Saturday, January 19, 2019

January 19, 2019

MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey

Abortion, Balaam’s Ass, and President Trump


Yesterday, Friday, January 18, 2019, over 100,000 people—families, young adults, children, religious groups—gathered in the freezing cold of Washington DC’s Mall to once again “March for Life,” a national event that has taken place every year since 1974…that is, for forty-five years consecutively.

But you wouldn’t have known it had you watched cable channels CNN or MSNBC, or even the coverage on NBC or CBS. The march hardly registered a blip, and then with barely disguised condescending comments about only “thousands” or “tens of thousands” of participants. Watching, albeit briefly, those broadcasting networks, I would have missed their coverage had I blinked more than once.

This is and has been the increasing and ongoing narrative of our mainstream media for decades. Abortion, we are told, is firmly here to stay, is completely normal and even desirable, in fact, a really good thing when a woman makes a “mistake” or simply decides that there is absolutely nothing problematic about getting pregnant and then disposing of the unborn fetus. It’s just like having a mole removed, you see, a simple “safe” procedure that removes that tiny piece of flesh in the womb, that encumbrance which will prevent the woman from expressing herself fully and enjoying the “full experiences” of womanhood, including total sexual freedom: all without worrying about maternity or any such additional responsibility.

Indeed with the rise of what can only be called a totally unleashed and frenzied “women’s movement” which continues to rush headlong towards the next and most extreme position, with demands that barely five or ten years ago would have been considered loony or insane, the popular narrative presented to American citizens is one of inevitability, that anyone in any way opposing the radical expansion and engorging feminist pro-abortion appetite is standing in the way of “progress” and the rights of women to their bodies:  a relict from a reactionary past who must be shouted down, banned, or even penalized legally. You cannot stand in the way of the advancing progressivist goalposts, the new norm, whatever that may be.

And yet, as each year passes and as medical and scientific research continues apace, it has become and is becoming more undebatable that “the piece of human tissue” conceived in the womb is, in fact, a real and functioning human being and not the equivalent of a skin mole to be so blithely excised and tossed into the incinerator.

This is a fact that the “women’s movement” and the “#MeToo” fanatics do not want you to understand. The more scientific corroboration there is that we are viewing a real human being, the more frenzied, unnatural, and anti-human the arguments of the pro-abortionists become. To the point that the narrative is simply to declare openly that it is simply okay to “kill” the embryo if it in any manner stands in the way of a woman’s free expression of her sexuality and her desires: there must be nothing to impede that, nothing to encumber her.

And implicit in this template is the admission that both the laws of nature, themselves, and effectively Divine Positive Law can be violated with impunity, that they somehow limit unjustly and restrict women, placing the onerous responsibility on the fairer sex of bearing children. In effect it is open rebellion against how nature and nature’s God have sanctioned and defined Creation since the beginning of time; it is the denial of creation, a rebellion against that order, an attempt to invert and reverse it.

There could not be any more striking comparison than between the March for Life and  the “Women’s March” [January 19], composed of and directed by some of the most extreme and hysterical elements of the feminist movement—a coalition of activists who live and fester in what can only be termed a type of “counter-reality” that denies biology, or rather, re-defines it and stands it on its head: if nature doesn’t suit you, simply define it differently or deny its being and its consequences.

Is this not as well the origin and result of the movement for same sex marriage, transgenderism, gender fluidity, and more aberrations on the horizon that we dare not envision? Do not these assaults on the laws of nature and biology emit from the same mindset, the same unquenched desire to become as gods, as complete and absolute masters of ourselves, ignoring our origins and our essential (and undeniable) relationship to creation, itself? Is this not the triumph of unbridled and uncontrolled passion, unleashed and freed from the natural order of things and the inherent responsibilities that every human creature possesses at birth within society? Is this not a rebirth of a brute barbarism which leads in the end to destruction and the dissolution of the human race?

Our inherited culture for thousands of years has understood that we as human beings are part of creation, that we exist along with the lower animals within nature and largely are governed by nature’s laws and biology. Our Christian faith has softened to some degree the harsher aspects of those laws, but without denying them. Indeed, wisely the Church has integrated their meaning and import into its teachings, fully confirming their existence and reality. For it recognized, just as the ancient philosophers did, that we are a special creation, endowed with rationality and special gifts, but within nature. It took the gift of the ancient Hebrew prophets and the Message of the Christ to transform that philosophy into a full understanding of the harmony between nature and mankind’s place and dignity within that creation.

That comprehension and belief has been essential in the development and flourishing of what we call Western Christian civilization. Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome: there are the sources of our inheritance, the expositors of our capabilities, and the founts of our dignity. Without that, without them, and without their deeply thought understanding and recognition of our place in creation and in the universe, without that divine spark given to us all—without all that, we would be nothing more than slightly higher brutes, devoid of true dignity, devoid of true humanity, wild beasts of the jungle and desert—without God and without Grace.

The “women’s march” is a march of the “new barbarians,” feminists who not only wish to reject three thousand years of human history, but who implicitly reject the laws of nature and deny the lineaments of creation itself.

The interesting fact is that in the past when other groups and movements have attempted to overthrow those laws, they have ended rather badly…whether the Communists who worked feverishly to defy and redefine those laws (recall Lysenko and his pseudo-biology), or some of the visionary revolutionaries in the late 18th and early 19th centuries who sought to establish utopias on earth, which inevitably turned out to be failures, and at worst dystopian nightmares.

And with each experiment the cost in human suffering and miserable death has been nearly incalculable. By conservative estimate the deaths as the result of Communism over its eighty year existence amounted to approximately 100 million (cf. The Black Book of Communism, edited by Dr. Stephane Courtois).

Yet unhinged and boastful human pride, disconnected from history and from the laws of nature (and of God), is always, it seems with us. And today, with the extreme cultural and religious decline in our society, it raises its head again, fearless and ugly, profane and defiant, women wearing “vagina hats” and parading with all the offense they can muster, who once more proclaim open rebellion and that they will replace nature and nature’s God with another utopia, another vision, another reality.

And, yes, it will end just as miserably, probably more so than all those other angry and violent movements of the past…and bring with it more suffering, more death—millions more infants in the womb slaughtered, more disillusionment, and more decay of the only civilization that we have.

Satan, himself, could not have devised a more effective program of destruction…and without doubt, in this case, he did.
This past week I had supper with a dear friend of over thirty-five years, a prominent conservative individual who has, over the decades made a real difference in American politics. On most every political issue we have been on the same side; but in 2015 and 2016 my friend, although he ended up voting for Donald Trump, resolutely supported in the Republican primaries, “anybody but Trump.”  His view—and I think I sum it up correctly—is that President Trump is morally and personally unfit, a womanizer, an opportunist, and although he supports many of the president’s initiatives, he earnestly wishes that someone else occupied 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

We have disagreed strenuously about Donald Trump and his role in American politics. As I have described it in various essays and installments in this series, Trump’s role has been that of a “bull-in-a-china shop,” a veritable battering ram to begin breaking up the viscous Deep State elitist stranglehold over American politics (and, indeed, culture). It would take, in my view, someone like that, with all the rough bluster, brashness and vigor, to make a real difference.  And that is why he is hated by those elites: he was one of them and is seen as a dangerous traitor to his class.

My friend asked me to name one thing that Trump had done that was actually beneficial to America, and after attempting to rebut the answers I gave, I offered the example of abortion and protecting the lives of infants in the womb.

“But how can a man who is morally defective, a sexual cheat [his words], produce moral and good results?” My response, only briefly mentioned, was to offer the most extreme of examples, an example taken from the Book of Numbers in the Old Testament [Numbers 22:21-34], the story of Balaam’s ass: God spoke through the donkey to Balaam, just as God may select and employ any vehicle He so chooses, even the morally imperfect, to make His wishes known or to achieve His designs. And I stated that Donald Trump had been and was the most pro-life president this nation had ever had, more so that Reagan, and far more so than the calculating Bushes.  And that if his election had saved just the lives of a few unborn infants, slowed down the abortion mills, had put a crimp in the industry of death for pay, nationally and internationally, then it was fully worth it to have elected a man of a debatable moral background. God, indeed, works in mysterious ways.

Just this morning I found the following interview with Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life and President of the National Pro-Life Religious Council. I pass it on because here is a highly religious, morally erect religious leader who fully understands the often ironic ways in which God effects His will and designs in society. And that is a major reason—indeed, maybe reason enough—to give thanks for Donald Trump.


Father Frank Pavone: Trump Is ‘Most Pro-Life President We Have Ever Had’

Robert Kraychik   18 Jan 2019

Father Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life and Missionaries of the Gospel of Life and president of the National Pro-life Religious Council, heralded President Donald Trump as “the most pro-life president we have ever had,” offering his remarks in a Thursday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak.

Mansour asked about the theme of science for Friday’s March for Life in Washington, DC. Pavone explained, “The speakers at the rally and also at the educational convention, which actually started today, sponsored by the March for Life, are focusing on this theme that good pro-life thinking is good science, and vice-versa.”

Pavone continued, “Our position is that there’s one objective line that is already drawn. It’s not drawn by any government or any particular interest group. One line that already exists that should be the defining line when we’re going to protect people or not is the biological event by which it was first decided that any one of us would be male or female or what color our eyes would be or any one of countless genetic qualities and characteristics we have. It was all decided at the same event, namely, our fertilization.”

Pavone added, “This is a basic scientific fact. Pick up an embryology book, or you ask an eighth-grade biology student, ‘When does an individual’s unique human life begin?’ The answer is objective science.”

Pavone said, “A lot of people look at a pro-life movement or a march like tomorrow’s, and they’ll say, ‘These people are trying to impose their religion or morality on others.’ It’s actually the opposite because we believe in freedom of religion. People can have any philosophy or idea they want about personhood or the soul or even the value of life, but the law doesn’t impose those beliefs. The law protects people despite those beliefs.”

Pavone went on, “If someone came along and said that you or I were not human, we don’t want the law to make them believe we’re human. We want the law to protect our lives no matter what they believe. They have the freedom to believe what they want, and that’s what the pro-life movement is saying. These babies in the womb are identifiably, undeniably, scientifically human beings and, therefore, they should be protected by the law.”
Mansour shared an anecdote of a friend of hers who “became pro-life” while studying genetics.
“I remember a friend that I went to college with when she was studying pre-med,” recalled Mansour. “She was having to take genetics classes, the early gene stuff. That was when she became pro-life because she realized this is a human being. This is a unique life. This isn’t just a glob of tissues how the science has moved us in the pro-life direction, especially the science of sonograms. You can see it, now.”
Pavone concurred, “We’re in an age now where the first photograph in your photo album is you still in the womb. Sonograms have really moved the debate forward. There are some projects we’ve been involved in that go even deeper than the ultrasound. There are techniques where you can put a camera right up against the amniotic sac and see the baby at four, five, six weeks in living color.”
Pavone added, “I invite people to just look at this stuff. Look it up online. You can see the pictures of these babies, and that’s where we have to start. I think we’ve not really had a debate on abortion for the last fifty years in this country. A lot of times we feel like we’re having the debate, but the two sides are talking past each other.”

Pavone stated, “We say the word ‘abortion,’ marchers that are going to march to tomorrow. We have a clear idea in mind. We see the baby we’re talking about, and we see what abortion does to the baby. Folks on the other side who are opposing us, they’re talking about something different. They’re not talking about abortions. They’re talking about freedom, the Constitution, women’s rights, women’s health. Fine, we can talk about those things. But if you’re going to talk about abortion, you need to look at the baby, and then you need to look at what abortion does to the baby, and that is where the debate begins.”

Pavone went on, “You just have to see for yourself. It’s science. People look at these photos, these images, and these videos, and they say, ‘Wow. In a generic sense, I knew it was a human life, but wow, this baby is way more developed than I thought.'”

Mansour remarked, “I worked for former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for many years, and she was very articulate on this issue. She had a very compassionate stance on it. She always talked about how we need to be able to reach out to women who are struggling with an unplanned pregnancy — getting pregnant at a time that’s just not necessarily good for them [or] unexpected — and really offer them a real choice.”

Mansour continued, “The choice can’t just be abortion. If you’re a real feminist — my former boss used to say — then you really want women to have a real choice, the ability to choose life. That, to me, always seems to be the big challenge for those of us who are pro-life, is how are we doing in building a culture of life and making it possible for women to choose life.”

Pavone shared, “One of the most beautiful things about tomorrow’s march is that so many of these marchers, when they are back home the rest of the year, they are working in pregnancy centers. The pregnancy centers around our country now outnumber the abortion facilities by about five to one. Pregnancy centers have people who are, every day, giving counseling, helping people find legal services, job and education opportunities they can pursue while having the child, assisting them to give birth to that baby.”

Pavone went on, “This is the positive work of the pro-life movement, giving those alternatives. That’s actually the first part of our message. Whenever we talk about this [and] whenever the pro-life movement presents itself — who are we? what do we do? — We help those that feel they need to have an abortion to see that there are other alternatives. That really is the good news about the pro-life movement.”

Mansour asked Pavone about Trump’s approach towards the pro-life movement’s concerns.
“Tell us about how you view President Trump [and] his stand on abortion and pro-life issues,” requested Mansour. “This is a people many people looked askance at, didn’t think he was being for real when he was a candidate, and yet he seems to have kept all of his promises on this issue. Correct me if I’m wrong.”

Pavone answered, “Let me summarize it this way: I have a Make America Great Again hat, and I have worn it publicly. I was one of the first Catholic leaders to come out in support of him during the primaries, and he asked me to be part of two coalitions: a pro-life advisory group and a Catholic advisory group.”

“This is a man who listens,” assessed Pavone. “When he doesn’t know something, he wants to learn it. He surrounds himself with people who can inform him. I have come to the conclusion, as many other pro-life leaders have, he is the most pro-life president we have ever had, and I’m talking about pro-life specifically — of course, in relation to the abortion issue, the protection of the youngest babies among us.”

Pavone added, “This man has gone above and beyond even what he promised. For example, he reinstated the Mexico City Policy, but then he expanded it to protect our taxpayer dollars from organizations that perform or promote abortions overseas.”

Pavone concluded, “Time and time again, in many other examples, he has not only kept his promises; he’s gone above and beyond. I think he’s the best friend that our movement for the unborn has ever had in the White House.”

Breitbart News Tonight broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot channel 125 weeknights from 9:00 p.m. to midnight Eastern or 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Pacific.

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter.

No comments:

Post a Comment

                                                  May 8, 2021     MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home:  ...