Debating Ethics: Abortion, Race, and Progressive Views

• Discussion:

          -Following are a series of excerpts with responses to them from an exchange with a progressive democrat. The sort of political ideology which this person has consumed is obviously meant to cause hatred and discord. It is hoped that points made here will prove to be useful in discussing the issues of abortion and race with others: 

          "You may not know it, but thugs is a real word. There are real thugs. You think it has to do with skin color. And that’s the problem: thugs are people who hate with brutality." 

          The skin color of a man is not the prima facie issue. Genetics alone would not be sufficient to determine the likelihood of one committing crimes. There are environmental factors, as well as psychological components, opportunities for education, and sources of influence. Rather than being considered an inherent part of their being, moral problems among black people can be attributed to cultural deficiencies, such as the breakdown of family structures, community cohesion, and personal responsibility. Moreover, critical race theorists oftentimes talk in ways that the abolitionists themselves in all likelihood would have regarded as unlawful. 

          "Like you and Hamas. You’re just an armchair terrorist and insurrectionist. An old bastard thug." 

          Likening people that one merely disagrees with to Hamas is breathtakingly ignorant. That group is comprised of radicals who murder outsiders in the name of global dominance. Just as Hamas terrorists do not really worship any god but the concept of death, so modern progressives worship the self and their own version of reality.

          "And “right to life” is in quotes because it’s a lie you and Craig and the other thugs tell yourselves." 

          We ought to reject any concept of "individual rights" that appeals to our ego. "My body, my choice" does exactly that. Moreover, this sort of thinking is puerile, since it rests on an oversimplified concept of personal property. This is more than a matter of, "I can do whatever I want with this. It is mine and no one can take it away from me." With personal liberty comes responsibility toward oneself and his fellow countrymen, including the unborn.

          "In a free democracy, you won’t let women of child bearing age determine their life." 

           False. Women of child bearing age determine their life by choosing whether to become pregnant. Parents have an obligation to care for their children by virtue of the inherent nature of such an interpersonal relationship. 

          "Because you don’t care about life. Evangelicals didn’t care about life until they needed a better political plan than opposing desegregation." 

          This is deceptive manipulation. Pregnancy centers are available to women in need of them as well as adoption agencies for adults who want to take care of abandoned children. For the record, it was mostly the Southern Democrats who defended the institution of slavery and filibustered civil rights legislation. 

          "Do yourself a favor and learn something for the first time in 40 years: look up Paul Weyrich." 

          The opinions of Weyrich do not carry any inherent authority over anyone else. 

          “Evangelicals considered abortion a “Catholic issue” through most of the 1970s, and there is little in the history of evangelicalism to suggest that abortion would become a point of interest." 

          Granting that, the shift only proves that people can be wrong about an issue and change their minds when presented with more data. It is irrelevant to the question of the morality of abortion itself, since truth is not determined by popularity. The state of medical research has changed dramatically since the 1970s.

          "Even James Dobson, who later became an implacable foe of abortion, acknowledged after the Roe decision that the Bible was silent on the matter and that it was plausible for an evangelical to hold that “a developing embryo or fetus was not regarded as a full human being." 

          Even if the Bible is silent on the topic of abortion, it does not follow that God has granted women permission to get them. Further, Scripture implicitly recognizes that a "developing embryo or fetus" has personhood (Judges 13:3-5; Jeremiah 1:4-5; Luke 1:44). That would indicate the biblical authors accepted the notion that human life begins at conception, challenging the morality of terminating life in the womb. Finally, it is inconsistent for liberal progressives to address the Bible's teaching on abortion, since they generally regard it as nothing but an outdated collection of writings by uneducated men.

          "In the course of the first session, Weyrich tried to make a point to his religious right brethren (no women attended the conference, as I recall). Remember, he said animatedly, that the religious right did not come together in response to the Roe decision." 

          The claim about the Roe v. Wade decision is imprecise. While it is true that the religious right did not initially form in response to that Supreme Court ruling, it was later used as a significant rallying point. Further, many women were involved in that movement from its early days.

          "No, Weyrich insisted, what got the movement going as a political movement was the attempt on the part of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to rescind the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University because of its racially discriminatory policies, including a ban on interracial dating that the university maintained until 2000." 

          Even if there was a federal piece of legislation drafted and signed into law allowing for abortions in certain contexts (i.e. cases of rape, incest, and when a woman's life is in danger), that still would not be enough for modern-day progressive democrats. As an additional point, their ideology is not progressive in the usual sense of the term, since they actually want to take us back to a culture comparable to ancient Greece and Rome.