Numbness in the Pro-Life Cause

[CRUSADER_KING]

I cannot say I speak for everyone of course, but I sense a great deal of numbness among many soldiers in the pro-life campaign. This “numbness” is similar to how one may feel about awful events throughout history such as genocides, assassinations, torture, etc. Many people looking back on these events recognize the evil in them, but have no outrage towards the injustices because they happened a long time ago.
This lack of emotion is seen in many “pro-lifers” (I am using the term, “pro-lifer,” in a broad sense to describe anyone who is personally against abortion for moral reasons). The average pro-lifer (in my experience) is much more outraged at terrorist attacks or school shootings or even the average drug deal gone wrong than at the deaths of innocent children by the millions. I’m not trying to say the pro-life campaign should be purely an emotional response since just the thought of murdering children should sound psychotic. Instead, I am making it clear that strong emotions are needed for passion, and passion is needed for change.
A good example of this lack of emotion is seen very clearly in the “I’m personally against abortion, but it should still be legal” crowd. If you believe that abortion is murder, but you still think it should be legal, then you are a sociopath. These people are extreme examples, but many more people in this mission are guilty of the same crime. It is not a crime of misguided action or lack of action (at least not always). It is a crime of zeal, or lack of.
Abortion is the most important social justice issues of our time or even of all time, and many pro-lifers don’t see that or don’t care. Many hard-working, faithful people do a lot of service to the campaign, but they lack energy. Abortion is intolerable. That is not an exaggeration. It cannot be tolerated under any circumstance. It is not a historical event, it is happening now. It is happening in our cities, in our states, in our countries. It is happening in our families, among our friends. We must not fall under the spell that it is “just” a fetus. Vocabulary is important to this issue. Accept that it is the murder of children. Don’t say “fetus” or"child in the womb" unless necessary as it takes away from the emotional aspect from this 21st century recreation of the Holocaust.
Am I alone in these observations? I’m interested in older generations’ opinions as I speak for younger people (teens to late twenties), and I find this attitude to be very common.

 

[kozlosap]

Ahhhh to be young and know more than everyone, including Papa Francis. Someday you will look back and realize that not everyone that doesn’t follow your rules 100% of the time are sociopaths.

 

[GEddie]

I think part of it is that abortion has now been legal for a humanly long time (roughly two generations) and there is very little prospect of it’s being banned again in the Western countries that now allow it.

As the sexual revolution has raged on (and has expanded into new permutations), any prospect of ridding our society of abortion has become increasingly remote.

Passion is hard to maintain generationally.

ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

Ahhhh to be young and know more than everyone, including Papa Francis. Someday you will look back and realize that not everyone that doesn’t follow your rules 100% of the time are sociopaths.

He didn’t contradict His Holiness, though, did he?

The young haven’t filled their minds yet, but their passion makes things move.

ICXC NIKA

 

[M-Dent]

Pro-life individuals have remained resolute. The one’s who were “emotionally outraged” every day since 1973 - are probably long dead from heart disease.

 

[kozlosap]

He didn’t contradict His Holiness, though, did he?

The young haven’t filled their minds yet, but their passion makes things move.

ICXC NIKA

You are right, I was using Papa as an example of someone that those full of zeal even choose to belittle by asserting that they aren’t Holy enough or don’t follow rules considered sacrascint by young posters.

 

[In_Hoc_Signo312]

I cannot say I speak for everyone of course, but I sense a great deal of numbness among many soldiers in the pro-life campaign. This “numbness” is similar to how one may feel about awful events throughout history such as genocides, assassinations, torture, etc. Many people looking back on these events recognize the evil in them, but have no outrage towards the injustices because they happened a long time ago.
This lack of emotion is seen in many “pro-lifers” (I am using the term, “pro-lifer,” in a broad sense to describe anyone who is personally against abortion for moral reasons). The average pro-lifer (in my experience) is much more outraged at terrorist attacks or school shootings or even the average drug deal gone wrong than at the deaths of innocent children by the millions. I’m not trying to say the pro-life campaign should be purely an emotional response since just the thought of murdering children should sound psychotic. Instead, I am making it clear that strong emotions are needed for passion, and passion is needed for change.
A good example of this lack of emotion is seen very clearly in the “I’m personally against abortion, but it should still be legal” crowd. If you believe that abortion is murder, but you still think it should be legal, then you are a sociopath. These people are extreme examples, but many more people in this mission are guilty of the same crime. It is not a crime of misguided action or lack of action (at least not always). It is a crime of zeal, or lack of.
Abortion is the most important social justice issues of our time or even of all time, and many pro-lifers don’t see that or don’t care. Many hard-working, faithful people do a lot of service to the campaign, but they lack energy. Abortion is intolerable. That is not an exaggeration. It cannot be tolerated under any circumstance. It is not a historical event, it is happening now. It is happening in our cities, in our states, in our countries. It is happening in our families, among our friends. We must not fall under the spell that it is “just” a fetus. Vocabulary is important to this issue. Accept that it is the murder of children. Don’t say “fetus” or"child in the womb" unless necessary as it takes away from the emotional aspect from this 21st century recreation of the Holocaust.
Am I alone in these observations? I’m interested in older generations’ opinions as I speak for younger people (teens to late twenties), and I find this attitude to be very common.

I should think what we do is far more important than emotions.

 

[CRUSADER_KING]

Ahhhh to be young and know more than everyone, including Papa Francis. Someday you will look back and realize that not everyone that doesn’t follow your rules 100% of the time are sociopaths.

Perhaps I wasn’t clear. I am not saying that the entire pro-life cause lacks motivation or is numb to the horrors of abortion. I am simply stating my observations of some people around me and seeing if they compare with others’ observations. Also, I realize that there will always be people older and smarter than me. That’s true for everyone.
As for my sociopath quote, I was just talking about the “I’m personally against abortion, but it should still be legal” crowd. I was simply stating that if someone believes abortion is murder but is tolerant of it in their society, then they are tolerant of murder. Hence, the term “sociopath.”

 

[CRUSADER_KING]

I should think what we do is far more important than emotions.

I completely agree. I’m usually not one to focus on the emotional aspect of anything, and I’m not really focusing on it in this case either. I just realize that emotions greatly motivate a cause such as this, and it encourages action.

 

[randomuser]

What I find more common is the growing disconnect between PRO-LIFE (caring about the baby after he or she is born) and simply being PRO-BIRTH (and completely indifferent to the obscenely expensive costs of deliveries, etc.) When there is absolutely zippo legislation about making childbirth more attractive to the women who have to carry the baby to term for nine months – have any men out there gone through maternity wardrobe? eating for two? morning sickness? labor? – and that “pro-life” has somehow, somehow, meant magically expecting pre-natal care and the cost of diapers, clothing, etc., to grow on trees.

What absolutely confuses me is why there is no interest whatsoever in the motive of WHY do women even want an abortion in the first place? How can we stop the killing of unborn babies if nobody cares to know why so many women are killing their babies? Isn’t that an important thing we should want to know so that we can help STOP the killing of so many babies? I just don’t get it – nobody wants to talk about motive, and nobody wants to talk about how expensive deliveries are.

Why aren’t we in the PRO-LIFE (not simply “PRO-BIRTH”) community taking more active steps to reduce the obscenely expensive cost of deliveries? The costs of prenatal care? The costs to vaccinate a newborn baby?

It’s like once the baby is born – once his or her parents have to had to take out a second mortgage, if they haven’t gone into bankruptcy with all the medical bills to pay for the delivery – nobody wants to be “PRO-LIFE” for those parents anymore. Why not?

Where’s the “PRO-LIFE” legislation to make abortion more expensive? Why have we allowed abortions to be so affordable? Why is there no legislation to increase the cost of abortions – late-term are already more expensive – and perhaps slap on higher taxes to go towards lower-priced deliveries and subsidies for adoption? You shouldn’t have to be a millionaire celebrity like Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie to be able to afford to adopt, and yet – adopting a baby is, pretty much, a luxury. Why? Why isn’t adoption more affordable and accessible – including to gay couples who would save that baby from slaughter? People would rather have that baby be slaughtered than let a gay or lesbian adopt that baby? I don’t get it.

So many people stop being “PRO-LIFE” once the baby’s born – no help for the baby, no help for the parents (and especially no help if it’s only one parent), and definitely no help if it’s a gay couple that wants to adopt the baby. (Quite the opposite when it’s gay people wanting to adopt that baby.)

I’m “PRO-LIFE” at all stages of life, including AFTER the baby’s born.

 

[Beryllos]

Perhaps those pro-lifers who pinned their hopes on the political solution have become disillusioned. They might realize that even the election of Trump is not going to make a huge difference in the number of abortions.

If he appoints enough pro-life justices to the Supreme Court, it will make difference in principle, but not in practice. As he said in one of the debates, “It will go back to the states, and the states will then make a determination,” which is to say abortion will still be legal in many states.

This doesn’t mean the battle is lost. It only means that another approach is needed. The appropriate response is not numbness, but thoughtfulness. Ask yourself, what do we need to do in order to substantially reduce the number of abortions?

The reason politics and law won’t solve it is that politics and law reflect what the people want. At the moment, people want liberty and self-determination, and they value this more than the life of the unborn. How can we change that?

It requires a change in the heart of the people. It’s easier said than done. It’s not going to happen overnight, or even in the next four years. I am not even sure how it’s going to come about, but I hope and expect that it can happen, and will happen eventually. I think it has to start with people talking about the issues, not on TV or Twitter, but within families, neighborhoods, churches, and town halls. When enough people recognize that life is more important than liberty, then politics and law will begin to reflect this.

What can you do to promote this cause in your family, church, and community?

 

[mikekle]

I think part of it is that abortion has now been legal for a humanly long time (roughly two generations) and there is very little prospect of it’s being banned again in the Western countries that now allow it.

ICXC NIKA

I dont know about that, all it would take to overturn RvW is to have the majority of supreme court justices that would vote to overturn it, we are in that position right now, and if Donald trump can be trusted on how he feels about abortion, and appoints judges who share these opinions, Id say it being overturned is actually probable.

 

[hu324b]

I agree the worlds moral values have accepted it as a basic right and has moved on to euthanasia which is the next big battle that will most likely be lost also - its already legal in my country. Its sad to watch the world move away from God’s law and follow its selfish pursuits and morality. But it was foreseen in the Book of Revelations that we would enter a time like Noah had and people would cast off God for their own ways because they cannot live to the Laws of God. Surely we are at the beginning of the end. Although the Gospels and the Book of Revelations make all generations feel it is the end time - it was done that way to prepare people for the coming of Christ - which we all have at the hour of death.

 

[goout]

This lack of emotion is seen in many “pro-lifers” (I am using the term, “pro-lifer,” in a broad sense to describe anyone who is personally against abortion for moral reasons). The average pro-lifer (in my experience) is much more outraged at terrorist attacks or school shootings or even the average drug deal gone wrong than at the deaths of innocent children by the millions. I’m not trying to say the pro-life campaign should be purely an emotional response since just the thought of murdering children should sound psychotic. Instead, I am making it clear that strong emotions are needed for passion, and passion is needed for change.
A good example of this lack of emotion is seen very clearly in the “I’m personally against abortion, but it should still be legal” crowd. If you believe that abortion is murder, but you still think it should be legal, then you are a sociopath. These people are extreme examples, but many more people in this mission are guilty of the same crime. It is not a crime of misguided action or lack of action (at least not always). It is a crime of zeal, or lack of.
Abortion is the most important social justice issues of our time or even of all time, and many pro-lifers don’t see that or don’t care. Many hard-working, faithful people do a lot of service to the campaign, but they lack energy. Abortion is intolerable. That is not an exaggeration. It cannot be tolerated under any circumstance. It is not a historical event, it is happening now. It is happening in our cities, in our states, in our countries. It is happening in our families, among our friends. We must not fall under the spell that it is “just” a fetus. Vocabulary is important to this issue. Accept that it is the murder of children. Don’t say “fetus” or"child in the womb" unless necessary as it takes away from the emotional aspect from this 21st century recreation of the Holocaust.
Am I alone in these observations? I’m interested in older generations’ opinions as I speak for younger people (teens to late twenties), and I find this attitude to be very common.

You are mixing some terms here which makes it difficult.
Generally speaking “prolife” denotes a person who is not compartmentalized in their beliefs about abortion, but rather sees the value of human life as paramount.

 

[goout]

I think part of it is that abortion has now been legal for a humanly long time (roughly two generations) and there is very little prospect of it’s being banned again in the Western countries that now allow it.

As the sexual revolution has raged on (and has expanded into new permutations), any prospect of ridding our society of abortion has become increasingly remote.

Passion is hard to maintain generationally.

ICXC NIKA

I see your point about inertia, but I believe the tide is turning toward respect for life.
I think even a hardened person can see the damage social tolerance for murder has brought.

The people who are lost are those who reflexively support abortion out of adherence to a blind political ideology. They are not thinking, they are reflexing.

 

[GEddie]

You are mixing some terms here which makes it difficult.
Generally speaking “prolife” denotes a person who is not compartmentalized in their beliefs about abortion, but rather sees the value of human life as paramount.

Generally speaking, but not in the 2000s USA, as ommonly understood.

 

[goout]

Generally speaking, but not in the 2000s USA, as ommonly understood.

Then I’m not sure what we mean by prolife.
I personally know literally no one who calls themselves prolife while believing abortion should be legal.
Anyone I know who believes it should be legal shuns the label prolife like it’s the plague.

Only in the political world have I heard someone claim to be personally prolife but publicly prodeath.

 

[RCinMT]

What I find more common is the growing disconnect between PRO-LIFE (caring about the baby after he or she is born) and simply being PRO-BIRTH (and completely indifferent to the obscenely expensive costs of deliveries, etc.) When there is absolutely zippo legislation about making childbirth more attractive to the women who have to carry the baby to term for nine months – have any men out there gone through maternity wardrobe? eating for two? morning sickness? labor? – and that “pro-life” has somehow, somehow, meant magically expecting pre-natal care and the cost of diapers, clothing, etc., to grow on trees.

What absolutely confuses me is why there is no interest whatsoever in the motive of WHY do women even want an abortion in the first place? How can we stop the killing of unborn babies if nobody cares to know why so many women are killing their babies? Isn’t that an important thing we should want to know so that we can help STOP the killing of so many babies? I just don’t get it – nobody wants to talk about motive, and nobody wants to talk about how expensive deliveries are.

Why aren’t we in the PRO-LIFE (not simply “PRO-BIRTH”) community taking more active steps to reduce the obscenely expensive cost of deliveries? The costs of prenatal care? The costs to vaccinate a newborn baby?

It’s like once the baby is born – once his or her parents have to had to take out a second mortgage, if they haven’t gone into bankruptcy with all the medical bills to pay for the delivery – nobody wants to be “PRO-LIFE” for those parents anymore. Why not?

Where’s the “PRO-LIFE” legislation to make abortion more expensive? Why have we allowed abortions to be so affordable? Why is there no legislation to increase the cost of abortions – late-term are already more expensive – and perhaps slap on higher taxes to go towards lower-priced deliveries and subsidies for adoption? You shouldn’t have to be a millionaire celebrity like Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie to be able to afford to adopt, and yet – adopting a baby is, pretty much, a luxury. Why? Why isn’t adoption more affordable and accessible – including to gay couples who would save that baby from slaughter? People would rather have that baby be slaughtered than let a gay or lesbian adopt that baby? I don’t get it.

So many people stop being “PRO-LIFE” once the baby’s born – no help for the baby, no help for the parents (and especially no help if it’s only one parent), and definitely no help if it’s a gay couple that wants to adopt the baby. (Quite the opposite when it’s gay people wanting to adopt that baby.)

I’m “PRO-LIFE” at all stages of life, including AFTER the baby’s born.

There’s plenty of data out there on why women don’t want the babies and the overwhelming reasons are related to lifestyle. Further, there’s ample assistance for those incapable of paying for medical costs. In addition. if one chooses adoption, the adoptive couples pay labor costs in most cases.

Further, there are plenty of agencies working toward helping people after a baby is born. I know people who volunteer as just such agencies but it seems to make more sense that those who need assistance seek out assistance than waiting for assistance to somehow find them.

Regarding the comment on adoption by SS couples…there’s some interesting research out there about the effects of being raised outside of homes with both biological parents. The research is even more stark when you get onto SS couples with kids. Educational attainment, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, etc. In addition, many pro-life people, the variety who volunteer and work at pro-life agencies, are often hated by those who adhere to the tenets of the sexual revolution so…

 

[JanetF]

Having witnessed the Annual Pro-Life March in DC in person, as well as other Pro-Life events, and then the more common day to day work that is done on behalf of the pre-born, I would say there is no numbness in the cause. The numbness may be in those who don’t get involved, but for those of us involved, we are hardly numb.

 

[randomuser]

There’s plenty of data out there on why women don’t want the babies and the overwhelming reasons are related to lifestyle. Further, there’s ample assistance for those incapable of paying for medical costs. In addition. if one chooses adoption, the adoptive couples pay labor costs in most cases.

Further, there are plenty of agencies working toward helping people after a baby is born. I know people who volunteer as just such agencies but it seems to make more sense that those who need assistance seek out assistance than waiting for assistance to somehow find them.

Considering many of those “overwhelming reasons” have to do how expensive it costs to carry a baby for nine months and then additional expenses once the baby is born, I would like to know which of those agencies actively work to make deliveries more affordable. Why, if abortion is murder and we need to everything possible to prevent babies from being killed, logic would dictate that deliveries would be and should be more affordable than abortion, but they’re not. Why not? What’s being done to make deliveries more affordable so women won’t want to kill their babies since SOMEBODY has to pay for those deliveries – someone has to pay the obscenely expensive hospital bills – and the state cannot compel a woman to PAY for something she doesn’t want. It’s not that many woman having abortions can’t afford deliveries (that’s a myth) – they can – it’s that they don’t have the expensive childbirth costs adequately financed. Not trolling, just asking tough questions I don’t see being addressed in the “pro-life” camp.