My teenager said something shocking to me in the van, “Anyone who supports abortion is, by logic, mentally unstable.”
Of course, this is not the politically correct way to address such contentious issues, but logic is rarely politically correct. I faltered for a moment, considered his arguments, confirmed that he meant people who actually knew what abortion is, and concluded that he was right.
We were talking about all of the election signs along the road, taking note of a certain party, and wondering if we could possibly vote for them. You know, usual teenage conversations. We don’t have cable television, and so we are spared some of the vitriolic spasms of political rallying and get to stick with watching some of the actual debates and question periods in Parliament. Because of this, we’re able, maybe, to stick to the topic. And to be honest, until things change in our country, there is only one question that ever needs to be answered for us to consider ticking the box.
The question is, “Do you believe that innocent human life, as defined by science, should not be murdered in vile, horrific ways?”
Such a strange and seemingly simple question. How could any sane person not answer “no”?
Yet, in convoluted and sophisticated ways, they do say no, but in the most compassionate and rational way. Well, that or they scream and spit at you.
It’s a wonder that the question even needs to be asked in our civilized time. If the answer is no, what possible question is there left to ask? What else could matter if the answer is, “No, I do not believe in stopping the vile, horrific murder of innocent human lives”?
I’m told that this politically incorrect belief of mine in not murdering innocent lives makes me, egad, a single-issue voter.
I’ve always found it humorous how timid we become when called names. “You aren’t pro-life! You’re anti-abortion!”
To change the actual issue at hand, someone throws a label and we all start biting our nails.
We respond, “What?! No, no! I’m . . . not . . . I don’t think . . .”
In fact, I am anti-abortion, and I am without a qualm a single-issue voter when that single-issue is murder.
When sanity once again reigns, I will leave that label on the shelf and move on to other, secondary issues, like stopping socialism, or banning single-use plastics. Let me tell you, I don’t like single-use plastics that much, and I don’t like the idea that one day our sedimentary rocks will be made up of them, but there is no comparing a dirty beach shore to the bloodied body of an infant.
I will go further and make this bold claim, that all voters are single-issue voters. Perhaps the particular issue that matters is not relevant at the moment, but when it comes up it will certainly be the only one that matters. I would bet my house that sane people would not vote for a slave-trader, even if that person was an inclusive-language using, anti-gun, anti-sexism star with luscious locks of wavy brown hair, because that would be ridiculous.
If he or she could miraculously balance our trillion-dollar debt, it would still mean nothing if they believed in slavery. No one would hesitate for a moment to call a slavery supporter insane. Once he spoke his support of slavery, all sane citizens would suddenly become single-issue voters . . . in a mentally stable world.
There are those, of course, who claim that to be pro-life means more than to be anti-abortion, and that you can vote for someone who supports abortion, but still is, in a way, pro-life, because they believe in the right to life for minorities, and immigrants. “To be pro-life is to be more than just pro-fetus,” they say.
This diversion is another illogical, modern way to avoid talking about murdered babies. Those immigrants, those minorities, did not start to matter only when they became immigrants and minorities. They mattered when they were invisible and unknown, when they were created, not by man, but by God, who will not be mocked or scorned.
If migrants and minorities didn’t matter at the moment of their creation, there is nothing rational to make them matter now.
If a politician doesn’t support a minority’s inherent and indisputable right to life from the moment of conception, then he does not value that minority as a human, defined by the Creator of humanity, but only as a cause.
The meaning of life is an all-or-nothing kind of single-issue. If a politician would not have stopped minority individuals from being legally dismembered, burnt to death by acid, or having skulls emptied by the educated class a few years ago, then what does it matter that a rally is held for them now?
My son and I finished our musings with an even more shocking conclusion: anyone who says they believe in God and also supports the pro-choice movement is lying. Unless they take Zeus, or more likely Moloch, as their god, they do not believe in or even know the One, the Love, who knit them together in their mother’s womb and even now calls out to them.