You think the average P&J person would be for abortion? (Yikes, I hope not).
Jesus might not be for the ‘extremes’ of positions like, oh, say ‘animal rights’ (carried to the extreme that not only animals should not be eaten, but shouldn’t even be kept as pets.) He might not be for the kind of extreme that says that the priesthood is ‘just another job’ and so a woman could and should be a priest ‘just like a man.’ He might not feel that communism or socialism should be ‘imposed’ because it’s more ‘fair’ economically.’ He might not feel that certain crimes were ‘victimless’; he might not feel that certain groups or individuals commiting an action could be ‘excused’ whereas other groups/individuals committing the same action would be ‘criminal’. He might not feel that all black people should be ‘paid restitution’ because some black people were slaves centuries ago. He might not feel that affirmative action was a good thing.
That’s why I was careful to use words like ‘some’. SOME people involved with P&J are involved in worthwhile causes, in a worthwhile manner, and look on P&J as important but as no ‘more’ important than Christ’s ‘other’ teachings.
And some are so focused on what they consider P&J --the extremes above and many more, especially the idea that it is ‘more just’ to abort a child rather than have the child and/or the mother ‘suffer poverty’–that they ignore true Christianity and raise their false teachings as being ‘superior’.
With that said, we must all try apply his words to modern issues, I suppose. Not so easy sometimes: not so easy to so, and some very uneasy conclusions.