How do the writings of Thoreau on civil disobedience relate to abortion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JelloPudding
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JelloPudding

Guest
In Civil Disobedience, Thoreau says that people often think that the proper response to an unjust law is to try to use the political process to change the law, but to obey and respect the law until it is changed. But if the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws. The the law deserves no respect and should be broken.

I’m curious from a Catholic perspective how this relates to abortion? Pro-lifers seems to fall into the former category, disobeying no laws in the pursuit of their cause. Is this really just? How so?
 
We tried illegal means. In my city we blocked entry to abortion clinics, defying a court order. Clinics were closed a few days. The demonstrators were all arrested. Fines were assessed, with warnings of escalated fines. Clinics reopened.

I’m not saying the strategy ended because prolifers were afraid to violate an obviously unjust law. It ended because, in that situation, with the numbers of people we had, violating the law didn’t work.

Today we pray in front of the abortion clinic. We have all our prayer warriors
sign a statement agreeing not to physically interfere with workers or “patients” coming and going.

We abide by a court order, standing within painted lines on the sidewalk.
We don’t block the driveway or doors.
But we are a very visible presence. We talk gently to people approaching the door. We have had a few girls either choose not to enter, or leave without going through with a procedure, and talk to us afterwards.
 
Civil disobedience unless done specifically in the parameters set out by God (YOU in particular as an individual are being told to sin, or forbidden from doing what He has commanded, this is worth dying over. Maccabees and the Martyrs) is unjust. See how Bush was elected, also consider, if 90 people vote for a specific law in a democracy you participate in or live under, and 10 people subvert that by stopping society from functioning, etc, how is that just? If we can, anyone can, and it is better than no one does. Do you want Islamic Twelvers using civil disobedience and ruining society because they can’t get their way? Or anyone at all? It is an adult tantrum. Pray, fast, give is all we can do against abortion for now, and is all that should be done. Become perfectly chaste ourselves, until then, nothing will or can work. May God save the souls of the infants who suffer.

Also we are to be subject to the law unless like I said, you in particular are being told to sin, and in that case we don’t really do civil disobedience, we break the law and accept the penalty. Destroying property, killing medical professionals, disrupting society, trying uselessly to withhold sinners from their murder, none of this is Godlike. Wheat and weeds, God will tolerate it for now, who are we to question His providence?
 
You see, the catechism appeals to the heart, conciouns of people/law makers but does not call for radicalism and terrorism.
 
I mean events like the Brooks Brothers riot, and so on. Disrupting the civil process (even if it would have been otherwise ended) is in principle wrong to me. It is not an anti-Bush thing just an example of the kind of civil disobedience I am condeming
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top