"We ourselves feel that what we are doing is just a drop in the ocean. But the ocean would be less because of that missing drop." ~ Blessed Mother Teresa
Did you know Mississippi could very soon be the first state to be abortion-free?
A law was passed in Mississippi which requires abortionists to have admittance privileges at a hospital close to the abortion facility (which is a good thing for when they injure women). The last standing abortion clinic in Mississippi, Jackson Women’s Health Organization, has four abortionists, three of which fly in from other states. The other one very rarely performs abortions and already has hospital privileges. Fortunately, the closest six hospitals have refused to grant the other three abortionists the privileges they would need. Because of this law, this clinic could close within a month making Mississippi the first state without an abortion clinic.
Mississippi (and this clinic’s owner Diane Derzis) have a history of endangering women. According to Troy Newman of Operation Rescue, “After looking at the abysmal safety record of abortionists in Mississippi, the hospital privilege requirement is the very least that the state can do to protect women.”
Today it is estimated that well over half a million people gathered in Washington D.C. at the annual March for Life. In the snowy 20 degree weather, pro-lifers marched through terrible weather conditions showing the world the power of truth. I was one of them. It was my first time attending the March for Life in D.C. and it was an awesome experience. I could not even estimate the massive number of people because they just kept coming. It was so cool!
Throughout the day, I saw very few protesters (aka abortion supporters). As we came out of mass before the March, one man chanted “women’s rights”. As we marched, there were two people with a sign about communion who weren’t really doing much. Outside the supreme court there were maybe 10 people holding “abortion on demand & without apology” posters. I didn’t see any other protesters which was a huge difference from my experience at the Walk for Life last year.
The protesters from this year – ooooooooh scary!Here they are among us pro-lifers
Another huge difference was the weather. It was around 20 degrees in D.C. today and it snowed as we marched. The snow was rather beautiful, but it was otherwise a pitiful and gloomy day. Good thing we were there to light up the city!
Usually the media ignores pro-lifers (unless they find the occasional violent one), but I am pleased to find that this year there are several somewhat-fair articles out. Here’s a round-up of the news stories and pictures I’ve found:
Being pro-choice means that you are in favor of choices. I think people generally shouldn’t be forced to do things – we are a free country after all. That’s why I’m pro-choice. I do believe, however, that some choices are wrong. That’s why I’m also pro-life.
You see, when most people think of the term “pro-choice”, they would conjure up images of people in favor of abortion and contraception on demand. When you think of the simple word choice, what comes to mind for you? Here’s what others responded when asked what choice meant to them:
If you are pro-choice, then what do you mean when you use “choice”? Do you only apply that belief to abortion and contraception, or do you apply your favor of choices to other areas of life? I found it fascinating that the people in this video, while claiming to be pro-choice, were generally not in favor of people making choices for themselves (ie. how big of a soda to buy, what kind of light bulbs to use) other than reproductive choices.
Now, let’s just be honest people. Even Planned Parenthood has recognized the dilemma of using and calling themselves “pro-choice” recently. It doesn’t make sense to call yourself pro-choice if what you’re really for is abortion and contraception: reproductive “rights” as you call them.
It’s incredibly sad how our society has redefined “choice”. When I think of what “pro-choice” means to most people now, I think of the 55 MILLION babies who have been killed by “choice”, the millions of mothers hurt by their “choice”, millions of families hurt by their “choice”, millions of children denied their siblings because of “choice”, millions of fathers who will never meet their children on earth because of a “choice”, and hundreds of clinic workers who have fallen victim to to the culture of death as they provide “choice” to women. When you think of “choice” do you think of young women living free lives? Or do you think of the reality this has created: depression, tears, broken relationships, dismembered children, hardened hearts, and families torn apart by a single choice?
We are better than the lies of the “pro-choice” euphemism. Women deserve to be told what choice really means, but we have to recognize what it actually means to be pro-choice first. It means that we support choice in general – not just reproductive choices. It doesn’t mean we think all choices are good or even right. Things like abortion are wrong in and of themselves.
Give it some thought, then comment below: What do you mean when you say “choice”?
I believe we could end abortion in a year if the entire pro-life movement was completely united and worked seamlessly together with a common plan to accomplish that.
Unfortunately, we are our own worst enemy. When the in-fighting begins, we are pushing the day abortion ends farther and farther away like we have for the last 40 years. People have different opinions of how exactly we should end abortion. Some think we have to start graphic picture campaigns, others that we have to take over Planned Parenthood with pregnancy centers, others think we need to shut Planned Parenthood down, others that we need to spread the message of purity so our society does not “need” abortion anymore. Some people want to use the Gospel and Jesus to teach people the truth about life, others want to use science. So who’s right?
Here’s the thing: No one approach is right. No single approach will end abortion. We need all aspects of the pro-life movement to end abortion.
When people start getting up on their high horse claiming their way is the best, we start having issues. It makes me sad and disappointed every time I see this happen. You might have heard of the drama with the group Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) recently. They’ve come under fire from pro-lifers and many Catholics because of their strong anti-Catholic posts on Facebook.
I “liked” the AHA page a long time ago because I really liked some of their graphics. But then I started seeing posts I got angry about. When an abortion supporter made a rude comment on the AHA page, they would call out that person by name in a post. They were often rude in their posts and I was tired of it. How would that help our cause? After hiding their page from my newsfeed, I didn’t know about their anti-Catholic posts until friends of mine started commenting on their page and telling me about it. I looked into it more and was so sad to see a group causing such division withing the pro-life movement.
Here’s something they had to say about Catholics:
When I first read it, I almost laughed. This AHA admin touched on pretty much all the common misconceptions about Catholicism in one little post. But then I was thinking “Why is the world is this even on this page?” If your goal is to abolish abortion, why start fights and bash other religions? So then I went to their “about” section to see if religion-basing was their goal. Here’s what I found:
So basically, they could bash other religions, but other people are terrible people is they promote, debate, or discuss theirs? Wow. How wonderful is that for the pro-life movement?!?! Because I was so disappointed in this group, I decided to write to them and let them know I was completely withdrawing my support because of their divisive posts. I ended up having an interesting conversation with an admin which was (ironically) cut short by a March for Life meeting I had to attend. Here are snippets of the conversation with commentary from me:
ME: “You state in your “about” section that “our page is not a place for the promotion, debate and discussion of the supremacy of one Christian tradition over another, or the building up of one denomination over any other”. But then, you strongly state that your own religious beliefs are supreme. Isn’t that a contradiction of what you said?
AHA: “I don’t think we are “dividing” anything necessarily, but rather exposing division that was already there.
Please remember that Christ himself said he came not to bring peace but a sword. This is peculiar statement considering this Christ also prayed that believers would be one. What could this mean?
I take it to mean that Christ exposed division in order to attain true unity. That is all we desire. Real true unity. Instead of a house that is divided and only unified on the surface level.
It really isn’t a contradiction because we do not consider Catholicism to be a part of “Christian tradition”. Let me explain. I do not wish to say that all Catholics are necessarily going to Hell. I think the majority of protestants are on the broad way and headed toward destruction. It is important to remember that your own church anathematized Protestants in the Council of Trent some time after the reformation. This is to say the Catholic Church declared us outside of the bride of Christ and outside of salvation. The Catholic Church herself declared that she preaches a different Gospel than those who flow from reformation traditions. The reason I point this out is that it truly is a hypocrisy to be angry at protestants for saying the Roman Gospel is no Gospel at all when that is what Catholic teaching has said about protestants all along.”
Did that make sense to you? Hmmm…not really. What does the Council of Trent have to do with being divisive? Anyway, here’s the Bible verse he was referring to:
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foe will be those of his own household. He who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me, and he who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” Mt. 10: 34 – 38
Jesus is saying that his word (referred to as a “sword”) will set families against each other. It’s not always easy following Jesus, and that’s what he was saying when he said we’d have to take up our crosses to be worthy of him. Nowhere in this verse did Jesus indicate that a division among families already existed. He said truth would divide people. The truth about life will (and does) divide people, but it should not divide people who have the same belief about life.
The admin then went on to say…
“If we are “causing” division like Christ “cause” division then I would call it a good thing because my Lord is worthy of imitation.”
I think my God is worthy of imitation as well, go figure! The problem here is that sure, the teachings of Jesus caused a lot of division. Can that really be compared to what AHA is doing? AHA posting rude things about Catholics is not the equivalent of what Jesus did because their divisive posts are hurting the pro-life movement.
One of the most interesting things this admin told me is this:
“I think the pro-life movement is a largely secular movement that is not dependent on God for anything. And because of this I think it is doomed to failure. It actually creates the illusion that we (the prolife movement is winning/fighting) when in reality she is crippling herself with compromise. We seek to reform the pro-life movement but we don’t know if she will comply. She must return to God if she is going to succeed and right now things are not looking good.”
So this admin thinks the pro-life movement is doomed to failure….That’s encouraging. I agreed that I thought our largely secular society has real issues. However, I pointed out that the majority of pro-lifers are Christians.
AHA: “I think the majority of pro-life activist believe in God but cater to the rampant secularism in our culture and it is demonstrated in the way the speak about abortion and set out to fight it.
If you see the damage of secularism, which is a reason abortion on demand exists, why should we oppose abortion on the same grounds that seem to justify abortions legality?
It seems that religion should matter much more to us than it does right now.”
ME: “Religion certainly matter to me. However, rabid abortion supporters are not going to listen to religious zealots shoving Jesus down their throats. That’s why it’s also important to use science and common sense methods of showing people the truth about life. Can you give me some examples of how we’re opposing abortion on the same grounds others justify it so I know exactly what you’re talking about?”
AHA: “We could take your comment you just made as an example.
The naturalist worldview is a major destroyer of clear ethical thinking. Why ought we cater to a worldview that is completely mind numbing when brought to its logical conclusions? It seems that if we directed our focus against actual causes for abortion-mindedness (atheism, secularism, naturalism) we would actually deal more directly with the problem of the culture and effectively change it for the better.”
To sum up this persons position, he thinks that atheism, secularism and naturalism are the causes of abortion, and the only way to solve that is to convert people to believers in Jesus. The last thing I asked (to wish I received no answer) was this:
“Can you explain, though, how there are Christians and other believers who support abortion? If using Jesus alone to end abortion is enough, why are they not pro-life?”
Do you see the problem here? Think about it. Like I said in the beginning, there is no one correct way to end abortion. Sure, having a secular society doesn’t help, but does shoving Jesus down people’s throats help? I don’t think so.
I loved reading The Crescat’s response to AHA and Calah’s view of the situation. Before converting to Catholicism, Calah was on the other side of the computer in AHA’s position and her insight was interesting.
“I came to the University of Dallas absolutely certain that I knew what these papists were about. And I told them so with predictable regularity. I’d ask some question, like, “why do you think Mary was born without sin?” and when they gave me their answer, I’d let them talk without listening and then explain to them what they really believed. No kidding, I actually did that. I told my friends that they worshiped graven images, followed a man instead of Christ, and had no idea what the Bible actually meant. God bless them, they took my incessant imperious apologetics in mostly incredulous silence and then changed the subject. It got old after a while and I gave it up.
What I thought then was conviction from the Holy Spirit about the Truth now seems to me suspiciously like fear. I clung to what I knew desperately, because there were only two choices: saved or unsaved. Heaven or hell. Predestined for Christ or predestined for damnation. And I had to believe I was saved. That meant keeping an iron grasp on my belief system, shutting out anything that might encourage doubt lest the whole thing come tumbling down and I find myself cast out among the damned papists.”
I truly hope and pray that the leaders of AHA see how they have damaged the pro-life movement and stop their divisive posts. I also hope and pray that God gives them grace to be able to work with other pro-lifers (especially Catholics) in this fight for life.
In the end, people, the pro-life movement is about ending abortion, not religious fights. We need God back in our society, but force-feeding him to people is not the answer. Let’s put the past behind us and from this day forward vow to fight harder everyday to end abortion without letting anything get in our way.
1. The church has been hating on women for too long. Just having Mary as the Queen of Heaven and Earth is not enough!
2. We should be nuns, you say? Nuns are useless…because providing the entire earth with education, healthcare, and prayers is not as good what priests do!
3. Let’s face it. Women have got to do the same things as men to be equal to them.
4. Who cares about 2,000 years of tradition (or St. Paul for that matter)? We can make our own rules!
5. Excommunication rocks!
Watch this video to see my inspiration…
Don’t worry – I’m not completely off my rocker. Here, my friends, are 5 real reasons (complementing the ones above) why Catholics will actually never “ordain a lady”.
1. The Church loves (not hates) women. They are revered as intricate and beautiful creations of God. How do I know this? Check out these quotes (from Church documents, no less):
“Womanhood expresses the “human” as much as manhood does, but in a different and complementary way.”
From Mulieris Dignatatem (On the Dignity and Vocation of Women) by Pope John Paul II
“The Church gives thanks for each and every woman: for mothers, for sisters, for wives; for women consecrated to God in virginity; for women dedicated to the many human beings who await the gratuitous love of another person; for women who watch over the human persons in the family, which is the fundamental sign of the human community; for women who work professionally, and who at times are burdened by a great social responsibility; for “perfect” women and for “weak” women – for all women as they have come forth from the heart of God in all the beauty and richness of their femininity”
*Notice how it does not list “priest” under different kinds of women
Anyone who claims that the Catholic Church hates women needs to do a little research. Read Genesis. Read encyclicals. All it takes it a look into the Catechism, Bible, or either of the Church documents I linked to to see that women, in fact, are loved and respected by any true Catholic.
2. Nuns rock.
Need I say more? Nuns do so much for us as Catholics, and for the entire world.
We are all called to holiness – the universal vocation. Women in the Church pursue the universal vocation by a more earthly vocation: marriage, consecrated life, or the single life. Something the women in the video might not have understood is that you don’t have to be a priest to be holy. We are all called to be holy in different ways. Women – just like men – are called to be holy, but men and women live out that call in different ways.
3. Being equal does not mean you are the same and do the same things. Does that need any more explaining?
4. If you are Catholic, you have to follow the rules of the Church. Duh? You can’t make up your own rules and still call yourself Catholic (that’s how other religions were formed).
5. If you go totally against Church teaching like these women have, you’re excommunicated. That kind of means you’re not a Catholic anymore. Does that rock? I doubt it!
When I saw that video, I found it hard to believe that this is still an issue to some people. What are your thoughts? Is this really an issue in the Church anymore?
A Drop in the Ocean 