---

Is the Pro-life Movement Too Christian? - Letters to the Editor for Friday, July 18, 2008

Re: Why Is the Pro-Life Movement So Christian, and Should it be?
( http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071510.html )

Dear Editor,

Often when a pro-life group is struggling for membership, they will question the way they do business.  This process can bring great fruits, but it can also lead to a dead end.

John's article puts up a clear warning sign against one common "dead end" - compromising our Christian identity.  The battle against a Culture of Death is a religious one, and we want Christ leading our way.

We welcome others to stand with us, and hopefully our Christian witness in this movement can be a powerful means of evangelization.
 
Thanks for this insightful article,
Kathy Schmugge
Fort Mill, SC 

____________________________________________________

Dear Editor,

I am one of those few and far between secularists Jalsevac speaks of who has embraced the pro-life cause purely through the power of reason, and I would like to rebut his commentary, as it has left me deeply hurt.

Like John, I was a Christian at one point in my life.  I even spent half a decade studying to be a priest.  Since then, I discovered that the tenets of Christian belief no longer rang true for me, and so I let go of Christian faith and moved on.  Despite this, my convictions concerning the unborn became stronger than ever, and I have spent the last two years doing something about it.  I am firmly convinced that taking the pro-life cause to the wider realm of human existence is the only hope that it has to survive, let alone thrive.  Indeed, I can tell you quite matter-of-factly that keeping it within the confines of Christianity will keep it confined, period, and the unborn will pay the price for that confinement.

I would also like to challenge you on your assertions concerning human nature.  It is in your belief system that Jesus Christ was fully human, and thus possessing the fullness of true human nature.  If you are correct that being fallen and limited and filled with ego is essential to human nature, then Christ must have reeked of those things.  However, you do not believe that. Hence, you should have called it "less-than-human nature."  Your view of human nature is also not true in a philosophical sense.  I can assure you that, deep down, those who are unwilling to serve reason know they are not being true to their own humanity.

I also must profoundly disagree with you on your suspicion of excessive optimism.  There can never be enough optimism.  Indeed, it is too essential to be diminished one iota.  It may be true that William Wilberforce was motivated as a result of his Christian faith, but history is too replete with examples of those who lacked such faith but still made a difference and would have been outright repulsed at your suspicions of excess optimism.

So what if secular pro-lifers are few and far between?  All that matters is that they exist at all, and their numbers can only rise if only you encourage the ones that are already there.  You successfully failed to do this as far as I'm concerned.  I hope you'll reconsider your positions, for they involve bad reason and bad faith. 

Marlon Biollo
Venice, Alberta

____________________________________________________

Dear Editor,

I would like to congratulate John Jalsevac on a well written article. It is interesting that everyone has a blind spot, and he notes that Aquinas' blind spot, if he indeed had one, was to think the world could be taught and was reasonable.

Jalsevac thinks Christianity is the only road to winning the pro life side; however, I think we won't do it without the Moslems who also hate abortion, and our Jewish brothers and sisters.

Together we have a prayer. No pun intended.

Barbara Irwin

____________________________________________________

Dear Friends at LSN.com,
 
If I had his contact information I would have liked to thank John Jalsevac for his effort and commend him on the depth of insight and wisdom he demonstrates, especially for one so young, in his response to those who feel Christianity/faith should be left out of the pro-life movement, so as to have greater impact and appeal to abortion promoters.
 
I support Jalsevac's insistence that to exclude the 'religion' of the pro-life position is to exclude the God and Source of all life and wisdom; that man has proven over and over again that his reason amounts to mere vanity unless he has something/Someone beyond his corrupted self as the foundational Truth that holds his reasoning from being exploited and perverted by lusts of his own flesh and unwitting self-centred motives.
 
The history of the Christian efforts to stem or overturn the tides of evil in the earth reveals generational failure and disastrous results, which explains why 40 years of reasoning against the push for legalized abortion has availed practically no desired results at all. We have conducted ourselves as "mere men," with religious overtones, as we have tried to debate the point with those whose minds are darkened by the god of this world. As Jalsevac says, the vehement pro-abortionist does not want to see 'reason' or 'fact' or 'evidence' or 'Truth'; they want abortion to be permissible...period.
 
We have failed, not because we are 'too Christian' in our approach, arguments and dealings with pro-abortionists, but because we have been trying to fight this battle using the same mortal attributes that the unregenerate are limited to. It's not Christianity we need on the pro-life side to gain this victory. It is Christ Himself we need.

Those who claim or appear to be 'devout Christians' but who are advocating leaving 'Christianity' (Christ) out of the 'pro-life' approach to the battle, are either deceived Christians or no Christian at all.
 
Christ has been left out of His Church for most of the last 2000 years, and it shows in the Christians and in the world at large. It's time to repent and give the reign and reigns of the throne and the Kingdom back to Christ.
 
Linda Klassen
St. Catharines, Ontario

____________________________________________________

Dear Editor,
 
I would like to reply to John Jalsevac's article on whether the pro-life movement ought to be Christian.

My circumstances are somewhat unusual. You see, I encountered the social ministry of the pro-life movement at my university. At the time I was not a Christian, nor did I want to be. The pro-life ministry called out to me because they defended the dignity of all persons, regardless of whether they had a disability or were considered less then everybody else.

I remember when I joined the club (because I was convinced that the prolife movement was correct in their logic and their reasoning) asking myself, "Why am I the only one who isn't a Christian in the club?" My mother told me I should start a club for people like myself; but she missed the fundamental question I was asking: "What is the connection between Christianity and the pro-life movement?"

Surely it isn't an accident that the pro-life movement is so Christian. I want to thank John for his excellent article. The pro-life movement should not be asked, "Why are so many of you Christians?" We should be asking others, "Why is it only Christians who are standing up for the unborn?"
 
God bless,
Sean Ollech
Prince George, BC

____________________________________________________

Re: No Such thing as a Right to Have Babies: Population Trust
(http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071509.html)

Dear LifeSiteNews,
 
Perhaps the reason that the pro-life movement is so thoroughly Christian is that Christians seem to be among the few people who are upholding the dignity of human reason.  So many people are holding to the opposite ethos, which says that "what's right for me is right; what's right for you is right."  And then we end up oppressed by what Pope Benedict called "the tyranny of relativism."
 
Mr. Carter Dillard of the Optimum Population Trust says that there is no right to bring more than two children into the world, and that the only private decision is the decision not to have children.  I would like to point out that the decision not to have children is a decision to allow food production, manufacturing, health care, the universities, research, and the military all to collapse in future decades.  The resources and services that the elderly need, but can no longer produce themselves, will become more expensive as the supply becomes more limited.  The elderly wealthy will continue to be able to compete for these resources; the middle-class and poor elderly will be most severely impacted by the supposedly private decision of people not to have children.
 
Respectfully submitted,
Rev. Thomas Extejt
Fremont, OH

____________________________________________________

Re: Can Catholics Who Vote for Obama Still Receive Communion?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08061208.html

Dear Editor,

I am a member of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada that also supports the Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin who is running for president in the United States.
 
I am very concerned about an article that appeared some weeks back.  It said that a Catholic or Christian should vote in favour of the best pro-life/pro-family candidate, but that if the best candidate is a third party member who is "not likely to win", then that person should vote for the best mainstream candidate.  The article specifically mentioned Michael Anthony Peroutka, who ran for president in the Constitution Party in 2004.
 
I have a major problem with this.  This kind of strategy just preserves the two party system and does nothing to change it.  It also encourages people to vote for the lesser of two evils instead of voting for the best person available.  You also have to consider that a third party does not have to win to influence change.  If a third party gets a significant number of votes, it will influence the mainstream parties to change their policies or risk being replaced by the third party.
 
Please cover Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party, just as you are covering the Christian Heritage Party of Canada.  The pro-life voters in the US need to know more about them.
 
Sincerely,
Mark A. Price
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

____________________________________________________

RE: 12 Bishops Oppose Morgentaler's Appointment to Order of Canada - "Shock of the century"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071603.html

Dear Editor,

While it is gratifying to note that 12 Canadian Catholic bishops have expressed shock and dismay with the recent Morgentaler award, I can't help but feel dismayed (though not at all shocked) that our Catholic leaders have  so little to say or do with regard to life issues. 

The Catholic hierarchy ought to move to the front of the lines and activate themselves so as to activate the Catholic population before we fall any farther.  Francine Lalonde has introduced yet another euthanasia bill, we butcher 100,00 unborn Canadians annually, Catholics continue to use and promote contraception at the same rates as the general population and yet we hear little from our bishops and see almost nothing of them addressing these issues.

Presenting Henry Morgentaler with the Order of Canada is a significant reminder of where we have been.  Unless our bishops become proactive and lead us into a strong opposition to where some would like to take Canadian society, we are lost.  The laity can't do it alone.

Christopher Gainey
Port Perry, Ontario

____________________________________________________

To write a letter to the Editor: E-mail your letter to . Write "letter to the editor" in the subject line. Include your name, city and province or state of residence, as well as your phone # (the phone # is for our use only, and will not be published). Please note that all letters are subject to editing. LifeSiteNews.com will publish letters to the editor at its discretion, giving priority to the most concise, insightful and timely submissions.

 Back to Top

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.