Thoughts on the terms "pro-life" & "Culture Warrior"

[tinfoil tiaras]

Selections from blog : http://blinginhippiex3.blogspot.com/

“pro-life”. The term may be the most well known as describing a person that is either involved with or identifies themselves with the anti-abortion movement, a movement that is quite prominent in my home state of Mississippi. Considering we only have one clinic that provides the abortion procedure in the entire state, I think it’s safe to say the “pro-life” movement has a lot of influence around here. But let’s examine that term. “Pro-life”. What does it mean? Well, literally, it would mean a person against the ending of any life, be it that of a fetus, an animal or even a human being. Tell me this: how many “pro-life” people do you know that are either a) against the current mess in Iraq (civilians and soldiers are killed everyday) b) are vegetarian (the animals in the meat plants are killed in a particularly brutal way), c) against the death penalty (which plays God by ending the lives of criminals or d) all three—the ultimate “pro-lifer”.
And our president, who is supposedly “pro-life”. Does the extent of his care and compassion for human life only extend to that of the pre-born? Maybe because fetuses don’t need to be drafted to fight his illegal war. Maybe fetuses won’t commit crimes that would eventually land them of death row. Maybe fetuses won’t experience the freedoms we so take for granted that our Dear Leader is slowly but surely taking away from us. Maybe fetuses didn’t get stranded in the New Orleans Superdome in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
It’s all of these things. The hypocrisy blows my mind. These people—who claim to care so much about the value and sanctity of human life—and yet they don’t. And I’ll admit this: I eat meat (though I was a vegetarian for about two months). I am opposed to the death penalty. I am against the war in Iraq and think we should try to solve most of our problems with diplomacy and only use war when it’s only necessary. And, believe it or not, I strongly dislike abortion. But I don’t think it needs to be illegalized. That would create only more problems and even more lives lost (that of the woman and the potential life of the fetus). So, in essence, pro-choice is pro-life, at least in my view of the phrase.
Secondly, we’ll examine the “Culture Warriors”. The “Culture Warriors” are always thinking someone in that nasty liberal media is trying so hard to either a) turn their children gay (which, by the way, is scientifically impossible. Homosexuality is genetic and determined at birth) or b) corrupt the minds of their innocent children with all that vulgarity and whatnot. While I agree that young children shouldn’t watch porn, I still believe that censorship is a very bad—and very dangerous—thing. Especially in this country of ours, the land of the free.
But a seemingly large amount of these “Culture Warriors” strongly support this quagmire with Iraq. And some are even able-bodied 18-22 year olds. It’s a wonder why some of them don’t enlist in the Army or the navy, or the Marines. Don’t they support this war? Weren’t they the ones that cheered BushCo on as they led us deeper and deeper into debt at home and as the number of casualties abroad increased? If you support this war and you are an able-bodied 18-22 year old—I’ll put it bluntly—you should get your ass to the closest army recruiting station and enlist. And to those who do enlist, I salute you. And to those who aren’t planning to enlist, though they support this war, you’re just another chicken-hawk.
Would Jesus bomb an abortion clinic? Would Jesus go to an anti-gay rally? Would Jesus choose to execute even the vilest criminals while still professing love for one’s neighbor? Does Jesus really love all the little children of the world—or just the ones that are American? Would Jesus let a homeless man starve while thinking to himself that the man is just another lazy bum, while professing that the meek shall inherit the earth?

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Anti-Choice & Fascist fanatics

[orpupilofnature57]

2. Anti-Choice & Fascist fanatics

[ClassWarrior]

3. Two books where you can find some good answers to all those questions...

...are "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean, and "Thinking Points," the new "handbook for Progressives" by George Lakoff and the Rockridge Institute. You can get the latter free in PDF form at http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/thinkingpoints, where they're serializing it chapter-by-chapter. Otherwise, patronize your local independent bookseller or visit your local library.

NGU.

[InternalDialogue]

4. "And yet they don't"

The issue of being pro-life in practice only with regards to one issue or being pro-family only so far as the family fits a 1950s stereotypical suburban white family--all of this brings up one of the things that I feel underlies any number of problems... or if not problems, then complications when it comes to political and cultural issues.

To digress just a bit, I'm a systems nut. It's not what I do for a living really, but the whole idea of procedure, system design, and efficiency play into my work, and it's something that grows a little deeper in me each day. And it's personal too. It's not the idea of designing a machine, really, but the theory of having a system that accomplishes all that it's supposed to while running as smoothly and with as few contradictions as possible. So that's sort of what drives my worldview--I want to feel like I have a system of beliefs (spiritual, political, personal) that explain my perspective of my world as clearly as possible. When something I thought I believed contradicts with a new piece of information, I look at my set of beliefs, my system, to see whether it disagrees with the new experience. If my belief system is challenged, I see that I need to change the system, to incorporate the new information, check the rest of what I believe and see if the system still holds together.

(and now back to your thoughts)

So the idea of people who proclaim themselves to be pro-life, or pro-family or pro-Jesus or pro-whatever you want to throw in there, but who clearly are ignoring that their credo applies to only one facet of society... well, that bothers me. It feels wrong, deceptive -- like you wrote, "and yet they don't." That little phrase is the problem, it's the indicator that words and deeds don't match up when it comes to politics. Some people will argue that's what politics is all about. But what kind of ideal are we holding up as an example if we willingly accept that we can order a la carte from a menu of ethical and moral decisions? They say they value life, and yet they don't. They say they value family, and yet they don't. They say they value freedom, and yet they don't. They say they follow Christ's teachings, and yet they don't. To me, that's a system that doesn't work. It's full of problems, full of inefficiency -- it's a broken machine. When it happens to me, I check the machine, sort through the code to reconcile the problem.

The hypocrisy blows my mind too. Sometimes I'm comfortable just pointing it out. Too often, though, exposing the hypocrisy seems to mean something only when talking to a fellow liberal. It's those times that I wonder what in the world I can ever do to make a difference. Is there a point where we reconcile the gap between deeds and words? Realistically, no. If you ask me, it's possible in theory the same way that eradicating racism is -- it's a matter of raising a generation, just a single generation of children, to be color-blind. Problem fixed. Same thing with the issues you raise. The contradictions are invisible to those people who have fostered the rationalizations within themselves, but to fresh eyes and new ears, the differences might be drastic. When you value life, you value all life, not just those of the unborn or those of white-skinned people. When you believe in Christian values, you believe in all Christian values, not just the ones that protect your property and keep your wallet full.

But that's not going to happen. It's too hard, too complicated, too pie-in-the-sky, and new contradictions will arise all the time. And the defenses such people build around their beliefs is reflexive. The harder they feel their ideas are being attacked, the stronger they hold to them. So I think the answer lies somewhere surrounded with patience. We can't work past the contradictory beliefs and actions without exposing them, yet we can't change the people who hold them unless we do so in a way that doesn't seem like an attack.

I don't know that there are really many people whose minds I've changed, but I have plenty of friends and relatives who I don't necessarily agree with politically or culturally, and yet they respect me and will come to me for information or advice. It's not because I've ever convinced them that I hold the more "correct" worldview or beliefs. If anything it's because they see that I am honest, that I live my life truthfully and with compassion, and that I seem to be at peace with myself. Do those actions overcome someone's hypocritical beliefs? I'm not sure. But if someone can come to me for my opinion and learn what I believe without feeling like I'm challenging them, I think that's the crack in the dike. One heart, one mind at a time.