Over at Eric Scheske's estimable blog The Daily Eudemon, I engage in a combox thumb wrestling match with one Henry Karlson over the topic of the term "pro-life".
See if you can make any sense of it.
Eric suggested that an expansive definition of the term "pro-life" to include quality of life issues - what's called "social justice" - made it more-or-less meaningless in daily conversation, without getting into a lot of niggly debate about things like what the meaning of "is" is. It sounds to me like Henry may be one of those who thinks that if a candidate supports raising the minimum wage and is for state-run health care, then we can overlook their positions on abortion, embryonic stem cell research, etc... because Evangelium Vitae says it's all "pro-life", you know.
In other words, he sounds like many who want badly to find some way to justify voting Democrat in November. But it's all okay because of Abu Ghraib.
I could be wrong about Henry, of course. It's hard to tell. A bit like nailing Jell-O to the wall, which I think is the point.
"Ahh how you die hard supporters of the New Way of thinking, you modernists just cant believe when even EWTN starts to sell out and compromises and sends mixed messages, unlike the Traditional Church of before Vatican II"
He is referring to the video at left, adverstised on the EWTN website, and for which he was kind enough to supply THIS LINK.
I can only assume that in his careful perusal of the very brief synopsis of the video, Frank somehow missed the words "Also includes their strategy for ending legalized abortion in the 21st century".
It's okay, Frank. We all tend to overlook things from time to time, especially when we are in a rush.
Esteemed commenter J. R. Stoodley, pondering the title of the video earlier in the thread, is likely correct... its title is partly a play on words, specifically the words of the pro-abort slogan "safe, legal and rare".
The presentation (I haven't seen it) may propose that we make abortion rare - and eventually make it illegal - via a strategy of the "hearts and minds" approach, rather than trying to make it rare by making it illegal. I'd appreciate input from anyone familiar with the video.
Abortion ought to be rare. Truthfully, it ought to be non-existent, but in a fallen world that will not happen. It can never be made really safe, being as it is such a great and traumatic invasion of a woman's body. It is major surgery, and the only people who will perform it began their careers with the abortion of their own conscience. If they will tear apart a defenseless unborn baby in the womb (or half out of it), should anyone be shocked that they might cut corners with regard to their professional standards? That they may be very content to roll the dice a little with things like, say, the risk of infection?
To bastardize Mark Shea... you let people get away with murdering babies, and it may eventually lead to something really serious, like lying or tax evasion.
Many thanks to Frank for bringing this video to our attention. I haven't seen it, but I just may have to order it and do a full review soon. Do consider purchasing it.
"I doubt if anyone of any tenderness or imagination can see the hand of a child and not be a little frightened of it. It is awful to think of the essential human energy moving so tiny a thing; it is like imagining that human nature could live in the wing of a butterfly or the leaf of a tree. When we look upon lives so human and yet so small. . . we feel the same kind of obligation to these creatures that [God] might feel. . ."
from Chesterton's essay In Defense of Baby Worship from The Defendant 1903.
For more, visit the Catholic Education Resource Center