Catholics who went to mass on this past weekend heard the announcements concerning Respect Life Month and encouraging respect for the life and dignity of every person from conception to natural death. The issue is not just about abortion. It transcends all segments of society. Life is denigrated in many ways of which we are constantly reminded by the senseless violence that permeates our schools and streets and even our political venues.
However, assertions about the sanctity of life and that we must protect the dignity of every person are now being challenged every day by political ads that counter Catholic beliefs by pointing out the “cruelty” of laws that do not permit women to seek an abortion under certain circumstances. Do not be deceived by these cleverly designed political ads
These ads are “chipping away” at anything that restricts access to abortion at any stage of development. By getting you to agree that a woman should be able to choose abortion under one circumstance, they invite you onto a slippery slope where they hope you will agree to more and more exceptions, until you have “flipped” on the issue and vote accordingly in support of those advocating more abortions.
Whereas there is not enough space to write here concerning all of the issues, I have addressed these concerns in my book “Building a Culture of Life” and I give short summaries on my web site https://buildingacultureoflife.org/ concerning abortion, contraception, incest, rape, human sex trafficking, neonaticide, infanticide, in vitro fertilization, stem cell research, human cloning, euthanasia, and assisted suicide.
I discuss in my book the entire history leading up to the Roe v Wade ruling by the Supreme Court in 1973. The majority opinion held that the Court “did not know when a new human life begins” despite the fact that all of the medical books in the world at that time were in agreement that a new human life begins at conception.
The court also did not address the issue of when the baby growing in the womb became a person entitled by the 14th Amendment to protection of its life…”No state shall make or enforce any law which shall ….deprive any person of life…without due process of law.”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
Instead, the Court made comments to assert a new “right” to an abortion based upon interpretations of fragments of other amendments, which they asserted could mean that there is such a right. Legal scholars at the time were baffled at the reasoning explaining the court’s decision. For example:
” It’s “a very bad decision,” wrote Yale Law professor John Hart Ely, a former clerk to Chief Justice Earl Warren, “because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.”
Those critics included a young Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In the years before she became a justice, she said the court made a mistake by going too far, too fast in its first ruling on the constitutionality of abortion.”
In my book, I quote blistering comments by the dissenting Justices in a Court largely described as “liberal” …a Court wanting to make a decision in search of a justification for that decision.
By contrast, in June 2022, a more “conservative” court ruled that the 10th Amendment was clear in its simplicity: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The constitution says nothing about abortion (which was an anathema to the Founding Fathers) and there is no federal law making abortion a legal procedure. Therefore, regulation of abortion is reserved to the States by the constitution…or, Congress can pass a law legalizing abortion, as has been promised by some people running for office in the present election…or, Congress could propose a new constitutional amendment legalizing abortion.
One can see that the issue of what a new federal law “legalizing abortion” could look like would be hugely controversial and divisive in a country where there is already misinformation flying everywhere. A constitutional amendment would face similar obstacles.
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution
Therefore, other candidates for political office embrace the Court’s decision that the people in the individual States have the right to debate the issues and elect people to make the laws in their own States.
Whereas, Catholics believe in the sanctity of human life and advocate for protection of the life and dignity of every person in all stages of life and in all conditions and circumstances, abortion advocates want to narrow these concerns to the issue of abortion and make us argue about it.
The Catholic Church is unequivocal in its position on respect for the life and dignity of every person and that a new human life begins at conception. The issue of when a new human life begins has been accepted by medical science for nearly 200 years since discovery of the human ovum in 1827. The discovery of DNA in the 1860’s and the elucidation of how it works in our development should have ended that part of the discussion. Rather, those who want abortion on demand at any time for any reason assert that a baby does not become a person until it passes through the “magic tunnel” at childbirth, and some people even want the right to kill a newborn baby if it is not wanted.
The position of the Catholic Church is the reason why those currently in political power have attacked the Church. For the same reason, Pro-Life advocates have been attacked. At the same time, other abortion advocates have spoken and written that they know that abortion is “murder” and they do not care [see documentation in my post on that subject on my web site under “Current Events…it was a while back]. These individuals evidently just wanted to create angst and throw that accusation back into the faces of Pro-Life advocates.
Be that as it may, the real issue that I address when I speak about the future of the Pro-Life movement beyond June 2022 is not only to continue these arguments about protecting the life and dignity of every person and engaging in pro-life activities, but to address the issues cited by the women themselves who felt like they had no practical choice but to have an abortion.
There is not space here to get into these details, but it is clear that some political candidates support abortion and wish to make it a divisive political issue involving money and power, whereas it was refreshing to hear a hint in the recent vice-presidential debate that we must find solutions to the problems women face that drive them to seek an abortion.
For that reason, we must continue everything we are doing, but we must press our leaders to address the social structure that forces women into untenable situations. Our pregnancy help centers and both federal and state laws provide much help to women in need, many of whom are in extremely difficult circumstances. Often, they think about abortion first. Our job is to be sure that there are answers to every problem a woman faces and that she knows that there are solutions, that she will get help. For example, every pregnant woman must be able to retain all of the options in life that non-pregnant women have for education and career advancement or to just choose motherhood.
In my book, I list all of the reasons women cite for getting an abortion; there are an average of four reasons per individual. Therefore, the challenges are before us. However, it is certain that some of our political candidates have no intention of offering solutions to women or providing any help at all to avoid the dreadful decision to have an abortion. The long term impact on women who have had an abortion is also callously disregarded.
We are at a crossroads in our society where respect for life has become so disregarded for so long that the consequences are felt in the tragic violence that we hear about every day. Let this be the moment that we turn away from the path we have been on and seek fundamental solutions beginning at conception. As we find solutions for mothers so they can choose life for their babies, we create a society that also respects the lives of older children, those with special needs, adults, the disabled, and the elderly. It is certain that the decision we make on this issue will define who we are as a society, and each of us will feel the impact, for better or worse.
Let this be the month that we resolve to be part of the solution. Let us change our society together.