Printer friendly version

February 8, 2004

Call a Slaying a Slaying

Michael Williams has apparently been criticized for using such heated and biased rhetoric as calling the convenience killing of unborn children "murder." To the contrary, it seems to me that pro-lifers do themselves no good by giving their opponents — or waverers — a reason to suspect that they tacitly don't really believe what they say about the magnitude of the offense.

The criticism does have relevance in a different aspect of the debate, however. I'm convinced that among the highest obstacles keeping abortion legal is the individual moral culpability of those who have had, or even supported, abortions. If it's murder, they've murdered, or supported murder. In that respect, perhaps an argument could be made that it would be more effective to acclimate them to the idea that abortion is wrong before hitting them with the full gravity of its wrongness.

Frankly, I don't think that's a significant factor at this point — overbalanced by the longevity and ubiquity of the fight as well as by the necessity of passion to build a sense of the magnitude of the individual choice. That's not even to mention the magnitude of the social atrocity; as Michael writes (emphasis his):

It's fine and good to win a debate fairly without resorting to emotional rhetoric, but sometimes the issue is so important that it's better to win at any cost than to worry about intellectual niceties. Such is the case with abortion. I'm all for detached, objective discussion in most cases, but one-third of my generation has been murdered by their parents. I'm more concerned with stopping the butchery than with dispassioned objectivity, and I purposefully use emotional terminology to tailor my message in the manner I believe will be most effective in convincing my readers.
Posted by Justin Katz at February 8, 2004 3:23 PM
Abortion
Comments

Thanks for the link.

Posted by: Michael Williams at February 8, 2004 5:59 PM

Justin,

What gets my goat about "pro-life" activists calling abortion "murder" is the fact that they don't show the same moral outrage toward murder (or compassion for its victims) that they do toward abortion and its victims.

Where was the "pro-life" lobby for Polly Klaas? For the little girl who was recently kidnapped and murdered in Florida? For the 3,000+ victims of Sept. 11? For any legitimate victim of murder anywhere?

Making the use of the word "murder" more outrageous, in my mind, is the fact that so many Catholics are willing to oppose capital punishment for murder when such punishment is not only supported by Scripture and Tradition, but encouraged.

Yes, I know the pope opposes capital punishment. I believe he is actively engaged in theological and moral revisionism by doing so, a revisionism that runs counter to Scripture and Tradition.

To me, "pro-life" activists really don't care about murder and the devastation it wreaks on the families and friends of the victims. "Murder" is just another piece of rhetorical propaganda used to serve a cause.

Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at February 8, 2004 10:39 PM

Joseph,

I think you go much too far in attributing ulterior motives to those who oppose abortion. It cannot be contested that there are subtleties in the matter of capital punishment, and it's downright vicious to suggest that pro-lifers don't care every bit as much — probably more — about abducted girls.

The problem is that they are already abducted, their abduction was already illegal, and it can be a matter of fair and reasoned debate what policies could diminish future horrors for future children. (Personally, I think teaching something other than passivity to girls would be much more effective than upping the ante for killers... although I think the latter is important, too.) Moreover, revenge and the closure that it brings aren't necessarily the best route to healing devastation.

Posted by: Justin Katz at February 9, 2004 1:42 PM

Justin, if pro-lifers care about murder and its victims as much as they do about abortion and its victims, why don't they organize the kind of demonstrations concerning murder that they do concerning abortion? I know murder is illegal but that's not the point; the point is the arbitrary destruction of life -- which, as far as I know, is the fundamental motivation for pro-life protests.

As far as vengenance is concerned, God *demands* that "whosoever sheds blood shall have his blood shed" (Gen. 9:6). The ethical dimentions of the Mosaic Law (which God instituted so that the Israelites would serve as an example for the rest of the world of how societies should function) demand execution for murder under a judicial system that respects the rights of the accused. Aquinas himself viewed capital punishment as just for various reasons.

Here's Aquinas on capital punishment and mercy:
"The fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger that threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentence. And if they are so stubborn that even at the point of death, their heart does not draw back from evil, it is possible to make a highly probable judgement that they would never come away from evil to the right use of their powers (Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, 146)."

Here's Aquinas on capital punishment, vengeance and protecting the community:

"If a man is a danger to the community, threatening it with disintegration by some wrongdoing of his, then his execution for the healing and preservation of the common good is to be commended. Only the public authority, not private persons, may licitly execute malefactors by public judgement. Men shall be sentenced to death for crimes of irreparable harm or which are particularly perverted (Summa Theologica 11, 65-2, 66-6)."

Justin, the problem with most Catholics when it comes to capital punishment is that they confuse vengeance with proportional justice. Say you deliberately kill my sister. A vengeful act would be for my clan to wipe out your entire clan, regardless of the innocence of other members of your family. Proportional justice dictates that you and only you, if found guilty under an ethical justice system, are to suffer the consequences. This is one reason God designed the Mosaic Law: to ensure that society protect itself by demanding proportional justice from the perpetrators (and, legally speaking, dispensing proportional justice to the victims).

Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at February 9, 2004 7:59 PM