Don’t water down the March for Life
Click to enlarge…
I spotted the above graphic on the Holy Angels Youth Group website (out of Chagrin Falls, Ohio).
Although the graphic was certainly well-intended, it bothered me.
The annual March for Life is scheduled on or near January 22, the anniversary of the infamous U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion throughout all of America in 1973.
Although the M4L website states it is “the collective effort of grassroots prolife Americans to assure that our state and federal laws shall protect the right to life of each human in existence at fertilization,” I think clearly the March is by-and-large a huge demonstration taking a stand against abortion.
Particularly for the above graphic to state the March is to make a statement “against the death penalty,” and to even list it first – before abortion – offends me.
There is a large segment of the pro-life movement that supports the death penalty as the most profound statement in support of life. Someone who takes an innocent person’s life must pay the highest penalty. This is how significant human beings are.
Even while many Catholics oppose the death penalty, the Catholic Church still condones it in extreme cases.
This post is not to launch a debate on the death penalty. It is to state that virtually all pro-lifers attending the March oppose abortion and can coalesce against this evil. But not all oppose the death penalty.
I know members of the Schindler family have spoken several times at the March against euthanasia, so I know this is a concern enveloped in the larger battle, as is human embryo experimentation – not listed on the flyer.
We all also, of course, oppose human trafficking. And we know this epidemic, and in particular sex slavery, can be linked back to abortion and the shortage of females, who abortion often targets in particular.
I think my problem, aside from including the death penalty as an unquestioned pro-life plank, is trying to make the March into some generic social justice, “seamless garment” movement. Will the next inclusion be war? wages? illegal immigration?
Abortion kills 1.2 million babies a year.
To date abortion has killed 55 million babies in America since 1973.
Approximately 45 million babies are killed worldwide every year (my estimate based on these Guttmacher stats: 46 mil in 1995 and 44 mil in 2008). That’s almost one billion in the past two decades alone.
No other human genocide throughout human history – or plague, or war, or hurricane, or tsunami – can possibly compare to what we are seeing right now via abortion.
Abortion is the greatest human atrocity committed – ever.
It cannot be lumped in as equal to others.
I agree it shouldn’t have been listed first, but if the youth group teaches that the death penalty is wrong, why can’t they advertise their own effort in going to the march for life as being against the death penalty too?
9 likes
Someone needs to rework that graphic, you’re right.
And why say “from womb to tomb” in the poster if you’re not going to list abortion first?
This was clearly an intentional move on their part, downplaying the abortion issue. Hello… January 22 is the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Abortion should be listed FIRST.
11 likes
There is nothing wrong with stridently avoiding mission creep Andrew, because it can happen. I’m not saying we are there yet, but how horrified would Anthony and Stanton be to see today’s feminists getting excited only by government contraception welfare and abortion on demand. Sure, there is not a lot of harm in what the group is doing, but better to be wary now. I’m not traveling to DC in a few weeks to register my opinion about the death penalty or even human trafficking, as much of a problem that it is. This group is misrepresenting what I and tens of thousands are there for, much to my chagrin.
5 likes
There is no automatic, logical link between the issue of abortion criminalization and ANY other issue whether the death penalty or euthanasia.
3 likes
I agree with you, Jill, that we do not need to water down the March for Life per se. Catholics are supposed to have a “consistent” ethic of Life and as part of that the death penalty certainly is included. However, the death penalty is not part of the March for Life and it shouldn’t be. Maybe this school is just trying to get more people to the March by appealing to a broader base of the youth group. or it could be a progressive Catholic school and they really teach that all these “social justice” issues carry the same weight. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were the latter.
5 likes
Is this only coming from one particular small group out of Chagrin Falls, Oh or is it now the ENTIRE PLATFORM for the MARCH FOR LIFE group – that originated only on the stand against abortion?
5 likes
I basically agree with Andrew on this one. For some pro-lifers opposition to abortion and opposition to the death penalty come from the same place intellectually, so I’m very much fine with mentioning them on the same flyer. However, given the point and objectives of the March for Life, abortion should always come first in reference to it.
10 likes
Well then, I have to disagree with you an d Andrew, JDC. These two issues are from the same place intellectually for SOME, but not for most of us.
The primary reason we are pro-life is not simply for the reason of life, but the absolute innocence of that life and the injustice of ending it. We do not fret about every living thing on earth. Our goal is to try to ensure the protection of INNOCENT human life.
All other lives, whether they be animal or malevolent, mature human lives, are not germane to the March For Life. They are for separate discussions, and can only “water down” our purpose.
4 likes
Hans, I think the important distinction here is that the flyer was made for the SOME that see the issues as coming “from the same place intellectually.”
This was a flyer made by a Catholic youth group for a Catholic youth group. It’s not made by the March for Life, and it certainly isn’t speaking for it. Other than the order of the issues on the flyer, I’m not sure why they’re being demonized for this.
8 likes
Upon proofreading, I realize that “demonized” is too strong a word, but I can’t edit my comment (did that capability go away?). A more appropriate verb would be: criticised.
4 likes
I don’t get how people can equate the death penalty (i.e., the execution of one who has committed a heinous crime) with abortion (killing of a completely innocent human life). I am not for the death penalty, but let’s at least admit there is a big difference. And I agree with Jill, it certainly should NOT be listed first, if at all.
6 likes
All we are saying is that those who wrote that flyer should have employed their edit function. It is too scattershot to include the death penalty or even human trafficking for a flyer promoting the March For Life.
I don’t think that flyer was meant for their own little group only.
2 likes
“I don’t think that flyer was meant for their own little group only.”
Based on what?
5 likes
Andrew,
I stand corrected. Checking out their website it appears the flyer was only meant for their church, to rally a group for the March. They’re entitled to their perspective. But as a representation for the movement as a whole - I would just be of a differing opinion.
3 likes
Like Jill, I’m offended about equating opposition to the death penalty with abortion. When my state starts to do a much better job of protecting innocent life from violent repeat felons, I’ll oppose the death penalty. Until then, I support protecting the innocent life in the womb, and beyond.
As a Catholic, I’m a little tired of fellow Catholics and other people perpetuating confusion about what the Catholic Church teaches regarding capital punishment. Whereas the death penalty can be used in a moral way, to protect the innocent when bloodless means have been exhausted, abortion is intrinsically evil. Innocents are always killed via abortion.
9 likes
Just about everyone in the modern world who isn’t a psychopath opposes “human trafficking,” i.e., modern day slavery. It’s not specific to any political position.
6 likes
I’d like to know from those who are ”anti-death penalty” how they think we should have punished or restored individuals like Hitler or Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden — ultimately war is a death penalty against evil that is attacking innocent people… Or even less known murderers and violent men/women. SIN is SIN no matter what the crime is… the wages of sin is death – thanks to Jesus – He saves those who are repentant and turn to Him in Faith. Most criminals on death row are not repentant. And the number of them on death row is very low compared to the number of prisoners in this country.
I suppose these anti-death penalty pro-lifers expect us to house them, feed them, clothe them, give them an education and training in prison so that they can become good citizens while they spend the remainder of their lives behind bars and take advantage of our tax dollars and programs. Please do not misunderstand me… i am all for RESTORATION AND HELPING PRISONERS GET THEIR LIVES IN ORDER and particularly with God first and foremost…but heinous criminals don’t usually want what’s best for themselves or society… Let’s help those who have godly sorrow for their crimes..but the others…well, we have Laws that must be abided or there are consequences…otherwise crime rate will increase!
2 likes
Hey Leigh, I am one of those “anti-death penalty pro-lifers”, and even I can see that sometimes it’s unavoidable (I only really believe it’s okay to execute people if there isn’t another option, and with Hussein and Bin Ladin I think that it’s a fair bet that their long term imprisonment would mean more terrorism rather than just putting them down).
I don’t care about your concept of sin, retribution, and punishment, so I am obviously not going to take it into account when deciding if something is a good idea.
It’s cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than try them for a capital crime and execute them.
The death penalty has absolutely no deterrent effect for other criminals at all. This is well documented.
Anyway, about the actual subject of the article, I agree with JDC and Andrew.
9 likes
DeniseNoe says:
Just about everyone in the modern world who isn’t a psychopath opposes “human trafficking,” i.e., modern day slavery. It’s not specific to any political position.
Oddly, the Obama Administration cut ties the with the US Catholic Bishops’ outreach to save victims of human trafficking — even though the Catholic outreach was deemed by HHS to be both the most cost-effective and the most effective at rescuing young sex slaves. Basically, every Catholic parish in border regions was a safe-haven, cooperating with rescue workers of all sorts.
Obama defunded this service only because the Catholics would not provide abortions, abortion drugs and contraceptives.
By Obama’s calculus, we can’t save women’s lives if it means saving children’s lives. (But Denise already said “psychopath”….)
I hope that the Catholic youth group instructors have made this clear to the students, so they can see how preventing human trafficking really is related to preventing abortion…. Live Action has already shown us how Obama’s support of Planned Parenthood is supporting human trafficking.
5 likes
Euthanasia is often about people who are elderly and sick. They may be in great physical pain. While you could consider it a “life” issue, there is no necessary and inevitable logical connection between the legal status of euthanasia and that of abortion.
0 likes
Del says:
January 2, 2013 at 3:18 pm
DeniseNoe says:Just about everyone in the modern world who isn’t a psychopath opposes “human trafficking,” i.e., modern day slavery. It’s not specific to any political position.
Oddly, the Obama Administration cut ties the with the US Catholic Bishops’ outreach to save victims of human trafficking — even though the Catholic outreach was deemed by HHS to be both the most cost-effective and the most effective at rescuing young sex slaves. Basically, every Catholic parish in border regions was a safe-haven, cooperating with rescue workers of all sorts.
Obama defunded this service only because the Catholics would not provide abortions, abortion drugs and contraceptives.
(Denise) There might be an inherent problem here. Females escaping sexual enslavement are pretty likely to be pregnant — and unhappy about being pregnant. However, getting out of the enslavement would have priority.
This reminds me of a story I read about the formerly sexually enslaved in Cambodia. One young forced prostitute had recently had an abortion. It didn’t say if she wanted it or not. However, she asked her pimp-enslaver to have time off to recuperate before doing business again. He took a wire coat hanger — yes, that symbol of illegal abortions — and gouged one of her eyes out with it.
Really, I think getting out of there would be my first concern. Carrying a pregnancy to term couldn’t be worse than being “owned” by such a brute.
2 likes
Jack: “I am one of those “anti-death penalty pro-lifers”, and even I can see that sometimes it’s unavoidable (I only really believe it’s okay to execute people if there isn’t another option, and with Hussein and Bin Ladin I think that it’s a fair bet that their long term imprisonment would mean more terrorism rather than just putting them down).”
Unavoidable? “Isn’t another option?” Why would any option other than justice be an option? The death penalty has to be deserved for it to be just — you can’t just do it because of what some other people might do if you don’t execute a person. “Oh we’ll execute this person even though he doesn’t deserve it, because other people might behave badly.” That’d be a grave injustice. But if they DO deserve the death penalty, then no other factors (such as what others might do if they stay alive) are necessary. If they actually deserve it — if killing them is just — then doing it is not unjust.
If people deserve it, there’s nothing unjust about killing them. If people don’t deserve it, then you can’t kill them regardless of what others might do.
Those who believe death is a just punishment for some crimes are free to urge mercy — that is, to offer life in prison as an alternative. They need only believe that justice doesn’t need to go as far as what’s deserved.
Those who believe death is not a just punishment for any crimes are not free, however, to be “fine with it” in some instances. You don’t unjustly kill someone for reasons having nothing to do with their deserts.
4 likes
Andrew, et al.,
Appreciating your perspectives, and being a leadership voice within the movement who has consistently maintained that pro-life means more than being anti-abortion, I nevertheless agree wholeheartedly with Jill.
This is a March against the Roe and Doe decisions of January, 1973. It is a march against abortion and, therefore in favor of life. If youth groups are being told that they are marching for anything other than an end to legalized abortion, then they are being misled. Allow an analogy here.
If I take my son to a Billy Graham crusade and tell him that we are attending an event that sponsors Catholic evangelization, I would be wrong to frame and present the crusade in that light.
True, Graham is promoting the Bible, which was promulgated by the early Catholic Church.
True, Graham is calling for people to turn away from sin, which is the core mission of the Catholic Church.
True, Graham is calling for people to accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior, which is what the Catholic Church requires of all her members.
While all of that represents core Catholic belief, there are a raft of differences between the Catholic Church and Billy Graham, such that nobody could or would rightly identify the event with Catholic evangelization.
The March for Life is a unique event among all of the life issues. It speaks to one singular issue which is the lynchpin of both the Culture of Life and the Culture of Death, and needs to be presented faithfully as such. That youth group would do well to hold a seminar at their hotel on the relationship between abortion and all of the other issues listed on their poster.
However, Jill is quite correct.
9 likes
Well put, Dr. Nadal. I guess it just seemed more like everyone was picking on a youth group for how they “gather the troops” so to speak than anything else. I do agree the march is specifically about abortion.
4 likes
I read an interesting study of people who said they were pro-death penalty. They were given 3 hypothetical instances of murderers and asked if they would vote for death in this case. The cases were not especially sympathetic but were average murder cases such as a man who beat his landlady to death in a rent dispute and a robber who shot a clerk in a hold-up. Interestingly, most of the pro-death penalty people said they would not have voted for death in any of the 3 proffered instances.
The researchers postulated 2 possible reasons for the seeming discrepancy. One is that the respondents said they were pro-death penalty largely as a matter of identifying with “tough on crime” and social conservatism. Another is that they were thinking of the absolute worst case scenarios of torture murders and remorseless multiple murders.
If the latter was the reason so many people supported the death penalty in the abstract while being very reluctant to even imagine imposing it in reality, there is a parallel to the abortion legality issue — although that parallel in NO WAY suggests that someone has to oppose both death penalty and legal abortion OR support both.
The parallel is the tendency to worry endlessly over extremes. About 1% of abortions in America are of pregnancies conceived through forcible rape. Yet the special plight of the pregnant rape victim is endlessly debated.
There may also be a parallel in the way people are reluctant to apply abstract principles in their own lives. Someone said, “Americans support abortion in cases of rape, incest, and their own personal circumstances.” I think it is true that many who oppose abortion in an intellectual level will have abortions when finding themselves unexpectedly pregnant.
It’s not related to the above but if issues like the death penalty, euthanasia, and human trafficking are going to be put into a demonstration against legal abortion, why not include something about the speed limit or drunk driving? Why not include a campaign for better diets? How about anti-smoking?
2 likes
Maybe the organisers are trying to lure opponents of the death penalty who aren’t anti-choice so that they can be force fed propaganda in an attempt to convert them.
While you support the death penalty you cannot claim to be pro-life.
3 likes
Agreed Dr. Nadal!!
I support the death penalty.
I am prolife.
There. I claimed it.
7 likes
I oppose the death penalty.
I am pro-life.
The claim is mine.
5 likes
As a former supporter of the death penalty who now opposes it – I was convinced by the arguments of the Catholic Church and JRR Tolkien that the death penalty should be abolished – I have to agree that the main issue of the March for Life is and must remain abortion. It is an anti-abortion event first and foremost. The other issues are secondary.
Also some who use the “seamless garment” argument to combine all life issues into one do so with sinister motives, ie, to imply that abortion is just one of many issues and that it is no more important than anything else.
5 likes
John,
I don’t ascribe sinister motives to the seamless garment crowd on the life issues, as I’m more or less one of them. However, there are parts of that garment that figure more prominently than others. Also, if one takes the long view of history, Margaret Sanger didn’t start out with abortion, but with contraception and eugenics.
In very many ways, abortion is not the causal or catalytic component that has led to all of these other life issues, but actually the end result of society having broadly accepted and having been shaped BY these other issues.
4 likes
As a pro-lifer that also opposes unjust war and the death penalty, I can’t say that I have a problem with the overall “seamless garment” philosophy. It should be noted that it was also developed in order to encourage social justice Catholics to invest more in ending abortion. And it’s not like there aren’t lots of pro-life groups that put other controversial issues (same-sex marriage) on their banners.
My main concern is how the “consistent life ethic” has been interpreted in practice. It has, effectively, turned pro-life voting principles into a checklist for too many people. A politician like Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, or Joe Biden can go “Look! I voted against cutting social programs, expanding capital punishment, and invading Iraq. I also voted for a ban on environmentally unfriendly lightbulbs and I championed healthcare reform.” Many Catholics, along with some non-Catholics, then use this to rationalize voting for these candidates on the grounds that they are overall more “pro-life” than their respective opponents even though they support abortion on demand. This is certainly a significant problem. But neither the Catholic Church nor the founder of the seamless garment movement (if I recall correctly) actually teach that capital punishment and welfare programs have the same weight as the state-sanctioned killing of 1.2 million innocent human being per year.
2 likes
No edit time? Really?
1 likes
Jill Stanek: What is your opinion — if you have one — on the death penalty?
I know you prefer to focus on abortion. I also know that groups opposing legal abortion often take no position on the death penalty because it is so very divisive among people who want abortion criminalized. Some of them are strongly anti-death penalty because it does involve the deliberate termination of a (however guilty) human life. Many others are just as strongly for it, in part for the reason you mention but also because they are conservatives and see execution as part of being “tough on crime.”
1 likes
Reality is now prolife?
Amen and amen!!
Thank you Lord!!
5 likes
Abortion & Euthanasia should be the focus of the annual National March for Life, not “seamless garment” other types of issues. The Right to Life movement does not take a position on the death penalty while the Catholic Church does. But the National March is for people of all denominations as is the Nebraska Walk for Life and the majority of State Marches that I am aware of. I have been to the National March several times and it is always edifying to see hundreds of thousands march together to restore legal protection to the innocent and vulnerable.
3 likes
Julie Schmit-Albin says:
January 3, 2013 at 12:23 pm
Abortion & Euthanasia should be the focus of the annual National March for Life, not “seamless garment” other types of issues.
(Denise) Abortion doesn’t directly and logically tie in with euthanasia. The latter often involves people who are extremely sick, in pain, and/or unconscious. You could logically and consistently oppose legal abortion but take a different position on euthanasia.
3 likes
Denise,
I would say the connection between abortion and euthanasia is very much stronger than that between abortion and the death penalty. And even negligent care that borders on euthanasia as in today’ Pro-life video of the day.
The nexus is simply the innocence of the victim. And no one has the right to “put someone out of their misery” except that person. And even that person cannot expect us to play God with their life.
Reality can joke that he is pro-life, but in fact he is pro-murderer’s-life and anti-youngest-most-innocent life.
3 likes
Hans Johnson says:
January 3, 2013 at 3:08 pm
Denise,I would say the connection between abortion and euthanasia is very much stronger than that between abortion and the death penalty. And even negligent care that borders on euthanasia as in today’ Pro-life video of the day. The nexus is simply the innocence of the victim. And no one has the right to “put someone out of their misery” except that person. And even that person cannot expect us to play God with their life.
(Denise) The vast majority of abortions are of HEALTHY embryos and fetuses. Euthanasia involves someone who is extremely sick. Often the person WANTS to be euthanized because of the extreme pain and discomfort he or she is suffering. It is really not similar to a pregnancy in which the ONLY factor keeping the embryo or fetus from health is the unwillingness of the pregnant female to carry.
Euthanasia doesn’t necessarily involve a VICTIM since the person often wants out of the misery. It doesn’t automatically follow that society should allow euthanasia. It’s just not linked to abortion which is special because the position of the unborn is special.
3 likes
Sandwiching abortion between the death penalty and euthanasia looks particularly absurd. The first is the execution of people who’ve committed horrible crimes. The second is the killing or allowing to die of people suffering horrible illnesses and often in hideous pain.
What do these things have to do with abortion?
As I said before, it makes as much sense as including an anti-smoking campaign.
1 likes
While abortion and euthanasia are different, they both involve the intentional killing of vulnerable people. I oppose both of them. But I agree that the March for Life is an anti-abortion demonstration and shouldn’t be presented as something it is not.
2 likes
Part of the problem with the death penalty is that most of the really bad murderers are probably psychopaths. At the present time, there is no treatment for that disorder. Such people must either be killed, locked up for the rest of their lives, or in some way separated from other people because they are dangerous.
Much research is being done now into the problems in the brain that are characteristic of psychopathy. I believe it’s quite likely that within 100 years there will be a reliable treatment for this disorder.
I think this is similar to the abortion issue in that I think it will pretty much fade away in a century or so. Unplanned pregnancies might not become totally eliminated but I believe they will eventually become a rarity. The women who get pregnant in 100 years will be those who want to have babies.
Of course, in the meantime . . . well, there IS the meantime and it might be a fairly long time.
0 likes
Gerard Nadal says:
January 2, 2013 at 6:54 pm
John,
I don’t ascribe sinister motives to the seamless garment crowd on the life issues, as I’m more or less one of them. However, there are parts of that garment that figure more prominently than others. Also, if one takes the long view of history, Margaret Sanger didn’t start out with abortion, but with contraception and eugenics.
(Denise) Margaret Sanger OPPOSED abortion. Part of the reason behind her push for contraception was her opposition to abortion.
1 likes
The distinction between the death penalty and abortion can be seen in the plea of Bathsheba Spooner here http://www.humanlifereview.com/index.php/archives/61-2011-summer/141-bathsheba-spooners-plea-of-pregnancy
She accepted that she would be executed for the murder of her husband. She begged for a stay until she delivered since what she carried was “innocent of the faults of her who bears it.”
1 likes
I was dissapointed a few years ago to hear that pro-choicers were now using the term pro-life-as in:
“I would nver have an abortion, but I wouldn’t have it illegelized either. …”
What we need to do now is make our position clear. We’re not the wet towels and limp noodles that call themselves Chritian, but look the other way when they see a ‘graphic,’ sign of abortions butchered child ‘product’
We are the warriors, we are the revolutionaries, we are the missionaries born so that others might be born, dying so that other’s won’t, wearing the crown of thorns-that the self righteous place mockingly on our heads.
When they say, to our face, we are pro-life, I proudly say back, I am an aborition abolitionist. I am anti-abortion. I HATE the legal-criminal act that is feticide.
Look away, if you choose, but I am ROE, and I will be silent no more.
5 likes
Here’s an example of a weird way execution and abortion came together: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/blog/article/the-first-woman-ever-executed-in-the-usa-was-pregnant/index.html
1 likes