John Henry –

Actually, I don’t think you were. I think you had a different agenda.

Kurt

lol. No need to get defensive – I was trying to understand your objections. You made rather strong denunciations of the pro-life movement as a bunch of haters, and so I was trying to understand the source of your animus, but I will gladly cease the ‘inquisition’ if you do not wish to discuss your views further.

“There is no social movement in present day American society that allows for someone with my beliefs, and therefore I have no forum in which to pursue them.”

Amen…the two-party system sucks. We individual snowflakes are left without a political movement to call our own.

Policraticus dismissively describes the phrase as ‘political posturing’. In one sense, I agree – the term ‘pro-life’ indeed represents a political posture (reducing the incidence of abortion) and it has a clear and widely understood meaning. That meaning need not be expanded to create yet another synonym for the common good. Sins have been committed under the banner of the ‘pro-life’ movement just as they almost assuredly will be under the phrase ‘pro-person’ if it ever enters into wide usage in public discourse. That doesn’t mean the term should be abandoned, it just means that we should acknowledge that Catholics are not simply pro-life, they are pro- a lot of other positions as well.

I am no longer part of the Pro-Life “Church” therefore I am not subject to its inquisitions. But I will say this. The matter is not a question of occassional “shrillness” by some elements within the Movement. You try to dismiss this as a rhetrotical matter. It is not. It is a matter of core doctrines of the Pro-Life Movement.

I have my beliefs. There is no social movement in present day American society that allows for someone with my beliefs, and therefore I have no forum in which to pursue them. It is probably a good time for me to consider taking up gardening.

Saying you won’t call yourself “pro-life” or identify yourself as part of the “pro-life” movement doesn’t mean you can’t pursue, in your own manner, goals that could rightly be called “pro-life” if the “pro-life” movement had not given the word “pro-life” a bad name. In another thread, Policraticus said, “Pope Benedict XVI has said that “pro-person” is a more desirable label for the Catholic position on the dignity of the human person. This term could better distinguish the Catholic view from the narrow and restrictive ‘pro-life’ view that is a concoction of political posturing.”

Many people are critical of the “pro-life” movement because, as a movement, it doesn’t appear committed to the “seamless garment” theory. The pro-life movement as it now exists is not the be-all and end-all movement that one must identify with for the sake of humanity.

Also, even if abortion is the most momentous issue of our time, I don’t think everyone has to devote himself or herself to it. Are the people who work with Catholic Charities or Doctors without Borders taking care of disaster victims in other countries going to have to explain themselves on Judgment Day because they did not devote their efforts to ending abortion?

To Jen: I cannot speak to the other members of Obama’s advisory committee but I gave a major public address on faith-based voting in which I explicitly criticized Sen. Biden’s position, which follows a tradition going back through Kerry to Ferraro and even Pres. Kennedy. That address was published in Origins (Oct. 9th, 2008), so yes I did go public with my criticisms. In addition, several of us sent a memo on the matter to Sen. Biden’s staff and another to Congresswoman Pelosi regarding her embarrassing and misleading remarks.