June 15, 2010 | In: Culture of Life, Euthanasia, Truth, Worldviews
Pro-choice is the Death of Love
In a previous blog post, I pointed out that abortion advocates have problems even if they call themselves pro-choice. The overemphasis of the individual’s choice tends to isolate the mother from the support of the community. Our culture is pretty much telling unwed mothers, “It’s your choice, so it’s your problem.” Whether a mother decides to kill her baby or give her baby life, the pro-choice movement makes the decision and all its consequences hers and hers alone. Her right to choose removes society’s responsibility and compassion.
Wesley Smith, an outstanding opponent of Euthanasia, teaches that the same thing happens with the “right to die.” The individual’s choice to end his or her life in the face of suffering or despair removes our responsibility to reach out to them in love.
“But I know people and you know people who became suicidal,” he continued. “They might not be alive today if it had not been for the mental health professionals and friends and loved ones who stood in the gap and said, ‘No, we love you, there’s another way’.”
“We are disengaging from each other,” Smith said. “We are losing love for each other, and that is reflected in how we treat people who are in despair and darkness.” [1. Klein, Franz. "Wisconsin is a 'major target' for pro-euthanasia groups, speaker says" Catholic Times. October 1, 2009. 12.]
One interesting thing about Smith was that he said he did not understand why euthanasia is a progressive issue. Apparently Wisconsin is being targeted by pro-death advocates and Wisconsin is known as a blue state. I wonder if Wesley Smith falls into the same misunderstanding of modern liberalism as many Catholics. Liberalism is no longer founded on progressive ideals, but instead on philosophical Modernism, the belief that truth cannot be known except through personal experience. Modernism emphasizes personal choice as the most important value, since it sees truth as a personal thing (“What’s true for you may not be true for me”). Pro-euthanasia and pro-abortion advocates call themselves pro-choice because the personalized choice is what matters most to them. However, their over-emphasis of personal choice means a neglect of community responsibility and love.
Related Links:
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
2 Responses to Pro-choice is the Death of Love
Tim
June 16th, 2010 at 11:31 am
“Modernism, the belief that truth cannot be known except through personal experience. Modernism emphasizes personal choice as the most important value, since it sees truth as a personal thing (“What’s true for you may not be true for me”). Pro-euthanasia and pro-abortion advocates call themselves pro-choice because the personalized choice is what matters most to them. However, their over-emphasis of personal choice means a neglect of community responsibility and love.”
You have wonderfully explained it at the most basic level. So let me make a mess of it and complicate the subject. Seems to me this Wisconsin “modernism” is open to people labeling themselves. One common label is when a person says they are a relationship person or not a relationship person. This of course is contrary to our faith. We are all called into unity with God and with one another. This has serious consequences when an individual person disconnects from society as a “non-relationship” type, or taking on unnecessary responsibility from others as a gifted “relationship” type.
Jeffrey S. Arrowood, MTS
June 16th, 2010 at 11:44 am
One of the main movements of modernism is the tearing down of any standards of human behavior or definitions of human nature that would be binding on everyone. Modernists decry these as “impossible ideals” that set people up for failure and keep people under the power of those who create the ideals.
This fits your observation precisely. A modernist would claim the right to define himself / herself / itself in any way he/she/it wants to. To claim that we are all called to relationship would be to impose an impossible ideal on everyone. This is a cardinal sin of modernism. You’re right – modernists claim the right to define themselves by using labels (that’s why, for example, homosexuals prefer to define themselves by their sexuality).
Christians who have been influenced by modernism find their justification in the Gospel by dividing Jesus into parts. “You may relate most to the social Jesus, but I relate to the Jesus who went off by himself to pray.”
If this isolation proves to be bad for human beings because human nature demands relationships – modernists prefer just to write off such facts by saying, “That may be true for you, but I’m fine being alone.”
Thank you for your excellent observation!