“It’s not that bad.”
That phrase, “It’s not that bad,” more than simply being the repeated insistence of a woman who recently “tweeted” her abortion, could really be the mantra of a culture that has become absolutely numb to its deep-rooted tradition of killing human persons. We americans have become simply too good at stopping the pain that comes from killing each other, whether we do it through orally-administered abortion, by pounding it into “our” soldiers that their victims are not human, by talking ourselves into believing that certain practices “aren’t really torture.”
Abortion? “Not that bad.”
Waterboarding? “Not that bad.”
Collateral damage? “Not that bad.”
Profit-centered health care system? “Not that bad.”
Capitalism? “Not that bad.”
When was the last time you said “It’s not that bad”?
Comments are closed.
Michael:
I rarely use the phrase “not that bad” for anything.
Some office acquaintances still make the mistake of casually asking me “how are you”? I suppose I could learn to say “not that bad” rather than telling them what’s really going on in my life. Mostly, I don’t answer the question at all — I don’t believe they seriously want me to tell the truth, and I know I neither want to lie about it nor give a full account.
“Not that bad” that tomorrow will be our middle son’s 22nd birthday, but he lived only 10 days and we still miss him terribly.
“Not that bad” that my wife spends hours every week fighting our insurance company, filing appeals and papers with the State Insurance Commissioner’s office to get them to pay our youngest son’s hospital bills.
“Not that bad” that our good friend died last Saturday. He’d had multiple complications of chronic diabetes.
“Not that bad” that much of my father’s life revolved around his struggle with PTSD and recovery from being tortured as a prisoner of war.
And not to forget:
“Not that bad” because my wife and I have been married over 26 years. “Protection” and “unwanted” pregnancy are non-issues for us.
“Not that bad” because I have amazing friends and my family has amazing friends who’ve supported us through tough times.
“Not that bad” because my company pays all but $50/month of my insurance costs.
“Not that bad” because neither I nor my sons served in the armed forces.
“Not that bad” because I live in a neighborhood which has no need for gunshot-location monitors.
“Not that bad” because my life has had, and continues to have, far fewer hardships than most.
“Not that bad” because I’m employed full time, and the investors who capitalize my employer continue to put money in.
“Not that bad” because my family lives in the U.S. and Europe.
“It’s basically like a miscarriage”!!!!
And homicide is basically like a fatal heart attack. Basically. You know, if you have a good reason.
“It’s basically like a miscarriage”!!!!
I think you are misinterpreting her meaning. She is not commenting on morality in that statement. She’s saying the experience of having a chemical abortion is similar to the experience of having a miscarriage. She describing the experience of having a chemical abortion.
I think you have to ask yourself why this woman, who already has a child, does not feel like she is killing a baby by having a chemical abortion. And you have to ask yourself why so many women who have already had children that they love dearly are willing to have an abortion in order not to have another child. Also, you have to ask yourself why women who have had abortions go on to get pregnant and have children. Clearly, these people do not believe that abortion is homicide.
Clearly, these people do not believe that abortion is homicide.
Right, clearly they don’t. As I said, we have become numb to reality.
David,
I think you have missed my meaning. I recognize precisely what she meant. Or, at least, I agree with your interpretation of what she meant. What strikes me as bizarre is that, in the same video, she can talk about her abortion as if it is not a moral question (“It’s basically like a miscarriage”) and as if she needs a good reason to do it.
“Clearly, these people do not believe that abortion is homicide”
I’m not sure that’s accurate. In some of the dialogues I have had with people who picketed abortion clinics, they say that the majority of women that they’ve spoken to are fully aware that they’re terminating a life. There are two common ways that it is justified:
1) The child is better off than to come into the circumstances the mother could provide.
2) They have no other choice.
There’s a reason why abortion is so traumatic. If women didn’t really believe they were terminating a life, there wouldn’t be any abortion support groups.
Dan,
First of all, the vast majority of women do not find abortions “traumatic.” Close to half of women having an abortion at any given time have had one previously.Would they put themselves through a second trauma?
Second, something can be serious without being murder. Many pro-lifers seem to believe that abortion is either murder, or it’s trivial. (I guess if abortion is not murder, there must be no God, or something.) Probably the vast majority of people think abortion is a serious matter, but they don’t believe it is murder. This is why I think it is really a mistake of pro-lifers to insist that personhood begins at birth. It is the most extreme argument against abortion. It has never been accepted before as the reason to prohibit abortion. You’re never going to get a majority of Americans to buy it. So the whole vast middle ground who might be willing to limit abortions instead of ban them can’t be enlisted in the pro-life cause. To be truly pro-life, you have to believe abortion is murder, and most people just don’t believe it.
As I said, we have become numb to reality.
Isn’t it a bit arrogant — with such a controversial and hotly debated issue — to believe you are the one who knows reality and other people don’t, or you are the one who is sensitive to reality, and other people are numb?
Isn’t it a bit arrogant — with such a controversial and hotly debated issue — to believe you are the one who knows reality and other people don’t, or you are the one who is sensitive to reality, and other people are numb?
1) No. I don’t believe “I’m the one” who has the truth at all. I am a person within a community, within a tradition. My belief that a human person is present from the moment of conception ain’t something I came up with on my own.
2) Am I only “arrogant” with regard to the issue of abortion, or am I also “arrogant” when I make claims related to torture and war, which are also “controversial” and “hotly debated”?
On the other hand, I have to admit I was shocked by the video and I don’t think I buy her reasons for making it.
But I could be wrong.
and as if she needs a good reason to do it. . .
As I said, a lot of people who don’t believe abortion is murder would still say it is serious and must be justified. That is the position of the Jews, for example. I just don’t get the attitude that either abortion is murder or the whole idea of morality must be abandoned.
By the way, I think she went on record somewhere saying the only reason a woman needs for having an abortion is not wanting to be pregnant. That is not my view.
My belief that a human person is present from the moment of conception ain’t something I came up with on my own.
1) And yet other people not in that community or tradition are “numb to reality.”
2) I am not objecting to everything that you say. I am objecting to the “numb to reality” remark. As I said, Jews don’t believe the unborn are persons or that abortion is murder. Are they “numb to reality”?
1) And yet other people not in that community or tradition are “numb to reality.”
Some of them certainly are, with regard to abortion and to other types of killing. Some people who are in this community/tradition ar also numb to reality. My point is that your charge that my view is “arrogant” is silly.
2) I am not objecting to everything that you say. I am objecting to the “numb to reality” remark.
I realize that. And I asked you if you would also object to me using the “numb to reality” with regard to other types of violence. It is hardly controversial to say that our society produces people who are numb to the reality of violence and killing. Why is is “arrogant” to say so with regard to abortion but not other issues?
As I said, Jews don’t believe the unborn are persons or that abortion is murder. Are they “numb to reality”?
I doubt speaking for all Jews is very wise, but yes, I think anyone who does not think the unborn are persons or that abortion is the killing of a human person is indeed numb to reality, regardless of one’s religious tradition.
Her sense of reality seems incomplete just like me and most people I know. She did seem conflicted with the reality of being pregnant with an unknown and unseen child and the expectation of a late-term pregnancy with a potential life threatening health crisis vs the love and bonding she has for her known child and the desire to care for that child without the threat of harm from being pregnant. That potential threat associated with carrying her child to birth seemed to be her greatest obstacle because it brought her face to face with the death crisis not only for herself but also for the child she can see and feel.
I get the sense that she is alone and has been alone in her most emotionally significant life experiences and consequently has had to bear the pain of her life internally in a state of isolation.
So right there you have the crises of death and isolation operating within her psyche.
Then she has the loss of freedom associated with being pregnant if she is alone and the ability to care for herself and her children.
The last crisis she faces with pregnancy is the loss of meaning and purpose she may have constructed for herself in the reality of living in a godless and unloving world where the only one she can depend on is herself.
“It’s not that bad…” seems to be her last line of defense against the reality that all women face in this world that threatens the very essence of the female. This is the mantra of self-hypnosis in an attempt to dissociate from the very vulnerable core of self that is created to nurture life. “It is a pleasure to be hidden but disaster not to be found.”-Winnicott.
I think anyone who does not think the unborn are persons or that abortion is the killing of a human person is indeed numb to reality, regardless of one’s religious tradition.
Wow Michael! With statements like that, those who accuse VN in general and you in particular of being pro-choice are put in a bit of a quandry. ;)
Wow Michael! With statements like that, those who accuse VN in general and you in particular of being pro-choice are put in a bit of a quandry. ;)
Well, they of course say that I might think I’m anti-abortion but that I “don’t do enough” and so therefore I am “functionally pro-choice” or some other such nonsense. Of course, these people are numb to reality too, in their own way.
How did you become so attuned to reality? :)
Zach – It takes time. I’m still working on it.
Bravo, Michael. Encore!
I doubt speaking for all Jews is very wise, but yes, I think anyone who does not think the unborn are persons or that abortion is the killing of a human person is indeed numb to reality, regardless of one’s religious tradition.
I would say that dismissing the Talmud as numb to reality is arrogant.
David,
A few things about the Talmud — first, which one? Second, the Talmud is not univocal — it is a representation of many debates, and goes into many answers. Indeed, the Talmud often dismisses itself in that context. Third, going with the second, much of the reasoning behind 5th century biology is now dismissed; that doesn’t toss out the Talmud, but follows with the kind of method the Talmud uses if one takes to it modern biological knowledge.
Henry,
It is not necessary to spell out the Jewish beliefs on abortion here, since they can be found in hundreds of places on the Internet. I’ll just limit myself to saying that dismissing thousands of years of Jewish thought on when an infant becomes a full-fledged human being — the killing of which is murder — is arrogant. It’s one thing to disagree. But the Jews are looking at the same “reality” we are. They are not indifferent to human life, including the life of the unborn. They know modern science. And they have not abandoned their tradition that life, in the sense of personhood, begins at birth.
This seems to be another case in which the insistence that life (personhood) begins at conception is the “one sacred truth” in the “pro-life” movement. If you insist that everyone accept the Catholic teaching that a person is present from the moment of conception, and imply that they are out of touch with reality if they don’t accept that, you aren’t asking them merely to respect all life. You’re requiring Jews to adopt Catholic beliefs.
We could quibble about the nature of the Talmud, of Rabbinic interpretation, of modern biology, and so on, but the fact remains that Catholicism and Judaism answer differently the question of when life (personhood) begins. It is one thing to disagree theologically. It is another to say, “I think anyone who does not think the unborn are persons or that abortion is the killing of a human person is indeed numb to reality, regardless of one’s religious tradition.”
Let me put it more simply. Judaism has no problem with an abortion to save the life of the mother. Catholicism is opposed to abortion even to save the life of the mother. To say Judaism holds that position because it is “numb to reality” is arrogant and offensive.
David – I think you are mixing up things that I’ve said, and are claiming that I’ve said something “offensive” about “the” Jewish view (quotes indicate that I doubt very seriously that there is one Jewish view) when I have not.
Let me put it more simply. Judaism has no problem with an abortion to save the life of the mother. Catholicism is opposed to abortion even to save the life of the mother. To say Judaism holds that position because it is “numb to reality” is arrogant and offensive.
David,
Saying that the inability to recognize that the unborn child is a human person results from a numbness to reality is not the same as saying that disagreement about whether or not that person can be killed under extreme circumstances results from a numbness to reality.
Indeed, I suspect that we all recognize enemy combatants as human persons, but have differing views on if and when they may be killed.
David,
I’m not sure I understand the consistency of your viewpoint.
There were those in the history whom persecuted Galileo for his heliocentric view of reality. I’m sure Galileo would be well within his rights to call them “numb to reality”. They either elected to ignore or failed to understand the evidence, and rightly deserved that accusation. Likewise, archaic or ignorant interpretations of biology must be superseded by the scientific reality that life does begin at conception. Those that ignore this reality are truly numb to reality.
Whether personhood begins at conception is another issue, but I don’t think there could be any scientific or biological basis for any argument that personhood begins at birth. I don’t think it is arrogant to make an assertion that those whom have no justification for their position are off base.
Not many will view the death of a zygote the same way as that of an infant – and for good reason. Early term natural miscarriages are very common, often unnoticed. early miscarriages are less traumatic than late ones. I think our sympathy/mourning/trauma increases the more the unborn approaches our state. I don’t think
many prolifers are truly as outraged by early abortion (1st trimester, the legal stage in Europe) as they are by infanticide; and the average person finds third trimester abortion worse than first.
Saying that the inability to recognize that the unborn child is a human person results from a numbness to reality is not the same as saying that disagreement about whether or not that person can be killed under extreme circumstances results from a numbness to reality.
Brett,
But Michael said, “I doubt speaking for all Jews is very wise, but yes, I think anyone who does not think the unborn are persons or that abortion is the killing of a human person is indeed numb to reality, regardless of one’s religious tradition [emphasis added].”
I am talking specifically about the Jewish belief (see this summary) that a fetus is not a full human being (person) until birth. Michael’s statement clearly declares Jewish thought on the personhood of the fetus “numb to reality.”
Catholicism and Judaism give two different answers to the question of when “life” (personhood) begins. These are matters of religious faith, not of some self-evident reality.
In my message above, I miscoded a link. Here is the link to the summary I was referring to.
Whether personhood begins at conception is another issue, but I don’t think there could be any scientific or biological basis for any argument that personhood begins at birth.
Dan,
We aren’t talking science or biology here. We’re talking religion. As I said above to Brett, Catholicism and Judaism give two different answers to the question of when “life” (personhood) begins. These are matters of religious faith, not of some self-evident reality. There is no scientific answer to whether a fertilized egg, or a first-trimester fetus, or even a newborn baby is a person.
First of all, I don’t even understand why someone on here is talking about Judaism on a Catholic blog. Second of all, the idea of personhood in Judaism is a hotly debated topic, I suggest you do some real research into Judaism before you act as if you are an expert, not everything on the internet is accurate, and I would go to a rabbi before proclaiming your all-knowing knowledge on Judaism. As someone who converted from Judaism to Catholicism, I find your view of Judaism to be both self-righteous and snobby. The idea of abortion within Judaism has never been settled. In true Judaism, abortion in the case of the modern concept of “choice” is not accepted. I am not talking about Reformed Jews who just make up things as they see fit like Cafeteria Catholics, but Orthodox and Chassidic Jews do not believe abortion is acceptable in most circumstances, in fact, from what I know, they are even against artificial contraception. They take the whole concept of “be fruitful and multiply” very seriously. Your idea must be thinking of the “life of the mother concept” which has been fiercely argued for centuries and never agreed upon by rabbis.
The point is that this is a blog to discuss Catholicism….worrying if people who do not share our faith will be offended because we believe in something different is rather ridiculous. Also keep in mind that the Talmud also says homosexuals should be stoned to death, so your whole argument that abortion is something that should be strongly considered because the Talmud said so and that its hundreds of years old, is rather naive. Sorry.
David,
“First of all, the vast majority of women do not find abortions “traumatic.” Close to half of women having an abortion at any given time have had one previously.Would they put themselves through a second trauma?”
Do you have sources for this?
Second, something can be serious without being murder. Many pro-lifers seem to believe that abortion is either murder, or it’s trivial. (I guess if abortion is not murder, there must be no God, or something.) Probably the vast majority of people think abortion is a serious matter, but they don’t believe it is murder. This is why I think it is really a mistake of pro-lifers to insist that personhood begins at birth. It is the most extreme argument against abortion. It has never been accepted before as the reason to prohibit abortion. You’re never going to get a majority of Americans to buy it. So the whole vast middle ground who might be willing to limit abortions instead of ban them can’t be enlisted in the pro-life cause. To be truly pro-life, you have to believe abortion is murder, and most people just don’t believe it.
Again, you come off as arrogant here because you claim to be speaking for the rest of the world. Do you actually have statistics here? How do you know that the vast majority of the world population cannot accept that personhood begins at birth? I don’t know where on earth you are getting your ideas and perspective. Is this YOUR view that you are reflecting on the rest of the world to make yourself sound more powerful?