Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
The Abortion Language Wars

The Abortion Language Wars

Last updated on: June 8, 2009 at 6:56 pm by Bonchamps

The Abortion Language Wars 2009-06-08T18:56:05-05:00 Bonchamps

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Three times now, fellow contributor to Vox Nova Sam Rocha has posted on the language surrounding the abortion debate, following my post, ‘Words Do Matter’. To recap, that post was an attempt to respond to the polemical assaults on the pro-life movement from certain elements in the pro-choice movement. Briefly, they argued that the words of our movement were as responsible for the death of late-term abortionist George Tiller as the bullets that actually ended his life.

Sam argues that we cannot assume that truth is inherent in the words we use. This may be true, but here on Vox Nova, I am unaware of any other way of conveying things that I believe and/or know to be true other than through the medium of written communication. I get the sense that Sam is uncomfortable with people such as myself making truth claims.

Sam says in his latest post,

If it were only a matter of using factual information, language, images, and so on, then, telling the truth would be quite simple and we would have very little to talk about.

Perhaps it was never clear before to Sam, and to others, that the fundamental values we hold often come prior to the facts; they are often subjective. When I make an argument against abortion, an argument based upon the true facts, I am appealing only to those who value human life in all stages of development – or those who have the potential to share that value. Graphic language and graphic images serve a useful purpose in that they hit those who are waffling, who are on the fence, rather hard. But do they transform fundamental values? I hope so, but I don’t count on it.

Here I must note, however, that even if it is not ‘only a matter’ – that is to say, even if it is not sufficient to use factual information – it is necessary to do so. It is a pre-requisite. Necessary, but not always sufficient. Why can’t this simply be acknowledged? Or are we to understand that facts and true depictions of abortion are just optional? I suppose we could say that if the sanctity of life is a fundamental value, the facts matter little. I myself am no abortion expert; I know as much as I think I need to know, but it is the value I place on life that guides my considerations.

But in this great journey of life, many are only somewhat clear, if at all, on their values, on where they stand on the fundamental issues of our day. A ‘brute’ presentation of the facts, a harsh reminder from outside of one’s own limited consciousness, is often necessary to help them come along. In the end, one may or may not value human life; but if one is ambivalent or even supportive of abortion on the assumption that the unborn child is not really a human being, then there is no doubt that the words and images we use can only serve to disrupt that position.

Sam then says,

if we desire to bring about beliefs that are rooted in the truth, then, we must do more than use words that we regard as having a single, absolute meaning

If anyone is unclear as to the meaning of a word I or anyone else is using, they need only ask for clarification. For instance, ‘murder’. It is an easy way of saying, ‘the deliberate killing of an innocent human being’. Is there some other word we ought to use to convey that?

The only possible objection to the use of this word is that the ‘thing’ being killed isn’t really a human being. It is some sort of pre-human, non-human, ‘clump of cells’ with no inherent right to live. Well naturally I expect that from someone who calls themselves pro-choice; but here, I thought I was dealing with people who are pro-life, who take as a given that the unborn human being is as human, and possesses the same rights, as anyone else.

Those who share that position should know that there is no point in opposing abortion at all if it isn’t murder. And anyone who did so in the past, that is, on the assumption that abortion really wasn’t murder, probably really was trying to preserve a ‘patriarchal’ society or whatever it is the feminists alleged are the ‘real’ anti-woman motives of the pro-life movement. Well, as I see it, that isn’t a legitimate reason to oppose abortion. Either the unborn human being has human rights or it does not. Either a violation of its right to life is murder, or it is not. And if it does not, and if it is not, then we ought to have free abortion on demand now, tomorrow, and forever.

Sam goes on to admit that “abortion is, as a matter of medical fact, murder” and that the argument establishing it is “sensible”. But still, we are missing something:

What is ignored by this sensible argument is that, to those who advocate for it, abortion is not murder. In fact, abortion advocates see it as an affirmation of the dignity of woman. Many of them volunteer and organize to preserve the right to abortion out of the belief that those who say that “Abortion is baby killing, period!” are in fact trying to subvert women.

I don’t know who ignores all of this, but it isn’t me. I was once in that movement, not exactly abortion advocacy, but far enough on the left to bump shoulders with enough people engaged in that sort of thing.

In the way they see it, we are trying to ‘subvert women’ by taking away a choice from them we don’t believe they have a right to make. It is more than likely true that without abortion, there are many young women who might not make it through college, or through a career track. There may be siblings in crowded poor families who lose their opportunity to do the same because meager resources are spread among greater numbers of children. Abortion certainly has made certain aspects of life easier for certain demographics, men and women alike, from one point of view.

What we believe is that the life of an innocent child is more important than the educational or career plans of its mother or its siblings (it is not strictly a female issue, as you can see, as male siblings and fathers also have a stake in the issue). We can only settle this question by settling the question of whether or not it is ok to kill the living being in the womb. One pro-life writer put it best, and I paraphrase Gregory Koukl: if abortion is not murder, then no reason is required for it. If abortion is murder, then no reason is adequate for it.

Sam tells us about his friend and his daughter:

“Do you have a daughter?” I admitted that I did not. He went on to say, “Until you have a daughter, you won’t understand.”

I have known many people who make this argument – “until you are such and such, you will never understand this issue”. It is complete nonsense, and no other complete breakdown of reason has the potential to annoy me as much as this.

What this man, and so many others, are essentially arguing, is that our concern as fathers would be so overriding that any of the objective moral and ethical considerations we are making here are practically useless. Why have laws about anything, then? And why isn’t this discussion just as valid:

“Are you an Aryan superman?”

“No, I’m not”.

“Then you can’t know what it is like to have to share a planet with all of these untermenschen, particularly the Jews.”

If only we could feel his pain!

Back to Sam:

But the greater point would be that his belief would stay the same, or become even more convinced that those people who think he is an advocate of murder, among other things, are crazy. And his belief, while wrong in many ways, would be rooted in truth, real truth.

You can’t satisfy everyone all of the time. If this man really believes that the love of his daughter is at stake in his position over abortion, why would you even try to argue with him in the first place? Such an irrational position cannot be reasoned with, anymore than that of my hypothetical Aryan superman, or a Southern plantation owner convinced, deeply, of the inferiority of the black man.

The truth of abortion does not appeal to everyone. If this man could look at the bloody, mangled corpses of human beings and not be moved an inch, but instead think that you were the crazy one for even caring about such things, then why would we want him as an ally anyway? Southerners could see for themselves that free black men who made it North could educate themselves, live and work as well as any white man; but did that matter, with all that was at stake for them? Of course not.

As far as I am concerned, we only need a majority, not unanimous consent. The solution to pro-abortion fanaticism is not to convert the pro-abortion fanatics, but to outnumber them and make them politically irrelevant. From that standpoint, our words and images are and will continue to be a success, though there is still a very long way to go – I am often dismayed by the false optimism of pro-lifers whenever a new poll comes out.

And please don’t read this as an argument that they are beyond salvation. I am speaking of the political level; I still believe that, having souls and free will and a conscience, they can change their hearts. What I am saying is that our strategy need not depend upon it, and that my priority is to stop the killing, not convince the killers that they are really killing.

To close this out:

You see, my friend can only begin to have a frank and direct conversation with me when he believes that I truly want the best for women, for his daughter.

Sam, I hate to say it, but your friend is morally stunted. To say exactly what you said here is the same as saying that your friend will only have a frank discussion with you when you believe what he believes. Why can’t the conditions for a discussion be him wanting what is best for fragile human life in the womb?

In the end, Sam, I think you and I have different objectives, and hence, different approaches. You want to get committed supporters of abortion to see that you don’t hate women and to listen to your point of view. I want to make those same people politically irrelevant.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

June 8, 2009

An "Old Spiritualist" on Catholicism

Next Post

June 9, 2009 Quote of the Week: Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did Jesus say to the storm on the Sea of Galilee?

Select your answer to see how you score.

"Depart from me!" "Be gone!" "Peace, be still!" "Let there be light!"