Dear National Right to Life:
A pastor once surmised that Jesus may have been attacked the most by Pharisees (the most conservative of sects) because Jesus would have been most closely associated with them. Jesus affirmed the authority of the existing religious system when He said, “The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice.” (Mat 23:1-3). The teaching of Scripture was not the problem; it was the hypocrisy of religious leadership.
At the height of Jesus’ fame, he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and his supporters were ready to crown him as king and overthrow the Roman occupation. Instead, he confronted the money changers and Pharisees, who in turn stirred up anger against him. A week after the peak of his popularity, the crowds who had cheered, “Hosanna,” were now shouting “Crucify him!”
Jesus could have reformed Judaism from within, but instead he chose a handful of ragamuffin fisherman, along with a despised tax collector and a physician to establish his Church. What wisdom was there in his decision to choose unlearned working men rather than the best and most knowledgeable theologians? This defies many modern books about ecclesiology. But Jesus acted consistently with how God had acted throughout the Old Testament.
In the story of David and Goliath, God also used an unlikely hero, a shepherd boy, against a veteran champion who is described as a “giant.” But before David was anointed king he served King Saul. Saul was a great king, but he disobeyed God and did what was right in his own eyes. David however, had a heart for God, and was obedient.
Today, on altars across the country, children are sacrificed by the thousands per day. Just as history shows us that there have always been those who worship at the altar of Baal, it shows us that there have always been those who oppose it. Some did what is right in their own eyes, even while in the service of God, as Saul did. Then, there were those who obeyed God as David did, despite their actions being foolish in the eyes of those around them.
Some in the pro-life movement, like Saul, seem to have abandoned true obedience to God, perhaps doubting that the victory is His. They doubt that a complete and immediate end to legalized abortion can be achieved, so they choose to settle for “crumbs from the table” by hoping politicians will help them achieve small victories that MIGHT save some lives. In so doing they have rejected the truth that abortion is the sacrifice of innocent blood to false gods and created their own idol of political pragmatism in opposition to abortion. Such a philosophy compromises to gain ground politically, agreeing to protect the killing of certain babies, such as those conceived in rape, in order to prohibit the killing of other babies. This position may be “anti-abortion,” to some extent, but it is not “pro-life.”
The reasons for which abortion is chosen (comfort, convenience, career, money problems or a bad relationship) and the reasons the faithful give for acquiescing to some abortions (practicality, something is better than nothing, the ends justifies the means) share the same alter.
National Right to Life, while your divergent secular and political approach could exist alongside the Personhood movement,and those who approach such evils as abortion from a Christian worldview, you are actively opposed to any views other than your own. You have made it decidedly clear you won’t tolerate dissent, nor are you willing to consider conscientious objections.
In 2007, Colorado Right to Life was disaffiliated for confronting you, and others, for “fraudulent fundraising in support of the Partial-birth Abortion ban,” which didn’t save a single human life.
Cleveland Right to Life was disaffiliated in August, 2013, for speaking against the support of “gay marriage” by Senator Rob Portman, a candidate you endorsed.
Georgia Right to Life was ousted this week after a push by a group, Georgia Life Alliance, led by conservative blogger and Editor in Chief of RedState, Erick Erickson, because GRTL has opposed bills that were considered by you to be top legislative priorities.
National Right to Life, like the Pharisees, you have traded Jesus for Barrabas by opting to back an organization who is willing to endorse candidates who are pro-abortion in some cases to ensure your political interests.
When your opposition to abortion is made at the altar of political pragmatism, how is your position any different than pro-abortion politicians who say that abortion should be “rare, safe and legal?” You fight for legislation that follows that same premise.
Despite the rhetoric against those who advocate for Personhood, it is not a position that says “save all or save none.” Personhood is not opposed to taking steps forward. It is opposed to taking steps forward that are contrary to the laws of God, which undermine the sanctity and dignity of life in the womb, and are complicit with the murder of innocents. Are you affirming the sanctity of human life when legislators, with whom you are in alliance, will “save none, if they have to save all”?
Human beings are created in the image of God. Every one of us is made by God, and our worth is not based on human standards or the manner in which we are conceived. Satan comes to seek and destroy, and the highest sacrament of idolatry has always been the blood of innocent children.
If we truly believe that God is the author of all human life, that every child in the womb bears his image, and that God himself willed them into being, then there is no compromise that can end in the destruction of innocent human life.
National Right to Life, no man possesses the authority to determine that one innocent life is expendable.
For Life,
Sacred Heart Abolitionist Society
edited by Amber Masterson (conceived in rape) and Shawn Viland
Catholic Abolitionist Society on Facebook
