In the aftermath of Dr. Tiller's murder last Sunday, the usual discussions about abortion turned to focus more specifically on the pro-life movement itself. I became somewhat caught up in this focus myself through several discussions online as well as a re-viewing of Tony Kaye's brilliant documentary,
Lake of Fire. (Tony Kaye, for those who don't know, is the mind behind
American History X, a must-see.
Lake of Fire does an admirable job of remaining more or less neutral, depicting the debate as "complicated.")
I have deep sympathies with the pro-life movement, though I won't describe myself as either pro-life or pro-choice. My christological convictions overwhelm political categories. Still, I have been thinking of some advice for individuals who are pro-life, and the pro-life movement in general. I think these points are central to their cultural engagement, and crucial be being taken seriously and even continuing to exist over the next fifty years.
- Admit complicity for tragedy, and repent. It is not enough to distance yourself from the murder of George Tiller, the bombing of women's clinics, and other tragedies done by extremists for your cause. If you want to be taken seriously by a culture that is revolted by such acts, you have to admit that you take them at least as seriously as those uninvolved do. It is true that the killer of George Tiller did not represent every pro-life worker, but the pro-life movement certainly created an atmosphere that allowed Scott Roeder to justify his actions to himself. Beyond admitting this, the pro-life movement must further take concrete steps to dissuade this kind of vigilantism like this from taking its name in the future.
- Realize and admit that abortion is a complicated issue. As long as proponents of the pro-life agenda take their case for granted, nobody who doesn't see their case as self-evident will bother listening to them. You have to realize that the religions of the world all have varying perspectives on abortion and when life begins; there is no concensus. Even arguing strictly from the Judeo-Christian worldview, the case is not so simple, as some Old Testament laws seem to treat the accidental termination of a pregnancy under property law, rather than as murder. Likewise, some strands of Judaism follow Genesis 2 in articulating that there is no soul-life until the first breath is drawn, just as God breathed life into Adam.
- Following number two, stop vilifying your opponents. It's only a tiny, tiny percentage of the pro-choice coalition who rejoice in the idea of babies dying (and those can mostly be found on 4chan). Pro-choicers in general want the best for mothers, children and society, and differ from pro-lifers only in their views on the personhood and rights of the fetus. As long as the pro-life movement characterizes anyone who disagrees with them as monstrous, society will be right to marginalize the pro-life voice.
- Fight for all life. This is probably the most important one. Because abortion is a complicated, ambiguous issue, many remain unimpressed by the pro-life movement's care for the unborn. In order to gain a hearing for your unique perspective on the unborn, you must earn respect and credibility by fighting for those already born. Use your considerable political muscle to address domstic poverty, inner-city violence, international debt relief, fair trade, push aid for political refugees, bring attention to and pressure upon international sex and slave trade, fight against agents of globalization who move their factories to poorer and poorer nations so they can, ironically, pay their workers less and less. Only when a watching world sees you protecting those they already know to be alive will they consider your claim to be protecting the potentially alive.
- Practice self-sacrifice in your own communities. Many pro-life movements are already getting their hands around this one. The pro-life movement must first create programs that make it practicable for a woman to carry her baby to term. This means a great deal of financial, spiritual and emotional support, quite possibly including opening your homes and checkbooks. If you want to organize a protest at a women's clinic, do not allow anyone to attend who is not willing to take home a teenage girl, and raise both her and her child as their own.
- Work with others to reduce the need for abortion. A lot of what Obama says is naturally rhetoric. That's what Presidents use. But he is right in this: there are both pro-life and pro-choice people in America who want to take concrete steps toward seeing the number of abortions decrease. Sex education, increased use of birth control and reduction of poverty are all fields in which the pro-life movement ought to be leading, not fighting against.
These six steps are, I believe, crucial to the pro-life movement ever achieving any of its goals or ever being taken seriously by the broader culture.
Do any of these seem inaccurate? Do these taken as a whole seem inadequate? What other advice would you give the pro-life movement?
Comments (94)
I do follow all of these points. And I am sure that many others do.
The problem with many prolifers is that they don't seem to follow what they say, and have contradictory beliefs, like not caring about all life, like you mentioned.
Which causes prochoicers to have a bad view of the prolifers. I do think that abortion is comparable to slavery--in the sense that neither side can truly be argued to be right.
We have accepted slavery to be wrong though, and I do wish that abortion would be too. But that would take many years. And there's a huge possibility it will still be accepted.
I am still ashamed at the prolifers who took the life of this doctor. I am embarrased to say that who ever it was was against abortion too. That just shows that they destroyed what they were supposed to be fighting for.
@scrambledmegzntoast@hardestlevel - lol wut? Explain please.
@scrambledmegzntoast@hardestlevel - Wow and when you said you were just another annoying 17 year old I was agreeing sarcastically, but now I'm not so sure.
Actually back yourself up with something. You seem to be sputtering gibberish for no reason. What exactly is the problem with my comment now?
@scrambledmegzntoast@hardestlevel - haha okay you want to play that game, except for one thing.
I've read more than one of her blogs. I've read many from her.
You know me from where? One place.
Do you know how many blogs I comment a day and how many of the Ish sites I return to daily? Quite a lot actually. How often do I have a fight? Rarely.
See the difference between me and idiots like you is that I actually gather many resources before I decide to judge a person. You, however, only took ONE resource and decided it was enough for a counter argument.
I'm sorry hun, but you just don't cut it. And if you really want to clear off as many of my comments from this "brilliant person"s site then I suggest not responding back because you already know what happens, don't you?
@scrambledmegzntoast@hardestlevel - Oh and btw, I really have to credit you on your contribution to the "serious conversation" here. Yup, a fountain of information and logical and rational opinions you are.
@scrambledmegzntoast@hardestlevel - Yea, you were totally helpful. Thank you for the insight, Dr.Phil. You really have changed my life.
5 and 6, totally rock. if only they were reality.
@SirNickDon - I'd prefer, for both our protection, to keep my answer private. I'll message you. If I am wrong, I don't want to stir up false rumors, on your site, or any other for that matter.
@galthouse - Yeah, definitely. Shoot me a message.
Number four is the biggest issue I have. So many people are pro-life, yet are pro-war and pro-death penalty. A very well written post.
well said.
@ProvokingThought - "On a similar note this weekend I havent seen a similar outrage about someone who had religious and ideological differences committing premeditated murder in Little Rock."
Respectfully, they have most certainly been there. Even on the typically liberal talk shows, the Little Rock murder has been covered as well, and with just as much outrage, as you call it. They've spent more time on the Tiller murder, but probably mostly because it rips open the debate (plus, it helps that they can actually book people who have a connection to the story). There really isn't a debate with the Little Rock murder; very, very few people actually believe that soldiers are committing outright murder, especially not in a way that would justify their assassination. No one sympathizes with that killer. No one is saying his actions were justified, or heroic, even. There aren't well-organized groups out there dedicated to stopping military enlistment, keeping and distributing lists of where recruitment officers and those who've enlisted live and go to church. Millions of people don't call soldiers "murderers" and "killers" and "worse than Nazis", much less do so with the power of their Church and faith behind them.
I completely understand your point. There should most certainly be outrage over the deaths of the enlistees. But I also understand the outrage over Tiller's murder. It's driven by fear... a fear that I completely understand. I'm not afraid that my father, a soldier in the National Guard and Navy veteran, is going to be assassinated. But I am afraid that if I ever were to have the misfortune of needing abortion services (or any other service at a women's clinic, even something as innocent as a pregnancy test), or were I ever to volunteer again at a women's clinic, or drive a friend to a women's clinic, that not only might I have to face the harrassment and vitriol of the protestors outside the clinic, but my life might actually be in danger.
Several weeks before this happened my cousin's wife had a concert. In this concert she sang a song about abortion, pro-life and pro-choice. I had never heard those words used in a song before. I have to say I listened to very little of it because my mind started switching to the point you make in 5. How much greater influence, how much greater love and compassion does it show to ask a teenage girl to allow her baby to be raised by you (ambiguous "you") rather than to allow it to die... To go to an abortion clinic and protest as a nameless person in a crowd shows none of that. But to approach a girl and ask her if you could adopt her baby... explain about yourself... You, someone she can see. Someone she can tell that cares. Asking her to allow you to adopt it. It's such an interesting thought in my mind. I meant to say something about it, but I started thinking about how difficult the adoption process is and got frustrated with my idea. It's such a discouraging topic.
@ithiliya - First, Thanks for the tenor of your reply. The discussion is important and us being rational and at the same time expressing our true positions and reasons are of great import.
I am not trying to "dance" or "wiggle". but I hadn't heard about it with any outrage or plastering of headlines similar to what I saw about the murdered doctor. I will acccept your word that there was. I wasnt watching tv, I was looking at feeds and noticed what I will term a disproportionate number between the two acts. I don't do tv with any regularity, but my family will say, did you hear about this or that when something like this happens.
Then I read on Monday a series of fear-mongering articles that were painting people who are opposed to abortion as potentially repressed murders laying in wait. I realize there is hyperbolic descriptive. Yet I use it to draw attention to the following .There was a fear mongering aspect , almost as if people who believe that life begins at conception are ticking time bombs looking for the first chance to snipe a abortionist. When you step away from the punditry though you realize the hype and the fear mongering that is being used to exploit Dr. Tillers murder. And it is divisive. Please let me explain why I hold that position, it isnt a talking point.
Roe vs. Wade is 36 years old and there have been less than a handful of abortion doctors murdered over the past 36 years. Three I believe, and three too many for vigalante justice.
But even the fear you express, which I accept to be genuine has to have been fanned by irresponsible people. If over half of the people in the nation who feel Roe v. Wade was a poor legal decision and should be overturned,or reframed, just say 150 million people and there are a total of 1.3 million abortions a year taking place, our country would be a walking time bomb if the pro-life movement or even any cognizable fraction of it was advocating taking any violent action over abortions that would be causation for fear.
I am not sure how many acts of violence or bombing total, but this was just pounced on unreasonably and then there has been how many retractions or follow-ups once it came out that the man who murdered Dr. Tiller in cold blood had a history of mental illness.
If there is something to be rightfully fearful of and that people on both sides of the aisle should be concerned about it is our mental health system that has basically been abandoned and us instead placing mentally ill people in prison after they commit crimes. Our broken criminal justice system that does not transition the inmate back into society properly keeping the system perpetuatiing itself. These are areas where real violence is coming from in our culture but we are "quiet about that".
Obama said at Saddleback if you believe life begins at conception you would disagree with his position. Roughly half the country disagree with him. But the facts just do not support the rhetoric or the fear mongering that some have engaged in. (Not referencing this post at all)
When you add into the mix that this man had a history of mental instability and it was being referenced on Sunday and Monday morning , don't you think that is a pretty relevant piece of information that was left out of a equation when you are trying to draw a causation and what people should be watching out for?
The fanning of this has the potential of you looking at half the people in this country with suspicion. That is inexcusable and irresponsible for the networks to be hyping it like that because there is no factual basis for it.
When you speak of lists, I could point to where lists were handed to ACORN people to go picket the homes of AIG managers who had employment contracts to intimidate them into giving back the bonuses. I could point to people who loaned money and signed contracts with Chrysler and GM on the condition they were the first to be repaid and the government has tried to bastardize the people who loaned them money as greedy and cheap skates for expecting the contract to be honored. Both cases were where our own government has placed citizens in danger by disseminating names to the public for intimidation. I point to this because it is not a "tit for tat", it is a manipulation of the population to turn on one another-commonly known as divide and conquer. I refuse to play their game.
And as you point out, even in a case of a man who converted to islam and then acted upon on his new faith and shot two military men, people were not on the television warning us to watch all muslim converts or beware of military recruitment centers, even though there has been other violence and protests at recruitment stations. Actually the case of the recruitment station was handled properly in my view. The one of Dr. Tillers was exploited.
We can agree to disagree, I just wanted to give a explanation for my position since your inquiry was sincere. Have a good evening and I truly trust that this has not struck any fear in you or would stop you from volunteering to help serve in the community as you felt led. John
@radicalramblings - "The big difference is in that abortion is legal"
Is it? Is 1st degree murder legal? Or is there just selective enforcement which discriminates against babies? Consider the Nazi govt. of Germany. It's policies were declared criminal by the Nuremburg judges, yet its policies were legal in Germany at the time. So your argument runs counter to the decisions of the Nuremburg judges and effectively declares that murdering people in Nazi Germany was legal.
@ProvokingThought - "That is inexcusable and irresponsible for the networks to be hyping it like that because there is no factual basis for it."
Inexcusable and irresponsible...AND, unfortunately, typical.
@soccerdadforlife - very interesting point.
You know, I've been thinking about #1. To be completely consistent, you would also have to ask pro-choice people to admit their own complicity for ending millions of human lives, or potential human lives, and repent.
If my belief that abortion is murder makes me an accomplice of someone who murders an abortionist, then those who believe that abortion is morally acceptable are also responsible for the loss of all the possibilities and potential that those babies represent. Are you comfortable with that?
I will agree that we all carry the shame. I grieve for the losses--all of them. To me, ending a life is murder, no matter who or where or at what stage of life. But even though I feel the shame that other human beings can be so horrible, I don't feel that I automatically am responsible for their actions. The terrorists on 9/11 were human beings, just as I am, they believed in their God, just as I do, and yet I don't feel any responsibility for what they did.
God will judge me for what *I* did (or did not do) and I feel fairly confident that he will not ask me to account for the murder of Dr. Tiller.
I agree with everything you said, 100%. Though many don't want to admit it, it doesn't apply to all pro-lifers of course, but as a whole the pro-life movement does create an atmosphere in which a person might find killing someone who performs abortions acceptable. Again, before someone jumps on me, I know this doesn't apply to everyone. But when events like this happen and prominent members of the pro-life movement and right-wing media (I prefer not to point fingers at specific people) speak out and say that "Tiller the Baby Killer" had blood on his hands and deserved what he got...it doesn't exactly make an unfriendly environment for things like this to keep happening. For Roeder and those like him, who are most likely mentally unstable to some degree, this is all the ammunition they need. Everyone is entitled to their opinion...but I don't think it's appropriate for those who are widely listened to and respected to publicly reinforce the motives and justifications Roeder had. And as a person who has always been pro-choice, the rest of your points are what I have been saying all along, especially 4 and 5. Well done on this whole post, if I could give you more than 2 eProps I definitely would. :)
Don't know if you've seen this video or not. Watch the one titled "Saint George Tiller?"
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=101291