On The Rejection Of The Personhood Amendment.
And so the Mississippi referendum did not go as I – and, I am sure, many of you – had wished. What hurts more, the result was clearly in favour of those against the measure, whereas the polls indicated a close call.
It would appear that in the last days of the campaign, prominent pro-lifers have intervened and expressed their concerns about the initiative. I have written already about this, but the concerns may be summarised with the argument that you shouldn’t fight to win, because you may lose and be in a worse position than you were before.
I never cease to be amazed at such arguments. Did the participants of the “Boston tea party” reason that if the operation had failed, their cause might have been set back? What about the Independence war: isn’t it so, that if that war had been lost an even bigger yoke would have been imposed on the Colonies? More in general, what kind of reasoning is that, that one shouldn’t fight because he might, in theory, be worse off if he fights and lose?
How can it be explained that Planned Parenthood was clearly opposed to the initiative? If it had played in their hands, they should have chosen a lower profile, right? How can it be explained that President Obama hailed the defeat? Have these people all become covert pro-lifers?
And about the argument of the Supreme Court re-affirming Roe vs Wade: Roe vs Wade is in force now. It kills children now. It can’t kill them more after being upheld that it does at the moment. It’s not that 73% of a baby is aborted now, and this percentage would have been increased to 91% after a second sentence upholding Roe vs Wade. No, when a child is aborted , he dies to 100%. He ceases to live. He is no more.
So, it is difficult for me to see how avoiding a further controversy in the Supreme Court might help a child to be “aborted less”, or help the cause in any way. In the end, the United States are a democracy, and when the public opinion decides that it wants to go in a certain direction – with an amendment of the Constitution, if must be; more probably without – there is no need to persuade Supreme Court judges. And how can you get the “right” judges to the Supreme court, if not creating a climate hostile to abortion in the Senate that must approve them, or making it more difficult for a President to propose the election of pro-choice judges? How can a battle to raise the awareness of the Holocaust that is abortion be fought with the fear of letting the issue become a hotly contested, highly controversial one?
I am baffled, really. I think this was a victory of cowardice over hope. Not so much for the end result of the defeat, which might have happened anyway, but because of the way in which this defeat has been, in a word, deserved.
What is next, I wonder? No battle in defence of DOMA because if it is lost we might end up in a worse position than we are today? If you ask me, this is Chamberlain’s logic.
Again, I am baffled.
Posted on November 10, 2011, in Catholicism and tagged Abortion, Conservative Catholic, conservative catholicism, mississippi personhood amendment, Planned Parenthood, Pro-life. Bookmark the permalink. 16 Comments.
Very well stated. I was perplexed and not amused that our local TV network here reported “Mississippi voters reject that life begins at conception”. The world has gone mad.
On another note, check out Mark Steyn online and read “Sunset on the Rideau”, a shocking account of death virtually ignored by the American MSM.
‘Chamberlain’s logic’ – nicely put.
As Yeats wrote, a dog-eared old quote, perhaps, but true:
“The best lack all conviction, and the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
And why are we without conviction?
Sadly, I think there are many people who are so proud of themselves for “seeing the deeper issues” and “knowing what will happen if” that they have become more concerned about being right than doing right. To those people I say this:
Stop strategising, stop intellectualising and just do what is right. Do it now, do it tomorrow, and don’t give up.
Right has already won. Which side do you want to stand with in the end?
Rather the above cited “Sunset on the Rideau” is an account of quadruple murder.
I was appalled at a discussion moderated by Megyn Kelly on Fox news yesterday. All the concern was about: What will happen to IVF if this passes….what about hormonal birth control which often “works” to prevent the zygote from implanting…what about ectopic pregnancies (not an issue here.) No one seemed to really care what the facts are about when life begins. They seemed much more worried about the inconvenience of having it begin with fertilization. Let’s define personhood at a stage when it won’t be so intrusive.
The world has gone mad, or maybe we are just consumed with our own selfishness to the extent that we choose to kill rather than recognize the newly created as persons. God help us!
Beautiful words, Little soul.
I don’t like neocons a’ la Fox News much, by the way.
The bishops of Mississippi IMHO were more interested in maintaining the status quo for fear that things could get worst. How things could get worst for the babies doomed for abortion is beyond me, but I ‘trust’ the bishops. (Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.) I also ‘trust’ loud-mouth, arrogant American bloggers like Mark Shea who explain it all to benighted fools like me who actually think some of our bishops are cowards and compromisers to the powers that be, Double wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.
Mundabor, off topic, but would be interested in your thoughts on this:
Haven’t read any of the books, Shane, but Barzini was good.
I’d share the thought about the land of beauty and overpowering ugliness. Without falling into common places, Italy is a country of contrasts, and – by all its advantages – a rather cruel stepmother to very many.
I am not planning to go back living permanently there, not even after retirement. Mind, I am very patriotic and proud of my Italian heritage (the past, I mean) and of the many ways in which Italians still do many things properly.
I think this should tell you something.. 😉
I am not planning to go back living permanently there, not even after retirement.
Mundabor, may I ask you why? No obligation for you to tell me, of course, just a bit curious.
Shane, very shortly because I haven’t eaten yet 😉
Corruption, criminality, “furbismo”*.
* cutting corners, wanting to be cunning, scheming
For the record, I’d never live in Ireland, either.. 😉
For retirement, Germany every day.
Very interesting…I’ve always thought Italy would be a beautiful place to retire (Britain is too cold!)
Well some place certainly are, and I have not ruled out some of them like Ferrara (which I absolutely adore, but too warm in summer) or Parma.
But generally speaking the situation is not encouraging, unless you want to bury yourself in a lost farmhouse somewhere in Umbria or Tuscany or Marche. Which might seem idyllic but would be, I believe, extremely boring.
Hey Mundabor, did you see this: http://liveaction.org/blog/amazing-video-yale-scientist-visualizes-conception-to-birth/
Thanks, this is beautiful!