February 09, 2010
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
 
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Abortion and the Consumer Society |
| by Joe Hargrave |
| 4/13/09 |
|
Pro-life Catholics fall into two camps on the issue of abortion: those who see it first and foremost as an individual moral failing, and those who consider it primarily a social moral failing.
There is nothing mutually exclusive about the two positions, of course, but that isn't the problem. The real issue here is emphasis; that in turn determines how we prioritize our resources and efforts, where we believe the pressure points are, and how to strike them.
Since I myself lean toward the social explanation for abortion, I want to clarify it for those who disagree. At times we are accused of -- and are indeed guilty of -- materialist reductionism. There are some within the Church (and on the pro-life side of the spectrum in general) who focus almost exclusively on social concerns. Similarly, there were many Catholics who thought supporting Barack Obama's candidacy during the 2008 election was a morally acceptable choice, because they believed his economic policies would strike at the root causes of abortion.
Unfortunately, the facts do not entirely support the argument. While it is true that some abortions -- perhaps a significant number -- might be reduced through economic policies that address the problems facing young, single mothers, the majority of abortions are sought by people living comfortably above the poverty line.
Of course, this argument was premised on another -- that Obama would necessarily pursue policies that would serve the interests of women likely to get abortions. Even assuming that his intentions are sincere, he is still limited by the economy, especially in the midst of a recession. If the "reduce abortion through social spending" argument was plausible before the financial crisis, it has become less so now. There is therefore no good reason to expect a quick solution to the problem of abortion, whether or not one believes the economy is at the root of it.
On the other hand, those who believe deliverance lies in the mere reversal of Roe v. Wade should consider how much the culture and political landscape have changed in the last 40 years. Even if it were true that abortion fell into our laps because of what a cabal of judges decided in 1973, we have nevertheless had nearly four decades of what Pope John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae described as a vast, orchestrated conspiracy against the sanctity of life (12, 17).
The culture of death is here, and it is both powerful and growing. Consider, for instance, that as voters flocked to the polls in November to reject gay marriage in the state of California, they also rejected by a solid margin a simple parental notification law for minors seeking abortions. Pro-life ballot measures failed in other states as well -- red states. If one's hope is entirely placed in politics, it's a bad sign.
Abortion will go away when the majority of Americans wants it to go away. According to one study, "At least half of American women will experience an unintended pregnancy by age 45 and, at current rates, about one-third will have had an abortion." This of course does not include the millions of men who will push their girlfriends or wives into getting abortions, or the parents who do the same with their daughters.
Having moved past both the quick-fix economic and political solutions, we see that the fundamental issue is chiefly an economic one, though not in the way the typical left-liberal Catholic conceives of it. The problem is not too little wealth and income, but rather too much.
In the aftermath of the Great Depression, the United States adopted some of the economic theories of the British economist John Keynes, who argued that the key to avoiding another depression was increased consumption by the masses. The war-time industry was converted into production of consumer goods, and a semi-official theory of consumerism became a part of American life. The importance of this development is highlighted by John Paul II as he explained the phenomenon of consumerism in Centesimus Annus:
A given culture reveals its overall understanding of life through the choices it makes in production and consumption. It is here that the phenomenon of consumerism arises. In singling out new needs and new means to meet them, one must be guided by a comprehensive picture of man (36, bold emphasis added).
What comprehensive picture of man was Western society guided by as it turned to consumerism?
Since the 1950s we have been "The Affluent Society," and we considered it our patriotic duty to build a consumer paradise to one-up Soviet communism. During this time a generation was born that would hardly know material want and would take for granted the sort of freedom from toil that was formerly reserved to the wealthy. It was a reality for which no one was prepared, a case where sweeping economic change had a profound cultural effect. As conservative commentator Robert Bork explained in the opening paragraph of his classic work, Slouching towards Gomorrah:
What did they want, these students? What conceivable goals led them to this and to the general havoc they were wreaking on the university? Living in the Sixties, my faculty colleagues and I had no understanding of what it was about, where it came from, or how long the misery would last. It was only much later that a degree of understanding came.
Bork is right to identify both rampant egalitarianism and individualism as both chief symptoms and further causes of many problems in our society, up to and including abortion. But he lacks a coherent explanation for the origin of these currents. I would argue they emerged out of the relative material independence made possible by the conversion of vast swaths of the economy to the production of consumer goods, as well as the application of science and technology to the needs facing the everyday person and household. In other words, Americans have grown accustomed to freedom from physical necessity, wherein, to quote John Paul II once more, "needs were few and were determined, to a degree, by the objective structures of [man's] physical make-up." This is true with respect to children and family life as well.
The fact is, the bearing and raising of children has lost a certain objective necessity that it once had; historically, children were not only objects of familial love but also economic resources. Boys became workers, and girls were married off to create advantageous social connections between families. Today, by contrast, we live in a culture where many of the children lucky enough to be born at all are idealized, coddled, and pampered to a degree hitherto unknown in history. As a result, their adulthood is often unnaturally delayed by a thousand laws and social conventions that premise "growing up too fast" as the worst of all possible fates (see Hara Estroff Marano's A Nation of Wimps for an excellent overview of this phenomenon).
Abortion and delayed adulthood are two sides of the same coin, the displacement of children from their earlier position in society and their replacement into a role that accommodates the consumerist mentality. Failing to recognize the historically shaped economic underpinnings of the family unit leaves us flabbergasted when those same underpinnings dissolve, and human behaviors and desires change as a result. This is not to say that human beings should ever be regarded merely as objects of economic utility, but simply that they do (or did) possess that utility, in addition to their inherent dignity and value as children of God.
I have no objection to a greater degree of social equality, a wider sphere for individual creativity and initiative, or the application of science for the betterment of our lives. Nevertheless, historically, these things arrived after the entire social structure of the Middle Ages had disintegrated. Progress came violently and with overt hostility toward the Church and its "comprehensive picture of man." Yet Pope Pius XI, in Quadragesimo Anno, argued that there is no logical connection between social and technological progress on the one hand, and the destruction of the essential principles of the old social order on the other:
For there was a social order once which, although indeed not perfect or in all respects ideal, nevertheless, met in a certain measure the requirements of right reason, considering the conditions and needs of the time. If that order has long since perished, that surely did not happen because the order could not have accommodated itself to changed conditions and needs by development and by a certain expansion, but rather because men, hardened by too much love of self, refused to open the order to the increasing masses as they should have done, or because, deceived by allurements of a false freedom and other errors, they became impatient of every authority and sought to reject every form of control.
Who today can fail to see the seeds of the "pro-choice" mentality in what the pope describes: men and women "hardened by too much love of self," "deceived by the allurements of a false freedom," "impatient of every authority," and who "reject every form of control"? It should not be shocking, then, that a progress founded upon these flaws should culminate in a total rejection of parental responsibilities (which is what abortion boils down to).
Can the trend be reversed? Yes. Since there is no logical link between progress and evil, there is no reason we cannot envision a society where science and technology are put at the service of life. But many of us still need to come to terms with the extent to which even we are infected by those same errors and deceptions (if we fail to see the link between consumerism and abortion in America, we might look at what is taking place in China). The creation of a culture of life requires more than political activism: It demands a transformation of lifestyle.
Joe Hargrave writes from Phoenix. He blogs at A New Catholic Paradigm, Vox Nova, and American Catholic. Readers have left 30 comments. You haven't explained how we can be good without being miserable. Do you think it's better that we're starving, sick, and oppressed by those born to be our betters, provided nobody has unapproved sex, than what we've got now? I don't really see you getting many takers for that. Written by Karen Joe: excellent set of reflections on a very complex situation. Co-temporal with the rise of economic consumerism has been the slide away from the widely shared moral sensibilities of earlier times. Yes, children moved away from being economic or social assets toward being sops to our vanity. How often do we hear of "ticking biological clocks." Apparently it's the "me" who matters, not the "other" (i.e. child). My guess is that this phrase didn't even exist fifty years ago. Children were not only assets, but were outward signs of our faith in the future, and our unique place in God's creation. As C.S. Lewis feared (e.g. "The Abolition of Man"), and Richard John Neuhaus documented ("The Naked Public Square") our shared moral foundation has undergone catastrophic erosion within my lifetime (just say somewhere north of fifty years...). As a father of three (22, 20, 15), I have at times been at war with myself seeing my progeny as extensions of my own ego rather than as unique individuals in God's plan. And, no, Karen, misery is not "required" for goodness. We are called to hope and joy. But, we live in a society wherein so-called rights are invented at a whim, and never, never with corresponding responsibilities. I've checked my "contract" and cannot find a single clause guaranteeing me constant bliss and plenty. God has been good to me, better, certainly than I deserve. Only when we stop our whining, accept our responsibilities, and focus on the message of Holy Thursday -- service to others -- will we be able to stem this tide. I, for one, have been a miserable failure at this. I'll keep trying. Any takers? Written by Nick Palmer When the commissar of utopia decides that big cars and big houses are "too much", how'm I gonna transport my eight blessings, and where, pray tell, will I put their bunk beds? What is the morally correct number of pairs of shoes for our family to own? If I take my children to Europe am I giving them the best education I can afford, or selfishly using more than my fair share? No one has ever forced us to buy anything, and we already practice "creative deprivation" in the raising of our brood, but human nature being what it is, I prefer freedom. Anyone who believes "social equality" and a "creativity and initiative" can long coexist, is smoking the good stuff. Oh, and btw, abortion is a SPIRITUAL problem. They even had it back in the middle ages, only I think they probably called it suicide then. Written by erica Erica: "Amen!" and you have far more "blessings" than I! And, what about mandated low-flow toilets? Somehow my three darlings, as young 'uns, seemed to think that tp came in single-use rolls... Now that they're older (and cognizant that in case of clog, "Plunge it, thyself!"), they've moved on to the thirty-plus-minute shower. Written by Nick Palmer Joe, it seems that even abortion (the single most important issue of our generation) is a vehicle for your obsession with all things financial. As for "consumerism" being the underlying cause of abortion, one word ... China. We don't have to recreate the wheel in a classroom type setting with abortion. It is very simple. We are in a Spiritual War and Satan's goal is death via pride and disobedience. Written by Mark Thanks again, Joe, for some great reflections. My knee-jerk reaction is always to disagree with you, but when I force myself to read your stuff, I usually come around. I liked this particularly: Today, by contrast, we live in a culture where many of the children lucky enough to be born at all are idealized, coddled, and pampered to a degree hitherto unknown in history. As a result, their adulthood is often unnaturally delayed by a thousand laws and social conventions that premise "growing up too fast" as the worst of all possible fates (see Hara Estroff Marano's A Nation of Wimps for an excellent overview of this phenomenon). — Joe HI'll look that book up tomorrow. I've also been frustrated by the recent phenomenon of Holding Our Children Back Until They've Completed Our Arbitrary Program. It's especially evident in the "everybody has to go to college" mentality. Not that academia isn't a worthy pursuit, but many youth are ready to start their lives right now. Written by Andy "My knee-jerk reaction is always to disagree with you, but when I force myself to read your stuff, I usually come around." That means a lot to me. Thank you. Written by Joe H Still thinking about this one, but thumbs up. Written by Ann Joe, it seems that even abortion (the single most important issue of our generation) is a vehicle for your obsession with all things financial. — MarkThis is an unfair characterization of Joe's argument. He is rightly pointing to an underlying cause of the abortion mentality in this country: consumerism. At the very least, it is worth examining. If we fail to go to the root causes of abortion, we'll never eradicate it. Abortion, after all, is a symptom.  Written by Zoe "He is rightly pointing to an underlying cause of the abortion mentality in this country: consumerism." - Zoe Rightly? Russia's population is less than half that of the U.S. but they have approx. 2.7 million abortions/year as opposed to the 1.2 million in the U.S. Consumerism can be ruled out. It's not uncommon for people who were successful in school to attempt to drag the real world back into the classroom but abortion is where I personally draw the line. It is FAR too serious to just sit idly by. Joe knows that I like and respect him but I have an obligation to the truth first. Typically I just smile and shake my head as I read his neo-socialist views wrapped in Catholicism... but again, we're talking about ABORTION here. I'll give you guys a hint but I'm not going to do your homework for you. If you are sincere in wanting to know the "underlying cause of abortion" in America, see Modern Feminism... which brings us back to the Spiritual War and Satan's use of pride and disobedience. Written by Mark "Russia's population is less than half that of the U.S. but they have approx. 2.7 million abortions/year as opposed to the 1.2 million in the U.S. Consumerism can be ruled out." Russia was ruled by a totalitarian political party that held atheism as a state religion. The USSR was among the first countries, maybe even the first, to legalize abortion after the October Revolution. The materialist orthodoxy of "Marxism-Leninism" is very similar to the American ideology of consumerism - they are different forms containing the same essence. The Soviet Marxists believed that abortion was essential for the social mobility of women. Russia may have been mired in backwardness and poverty throughout the Soviet era, but its living standards did continue to rise, especially after WWII and the reforms under Khrushchev. American consumerism was partially - perhaps even largely - a response to the Soviet ideal of building a material utopia through a command economy. There was a massive shift to the production of consumer goods after WWII that mirrored in its own way the US's own shift to consumerism. Given the difference in resources and the legacy of the war, Russia could not advance nearly as fast as the US. But the idea was still the same. An abortion played a similar role in the Soviet ideal of society - women must be freed from "domestic drudgery", children should be raised by State institutions so women could freely pursue careers of their choosing. Ironically we put "In God We Trust" on our money to demonstrate our fundamental difference with the USSR. Written by Joe H Joe, you make some very good arguments about consumerism in this article, but it seems to me that you're missing a rather substantial point. You are correct in pointing out the "historically shaped economic underpinnings of the family unit"--but what you fail to note is that those underpinnings were those of an agrarian economy. And the agrarian economy wasn't done in by consumerism--it was done in by industrialization, long before consumerism appeared on the scene. (Along those same lines, a strong case can be made that in the initial stages of industrialization, children were utilized in much the same fashion has they had been in the agrarian economy--as workers--before child labor laws forced them idle, effectively laying the groundwork for the concept of adolescence.) At any rate, the important point is that consumerism filled a void. The old economic culture had already been destroyed, and before consumerism, nothing had arisen to take its place. So when you call for a lifestyle change, you're not calling for a reversion--there's nothing to revert to. If consumerism is to be supplanted, we're going to have to build the culture that supplants it from scratch. Written by LV According to one study, "At least half of American women will experience an unintended pregnancy by age 45 and, at current rates, about one-third will have had an abortion." This of course does not include the millions of men who will push their girlfriends or wives into getting abortions, or the parents who do the same with their daughters. — JoeThis is why the issue is lost (or almost lost). So many people have had an abortion, or are close to someone who had one and therefore sympathetic, that the numbers just aren't there. These people can't start seeing what they did as the snuffing out of a human life or they will go crazy. So they must keep believing it is not a human life. It's not an illogical stance. Mental self-preservation and all that. Written by Ann Thanks for the comment. Of course I realize that consumerism is, in a physical sense, a fruit of industrialization. The question is, however, whether or not industrialization could not have proceeded along different lines - or whether or not it might be reorganized today. That was the purpose of quoting Pius XI. In a materialist-reductionist view of the world, where man has no soul and is basically another animal among animals, industrialization takes a route through either classical liberalism or communism which leads to consumerism either way, which leads to widespread hedonism and abortions (legalized and in great numbers). But in a world ultimately governed by God, where human beings have free will, a conscience, and knowledge of right and wrong, industrialization can be carried out in any number of ways, and the inhuman manner in which it was often carried out, giving rise to corrupt ideologies, is not some kind of historical "necessity". I don't think we can put the toothpaste back in the bottle here, and make abortion go away over night through our personal efforts to consume less. I do think, however, that Catholic communities - urban communities - dedicated to a simpler lifestyle and a cooperative economy could become the cornerstones of a true culture of life, inspiring everyone they come into contact with. Written by Joe H Excellent work here Joe- this is the type of thing we must do more of- instead of ripping abortion out from the corpus of Catholic social doctrine like so many Catholics seem intent on doing- you are doing what the social doctrine itself calls for- and since the Compendium of Social Doctrine is authoritative- while everyone has an opinion- I'll prioritize the places where we have Holy Spirit promises to be in the mix. In #9 the Compendium talks about the need for this document offering a "complete overview of the fundamental framework of the doctrinal corpus of Catholic social teaching" and follows: "this overview allows us to address appropriately the social issues of our day, which must be considered as a whole, since they are characterized by an ever greater interconnectedness, influencing one another mutually and becoming increasingly a matter of concern for the entire human family." It is clear for those of us wishing to be orthodox Catholics, and not comfortable liberals or conservatives, that we must try to get the big picture into our minds- the root causes of abortion are many- it won't suffice to just say- "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!". That may do the trick for small American christian worship ecclesial communities, but not for the Universal Catholic Church membership. We need to keep making stabs at the beasts that threaten us from many sides- social sin is a many-headed monster, and we had better cultivate an authentic Catholic worldview if we are to understand both the Enemy and the strategies deployed by such. I am tired of the social doctrine reductionism of American liberals and conservatives- the EWTN/Catholic Answers approach is too narrow- "Look at the body count in abortion as opposed to all the other issues of concern" Well- yes and no. First of all every life matters, and if we take our social teachings seriously we must see the interconnectedness of our economy, our view of solidarity, universal destination of goods, common good, universal common good and all the rest which combines with the appreciation for the dignity of each and every human person. We don't need less information- we need more- and at least Joe here is trying to make the necessary connections which could lead to cultural and political improvements and reforms, and maybe changes some hearts and minds for Christ and His Church as opposed to remaining ignorantly or stubbornly in the world. So bravo Joe- let's continue the trend of trying to make sense of the great sins of our times by drawing in and together more and more of the entire social doctrine and making of it a courageous analysis in order to slay some of the monsters that torment our neighbors and our selves. There is a big problem in trying to dumb down the Church to our tiny little human ideologies- this is why I like Joe's approach of never accepting one of those labels as a replacement or co-equal for his Catholicism. I think it fine to choose a party, but never to be a mere party hack, or to embrace an obvious ideology too warmly. The only solution is to dwell more seriously on the authoritative texts of Catholic social doctrine- the encyclicals, the Compendium, and the Catechism, and of course, the ever-inspiring Holy Scripture. Joe isn't trying to be Pope, he is just taking the popes very seriously- as any Catholic ought. When you listen to Pope Benedict, he is obviously pro-life in the extreme, but he spends a lot of time writing and commenting on the whole series of human miseries, and social issues where people suffer. This should be our model for pro-life activism- try to connect the dots- this will only build credibility in more circles where good people are presently blind to the evils of abortion but more in tune with the suffering of humanity in war, in poverty, and other dire situations- these people are not the enemy, and we pro-lifers are not their enemy- we just need to find our way to common cause- pro-life for the unborn and the born- make pro-life activism more dynamic, more in keeping with our Church's teachings and ongoing guidance. Disagree if you will with Joe's analysis, but do not cast stones at his attempt here to bring together more of our social doctrine's teachings. Written by Tim Shipe "it won't suffice to just say- "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!" - Tim Shipe "And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it." Apparently Jesus didn't get your memo. Written by Mark Abortion is a logical consequence of rampant contraception. While a consumerist worldview makes abortion easier, it's not essential as others have pointed out. Written by Christian The root cause of abortion is Godlessness. Whatever false god of Ism one chooses to worship is irrelevant; consumerism, communism, moralism, feminism, racism, sexism, socialism, fascism, marxism, fundamentalism, fanaticism, etc. etc. etc. The Devil is most certainly in the details and consumerism is one of many devils. We only make it easier for him to do his work by our perpetual analysis, finger pointing and self deceptions. Written by Mary "it won't suffice to just say- "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!" - Tim Shipe — Mark"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it." Apparently Jesus didn't get your memo. Did you even read what Tim wrote? He makes the obvious point that if we really want to stop abortion, we have to identify the root earthly causes first (there are lots). And you respond with an irrelevant Bible verse on the indefectability of the Catholic church? ![[smiley=shock]](http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/components/com_jreactions/custom/templates/blog/smileys/smiley_shock.gif) Wow. Written by David F. "it won't suffice to just say- "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!" - Tim Shipe — Mark"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it." Apparently Jesus didn't get your memo. hey Mark, how about this idea: If we really want to put an end to drunk driving, we should just forget all that nonsense about trying to figure out how to reduce alcoholism or how to motivate people to be more responsible behind the wheel. Instead, we should just blame the devil! Drunk driving isn't caused by the reckless use of alcohol, it's the Devil!! And if people don't like it, they can just read this unrelated Bible verse: "Thus the entire assembly of the returned exiles made booths and dwelt in them." Nehemiah 8:17 I'm really starting to like your strategy! ![[smiley=happy]](http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/components/com_jreactions/custom/templates/blog/smileys/smiley_happy.gif) Written by David F. How is it that Barrack Obama can be let off the hook for not helping to reduce the number of abortions due to the economy? This is the same president who overturned the Mexico City policy, thus ensuring that our money WILL go overseas to kill the unborn-do disagree that the same funds should have been spent saving the unborn? Then after letting the new president off the hook, you continue to blame America for the abortion policy of Communist China, and compliment Kruschev Soviet Union. Please remember that many religious and political opponents in those countries were jailed and executed, or died during forced labor. Those countries had no use for religious or free thinkers, and they made abortion avaliable to affront the church as much as anything else. Consumerism is a symptom or an excuse of illness, such as abortion. But this does not have to be material consumerism. For example, our public school students learn explicit sex ed materials, the society teaches atheism, and hatred;and we see strange entertainment on our television, IDEAS WHICH ARE CONSUMED AND PUT INTO PRACTICE. Prolife facts and teachings are not usually made public for such consumption. Garbage in: garbage out. Written by Mike Mike, I was criticizing Obama's pro-life supporters. We all know Obama is pro-choice and pursuing an anti-life agenda. Nothing I've said has ever suggested anything to the contrary. "you continue to blame America for the abortion policy of Communist China," It does share some of the blame. Not all, but some. "and compliment Kruschev Soviet Union." I only stated a historical fact. Written by Joe H Mark- I am an orthodox Catholic- I believe that I am following the Church with my advice- which is essentially to listen more closely to the authoritative teachings and ongoing guidance of our Church. The popes are always giving us such excellent advice- as one can easily follow at zenit.org, and the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church was the or one of the last things commissioned by Pope John Paul II- I think this is very meaningful- I am not telling anyone that Joe H. has the only decent analysis of the cause(s) of abortion, but I am saying that he is on to something by looking across the spectrum to see how abortion dovetails with other societal evils- and every nation will have some varying root causes for some of the same outcomes- like rampant abortion- either due to choice or governmental decree- depending on the local situation. Written by Tim Shipe "I am an orthodox Catholic- I believe that I am following the Church with my advice- which is essentially to listen more closely to the authoritative teachings and ongoing guidance of our Church" - Tim Shipe Well Tim, as an orthodox Catholic, you should know better than to mock the Church's teaching on Satan and the Spiritual War we are in with comments like - "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!" After all : - when Jesus taught us the Our Father, he ended with "and protect us from the Evil One." Who might that be? - when Jesus founded His Church on the rock of Peter, He told us that the gates of Hell would not prevail against us. - at Baptism, the priest asks us if we renounce Satan and all of his works. It doesn't get more "authoritative" than that and yet ... no mention of consumerism anywhere. How about the reason we need to be Baptised in the first place ... what was the cause of Adam and Eve's original sin? Consumerism? Capitalism? Lack of Social Justice? I'm sure that you and Joe are both nice guys but I will never drink your Socialist Martini with a Catholic twist. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's." "You cannot serve both God and mammon." Here we can KNOW that Jesus does not want us to obsess on money ... even under the guise of being christian Robin Hoods. Oh, and thanks for the advice but I don't think I'll be trading in Fr. Rutler and Fr. Corapi for the likes of Tim Shipe and Joe H. any time soon. Written by Mark "I am an orthodox Catholic- I believe that I am following the Church with my advice- which is essentially to listen more closely to the authoritative teachings and ongoing guidance of our Church" - Tim Shipe — MarkWell Tim, as an orthodox Catholic, you should know better than to mock the Church's teaching on Satan and the Spiritual War we are in with comments like - "It's the Devil! It's the Devil!" After all : - when Jesus taught us the Our Father, he ended with "and protect us from the Evil One." Who might that be? - when Jesus founded His Church on the rock of Peter, He told us that the gates of Hell would not prevail against us. - at Baptism, the priest asks us if we renounce Satan and all of his works. It doesn't get more "authoritative" than that and yet ... no mention of consumerism anywhere. Wow, Mark, you still don't understand their point? The devil can be responsible for the evil of abortion while he uses consumerism (among other things) as his vehicle to do it. I am sure you are a nice guy, but it ain't that complicated.See, just because someone develops lung cancer from smoking doesn't mean it wasn't ALSO the devil or sin that put him in that condition (maybe made him want to smoke). Now if you really want to stop lung cancer you can address the guys spiritual hunger AND ALSO try to educate him on the dangers of smoking. This isn't very revolutionary stuff here. "Oh, and thanks for the advice but I don't think I'll be trading in Fr. Rutler and Fr. Corapi for the likes of Tim Shipe and Joe H. any time soon." by Mark If you read Tim's post you will see that he was quoting from popes and encyclicals. Maybe you prefer Fr. Rutler and Fr. Corapi over the popes? Ok, but don't blame Tim for that. Written by Dave F. I dunno Mark, I think Jesus was talking about consumerism in Matthew 6:24-34. Written by Joe H Hey Joe, So Jesus warned of consumerism in 33 AD and Israel made abortion legal a mere 1944 years later... great cause and effect argument. I have a couple othet points to make but there are just too many good playoff hockey games on tonight. I'll do my best to get back to you tomorrow. Thanks Written by Mark Joe's analysis dovetails with 1 Timothy 6:10- the love of money is the root of all (or many) evils. Surely exploring a connection of this to abortion is logical? Written by Tim Shipe I think my argument was that a selfish ideology such as the one described by Pius XI, combined with modern production methods and their effect on our lifestyles, is what provides the catalyst for a widespread acceptance of the pro-choice mentality. Written by Joe H If Communist Russia got better economically under Kruschev, I have no reason to assume it is because it works. I can easily assume it got better because capitalism was tried in certain situations and policies and presto, it worked in the SU. I regret that American and western money is used to promote abortion in China and elsewhere, IF that is the case. Abortion was promoted in China before American dollars benefitted them. Communism is a lie where it is tried, money spent on a massive military and secret police arm that itimidates the common mass. I have no reason based on these facts to believe America is somehow strongly to blame for communist failings. Written by Mike |
|
 |
