it is likely that this individual, after refusing to offer his aid to another, would be labeled cowardly: after all, how could a compassionate individual deny a man in his greatest hour of need? Yet, we live in a culture that supports a woman’s “right” to terminate her own child’s life should she deem it necessary for her physical, spiritual, financial, or emotional well-being. In the greatest of ironies, we expect strangers to make greater personal sacrifices for others than we expect parents to make for their own children.
In this topsy-turvy world of ours, self-preservation is paramount. No longer is self-sacrifice heralded; in fact, it is now something to be avoided – no matter what the cost. Not even parenthood, which should be the near pinnacle of selflessness, is exempt from this distorted mentality. For a mother or father to be complicit in the murder of their child seems utterly nightmarish. Nature itself revolts against such a notion. Yet, when abortion advocates assert, as Dr. Tiller himself did, that “…abortion is about women's hopes, dreams, potential, the rest of their lives. Abortion is a matter of survival for women,” people unhesitatingly rally behind such “noble” words, all the while forgetting the innocent children left in the destructive wake of abortion.
True parenthood is the embodiment of self-sacrifice. If, say, a truck was racing toward a child, undoubtedly, in an effort to rescue him, his parent would race headlong into the street, regardless of whether death appeared imminent for parent, child, or both. The possibility, no matter how remote, of saving a life - particularly that of one’s own child - should always trump considerations of personal interest or well-being. Though the physical, emotional, or financial challenges confronting a pregnant woman may seem insurmountable, her willingness to confront those difficulties, should they even threaten her very life, attests to true heroic virtue.
This is not to belittle the heart-wrenching tragedies faced by some pregnant women. Dr. Tiller’s supporters often point to extremely uncommon, though none-the-less devastating, stories of women whose unborn children are diagnosed with a host of incurable diseases or abnormalities, which make their survival outside the womb almost certainly impossible. But, I ask, is true heroism found in turning away from challenging, if not outright terrifying, circumstances? Or is it recognized in the gallant determination to do what is morally sound, regardless of personal cost? Can we really elevate a man to the status of hero, when his life’s work consisted in regularly taking a child’s life (however grim its chances of survival were) to “safeguard” the life of its mother?
Unfortunately, life is often rife with disappointments, sorrows, heartache, and, occasionally, even disaster. These are inescapable components of the human condition. True heroism is found in meeting these adversities with courageous dignity, marked by sacrificial love and devotion to principle. As supporters of Dr. Tiller point out, many women and their families face truly heart-wrenching tragedies surrounding their pregnancies. Yet, no matter how tragic the circumstances they face, it can never justify the outright killing of an innocent human being. Everyday, men and women across the world encounter extraordinary challenges, but by meeting and overcoming these obstacles with moral character and fortitude, they show themselves to be heroic champions over the evil or misfortune that oppresses them. Furthermore, in this heroic triumph over tragedy, men and women often discover a dimension of strength and tenderness within themselves that few people are ever able to comprehend. It is this self-sacrifice that truly exemplifies love and raises the individual above the evil and selfish tendencies often pervading our culture, and, moreover, demonstrates the best there is in humanity. Throughout history, heroes - often themselves ordinary people -have done this: individuals, who, in order to maintain their personal safety or comfort, could have merely stood by and watched their fellow neighbors die, have instead rushed into burning buildings, defended the helpless, or opposed tyrants. As truly valiant and compassionate defenders of those in need, we should champion the cause of all human life (particularly the lives of the most vulnerable among us) and commit ourselves to charitably aiding the women who face these challenging situations, so they may make decisions, which, although difficult, are praiseworthy and truly heroic.
M.K.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)