ProLifeCorner.com- By Larry Plachno- Is Abortion and Pro-Choice Built on a House of Cards? Have we become two polarized factions living and fighting each other in the same country? Demographers and researchers are telling us that the United States has grown into two separate groups with essentially opposite philosophies on good and evil.
Belgian demographer Ron Lesthaeghe pointed out that in the last presidential election, the results were substantially based on fertility. People with more children voted for the conservative candidates while people with fewer or no children voted for the liberal candidates. Other research and reports show similar polarizations with married people and those attending church regularly more likely to vote for conservative candidates and issues.
Recently we saw the U.S. House of Representatives debating a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks. The bill resulted from a combination of concerns over the fact that babies can feel pain at this stage of their development plus several recent reports about late term abortions where babies were born alive and then killed. Polarization was obvious. The final vote fell nearly along party lines with one side talking about responsibilities and the other side talking about rights.
To explain this polarization we can go back to July 25, 1968 when Pope Paul VI issued his famous encyclical titled Humanae Vitae (Latin for Of Human Life). In it he rejected all forms of artificial contraception and predicted it would cause a “general lowering of moral standards,” that men may reduce women “to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of [their] own desires,” and it would lead to an abuse of power by public authorities and a false sense of autonomy.
While some people laughed in 1968, time has proven Pope Paul VI to be correct. The real issue was not contraception but whether good and evil exist or is everything just a choice? For many people, good and evil no longer existed for contraception and it became a choice. In following years, some people decided that good and evil no longer existed for other actions and decisions. Abortion, marriage, pregnancy, babies and the traditional family all became choices.
As you probably have already guessed, this division in our society has substantial moral implications. God sent his Son to suffer and die to atone for our sins. Hence, we know that good and evil exist and that some atonement is required for doing evil. Jesus Christ gave us two basic laws to live by: love of God and love of neighbor. We love God by judging our actions as good or evil and avoiding doing evil. We show that we are a follower of Jesus Christ by being unselfish and doing what is best for others. Concern for others has been the definition of a Christian for 2,000 years.
The secular side to this is that society is a team. A simple definition of society is a group of people working together for common goals. When people accept selfishness, choice and moral relativism then they are not working together and not working for common goals so society suffers.
As somewhat of a side note, I can tell you that most of us researching interconnected social problems find that the statistics side with Jesus Christ and confirm the importance of good over evil and doing what is best for society. On the other hand, social problems increase when people get selfish, pro-choice and accept moral relativism.
This is where the polarization comes from. In general, our society has split into two different camps. It is the conservatives who believe in good and evil. However, the liberals do not believe in good and evil and instead put themselves first and think that they have a right to do what they want with their actions and decisions.
There are obvious major differences between the two groups. Conservatives understand how a good action or decision brings some good to society while an evil action or decision brings some harm to society. In comparison, the liberals are somewhat lost because they have difficulty in connecting cause and effect. They believe in choice rather than in good and evil. For them, things “just happen.” They cannot understand that marriage reduces social problems because to them marriage is a choice. They cannot understand that children raised without the guidance of a father have problems because that is a choice for them. They cannot understand how failing to support traditional families has harmed our society because, again, that is a choice for them.
What is interesting is that the liberal and pro-choice position is effectively built on a very shaky house of cards. In order to accept selfishness, the pro-choice attitude and moral relativism, they have to turn their back on God. They then have to make a mockery of Jesus Christ’s suffering and death for our sins and they have to deny that good and evil exist. If they admit that good and evil exist, their house of cards falls down.
Perhaps the shakiest part of the liberal house of cards is their insistence that the person committing the action or making the decision should determine right and wrong. This makes each individual his or her own god. It also makes no sense logically since it means that a person who thinks they need money can sell drugs to kids or murder a rich uncle for an inheritance. If everything is a choice then why worry about shooting guns in schools or blowing up airplanes with bombs?
Can we get liberals to acknowledge that good and evil exist? You can try, but the liberal philosophy is based on the fact that good and evil do not exist and that actions and decisions are personal choices. For example, we can look at the recent tragic incident at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Connecticut and show this polarization between conservatives and liberals.
When conservatives look at Sandy Hook they see a country that has turned its back on God and made a mockery of the death of Jesus Christ. They see a society that said that good and evil no longer exist and everything is now a choice. They see a government that says that pregnancy, babies and children are evil and should be eliminated with tax dollars. They see a young man being raised without the guidance of a father and possibly in need of special help. However, when liberals look at Sandy Hook they cannot admit that good and evil exist so they blame the gun.
This same situation tends to apply all across the board. Even when confronted by murder, liberals will avoid dealing with good and evil and instead say that there were extenuating circumstances in the childhood or early life of the individual that caused this action.
Like a house of cards, the liberal position can be very shaky. The bottom line to all of this is that liberals cannot accept or acknowledge that good and evil exist. If they admit that good and evil exist, then abortion would no longer be a choice, marriage would no longer be a choice, babies would no longer be a choice and traditional families would no longer be a choice. Without choice, you cannot justify selfishness and moral relativism.
Some people ask why the liberals support late term abortions but not adoption. The reason goes back to good and evil versus choice. A late term abortion ignores good and evil and continues to support choice. However, adoption strongly suggests that good and evil exists.
During the recent debate over late term abortions, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi drew fire by calling late term abortions “sacred ground.” Of course it is sacred ground to the liberals. Abortion is the bottom card in their house of cards. If they admit that good and evil exist for abortion then they have to admit that good and evil exists for babies, children, marriage, and supporting traditional families. If they admit that good and evil applies to abortion, their support of selfishness, the pro-choice attitude and moral relativism would fall apart like a house of cards.
Please Note: Many of our readers are familiar with the excellent writings of Larry Plachno which he has so graciously shared with us over the past years. Larry is a businessman and a parish respect life coordinator. You can read more of Larry’s excellent work at: www.unselfish.org