Abortion and the Return of Moloch

First off, for our liberals out there – who was Moloch? Moloch was a pagan god who went by various names in the ancient world, but the main point here is that Moloch was appeased by human sacrifice, especially the sacrifice of children. In case you ever wondered why the Romans, after defeating Carthage in the Third Punic War, destroyed the city entirely and sowed the ground with salt, it was because the Roman’s despised the Carthaginians, who worshiped Moloch – to the Romans, what sort of savage, inhuman people sacrifice children like that? If you want to get a sense of the horror the Romans felt, imagine a community of modern, American people getting dressed up in their best to go watch a baby being roasted alive. Since the downfall of Carthage and the later rise of Christianity, the very concept of human sacrifice has been anathema in the West – until recently.

Here was have an article by Sady Doyle which is urging all good liberals to cease defending abortion as a necessary evil, but promote it as a positive, moral good:

Katha Pollitt’s Pro: Reclaiming Abortion Rights is a deeply felt and well-researched book which argues that abortion, despite what any of its opponents might claim, is a palpable social good. Progressives, Pollitt says, can and must treat abortion as an unequivocal positive rather than a “necessary evil”; there is no ethical, humane way to limit abortion rights. The fact that Pollitt needs to make this argument in 2014, however, seems to indicate that pro-choicers have long been a little too nice for our own good…

Too nice for their own good? Goodness, it’s like the good lady hasn’t even checked to see just what sort of hatred, vitriol and violence is directed against pro-life people by pro-abortion. But, we’ll set that aside – the real issue here (and I do give her points for honesty) is that she’s of the view that abortion is morally good, and insistent that the pro-abortion movement say just that in public.

The article goes on for a bit about how sweet and wonderful abortion is – essentially asserting the view that pregnancy is a disease and massive, artificial medical intervention is necessary lest women have the unbelievable horror of pregnancy “forced” upon them, apparently in violation of the primary female activity, building a career in corporate America (yep, nothing says “freedom” better than being shackled to a cubicle for 8 hours a day…of course, it could be that Ms. Doyle doesn’t interact often with that part of the sisterhood which doesn’t make its living writing articles lauding abortion…). It is horrifying to read; to understand that in 2014 we have people who have so far gone into moral topsy-turvydom that evil is good and good, evil. Pregnancy to Ms. Doyle is a problem – and it needs a solution, and might as well make it a Final Solution, right?

I’ve long held the view that once you step off from morality, you’re doomed to just get worse and worse unless you step back to morality. Chesterton in one of his stories had a character point out that you can some times maintain a reasonable level of good (in spite of routine failures and sins), but you can’t maintain a reasonable level of bad – once you go bad, unless you repent completely, you’ll just get worse and worse. Once people asserted that human life is not uniquely valuable and legalized abortion, it became certain – unless we repented – that we would eventually start killing anyone who isn’t up to snuff. Now we see euthanasia for the ill and elderly, people advocating for children to be killed even after birth if they aren’t “fit”, and now a bald-faced assertion that killing is morally good – this being far different (and, morally, far below) the original argument of rare, sad necessity used to push abortion to legality. Given how far we’ve fallen, I don’t think that anyone can argue against my next statement:

Unless we repent and restore the sanctity of human life in law and custom, we will eventually start celebrating the murder of human beings.

I’m not kidding – people who have fallen low enough to say that abortion is morally good will eventually want to celebrate it. It is the next step down, don’t you see? What would stop them from doing such a thing? They already hold life, itself, in contempt – only the most narrow and selfish interests move them…and if they are to have an abortion, why not make a party out of it? And they’ll do it when they kill the elderly, as well – in fact, I can easily see, given attitudes about the environment, that killing human beings can be seen as beneficial to the world…a small sacrifice to Mother Nature, right? That it is human sacrifice – heck, so much the better: in fact, when you abort your child (or off you grandmother), you are doing a good deed…you are helping to save the plant by reducing humanity’s carbon footprint!

We are, fortunately, on the cusp of an increasingly pro-life America. The young, especially, seem to be keen on allowing everyone to live (having been born in a time when they, too, could have been aborted at will, I think, has concentrated their minds on the matter). I do hope that this is the last, hideous shriek of the Culture of Death – but if these people do continue to have power, they will continue to press their case, and we might find altars to Moloch springing up here and there. The lesson here is for everyone who still claims to be “pro-choice”: you can no longer hold to that position. You really do have to choose – be pro-life, or be pro-abortion (or, more accurately, pro-death). Pro-choice was a phrase which allowed people to hide from the actual, moral choice required of them. It is now time to choose – which side do you want to be on? On one side, there’s the rather difficult task of getting everyone into the world, and then treating them decently until they die a natural death. On the other side, people who will kill because a person is inconvenient. Pick.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Abortion and the Return of Moloch

  1. Cluster October 5, 2014 / 6:01 pm

    I have always had the opinion that I think it is wrong, and even a little sexist to think that pregnancies are just a woman’s problem. What kind of person, or society, or ideology thinks that it is ok for men to impregnate women, and/or father children with impunity? This is outrageous in my opinion and that is how I as a conservative challenge liberals on this issue. Why do they think that it is ok for men to avoid responsibility and instead place the onus entirely on the woman?

    I place 98% of the blame on men and any man that abdicates his responsibility to his children and or mother of his children, should be castrated.

    • M. Noonan October 5, 2014 / 9:04 pm

      It was, after all, figured out by men – and propagandized heavily by men who wanted to be free to engage in sex without consequences. That is the most intense irony of the whole feminist movement – it has empowered men to be irresponsible first and foremost.

  2. Retired Spook October 6, 2014 / 9:32 am

    I think anyone who defends and promotes abortion as a positive, moral good is in such a tiny minority that they must feel threatened by the current state of abortion in the United States.

  3. Retired Spook October 7, 2014 / 10:53 am

    I ran across an interesting quote this morning:

    “Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants.” Mother Teresa

    • M. Noonan October 7, 2014 / 12:36 pm

      That is precisely it – to me, there is no rational position to take on abortion except to oppose it. We’re supposed to be human beings – these are fellow human beings. Regardless of what might have led up to the creation of that human being, she deserves her shot at life.

  4. Amazona October 7, 2014 / 1:13 pm

    This goes back to my discussion with Mark about how best to appeal to squishies. (I don’t think it is worth our time or energy to try to appeal to the hard-core.) He argues that we need to tell mothers of fatherless children that we will support them. I argue that we need to tell them we will use the funds of the government not to pay for taking care of those children but to track down the sperm donors and force THEM to do it.

    Mother Theresa got it right, and made the point the pro-abortion crowd tries to ignore or gloss over. Abortion is violence. It is the ugly, brutal, ending of a human life. The same mentality that refuses to eat meat, or protests to stop capital punishment, will turn another face and bleat that while some deaths are inexcusable some are just fine, such as taking the life of a human being not because it has proven itself to be a danger to humanity but because it is just inconvenient. The same hypocrites who object to the violence of war, who shriek about the loss of “innocent civilian life” in various conflicts, have no problem in ending the life of the most innocent and helpless among us, and for frivolous reasons that almost always boil down to a version of “I just don’t feel like being pregnant”.

    I will bet that if you had polled the protesters trying to stop the execution of Ted Bundy you would have found most if not all of them to be self-defined “feminists” (trying to save the life of a person who only killed women) and pro-abortionists who were quite selective about which violence they condemned and which they condoned and even actively supported.

    • M. Noonan October 7, 2014 / 10:38 pm

      To be sure, the men involved do need to be brought into the picture – and if we can track them down, then they must be made to pay for their actions, even if its 18 years of child support. Of course, a lot of the men involved aren’t worth much – financially or morally. So, there still will be a population of women with children who don’t have anyone to help, and help must be offered. It is, of course, already offered – the basic thing is that if there is a woman out there who feels that abortion is the only way to go because of financial reasons, then she is just unaware of how large and well-organized the pro-life movement is in this area (and this is a lot of where the side walk counselors – that the left wants to ban – come in; they’ll tell these poor women on the way into the clinics that there is another way, and the pro-life movement is ready and able to provide emotional, financial and moral support). I don’t think, though, that the real basis of a decision to abort is financial – I think it is far narrower than that.

  5. Amazona October 7, 2014 / 1:49 pm

    This is the text of House Bill HR-1091, or the “Personhood Bill” It is the centerpiece of a vicious and dishonest campaign by incumbent and desperate Mark Udall, who is running almost nonstop ads claiming that by supporting this bill his opponent, Cory Gardner, is trying to ban “the most common forms of birth control” and “make abortion a felony”. The pro-death crowd is terrified of this bill, although it specifically states it cannot be used as the basis for prosecuting a female for having an abortion. (Sorry, but being a woman I just can’t force myself to consider someone who kills her own baby a real woman, just a pathologically selfish creature with female genitalia.) emphasis mine

    “A BILL

    To implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to
    the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human
    person.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
    United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the “Life at Conception Act”.

    SEC. 2. RIGHT TO LIFE.

    To implement equal protection for the right to life of each born
    and preborn human person, and pursuant to the duty and authority of the
    Congress, including Congress’ power under article I, section 8, to make
    necessary and proper laws, and Congress’ power under section 5 of the
    14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the
    Congress hereby declares that the right to life guaranteed by the
    Constitution is vested in each human being. However, nothing in this
    Act shall be construed to authorize the prosecution of any woman for
    the death of her unborn child.

    SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    For purposes of this Act:
    (1) Human person; human being.–The terms “human person”
    and “human being” include each and every member of the
    species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the
    moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an
    individual member of the human species
    comes into being.
    (2) State.–The term “State” used in the 14th article of
    amendment to the Constitution of the United States and other
    applicable provisions of the Constitution includes the District
    of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each other
    territory or possession of the United States.”

    This is scary because it points out what the pro-abortionists do not want discussed—that the lives they want to end are human beings. So they have to lie about what the bill really says, they have to recast it as a draconian effort to attack females just because they kill their own, they have to twist the wording to say it would “ban the most common forms of birth control” by which they have to mean the use of abortificants.

    I consider it a mirror held up to the pro-abortion crowd, saying in effect “We can’t stop you from butchering innocent human beings, but at least we can dismiss the pretense that they are anything BUT innocent human beings. Kill them if you must, but don’t pretend you are doing anything else.”

    And they don’t want this. They want to hide behind the pretense that abortion is the removal of a few cells, that it is a choice between the life of a baby and the life of the gestational creature whose actions created it, that human life begins at the taking of a breath, etc. We’ve heard it all, and we’ve seen the definitions and rationalizations shift as time has gone by—-from “a clump of cells” to “first trimester” to “second trimester” to “as long as it has not gotten its head out of the birth canal and taken a breath” to “dump it in a box and let it starve to death after it is born if the female creature wants it dead”. They have fought the requirement to undergo an ultrasound before killing a baby—we saw their absolutely hysterical shrieking right here on the blog, claiming that transvaginal ultrasound is RAAAPE !!!! and so on, that having a sterile medical instrument inserted into the same orifice used in the creation of the doomed human life is soooo much more horrible and brutal than poisoning and/or dismembering that human life even though it can feel pain. Their frantic arguments to protect and defend their atrocities have been illustrated, and all this has done has been to showcase their odd and bizarre dedication to a vile, vicious, brutal and inhumane practice that is antithetical to humanity itself.

  6. Amazona October 7, 2014 / 5:12 pm

    Unless we repent and restore the sanctity of human life in law and custom, we will eventually start celebrating the murder of human beings.

    We already have. A couple of years ago, one of the forker females issued a congratulations to all the pathologically selfish female gestators who had butchered their babies that day.

    It was the single most foul thing, of so many foul things posted by the Toxic Left, I ever saw. She loved the idea of killing babies, she reveled in it, she gloried in it, she wallowed in it and rose savoring the stink of it, and she openly stated her desire to “congratulate” all who had chosen to participate in this ritual of brutality.

    The thing is, no woman has to get pregnant. Any woman can choose to be sterilized, to be sure that she will never be afflicted with the dread outcome of sexual activity. (I know better than to point out she could simply abstain from sexual activity—utterly self-involved hedonists who put their pleasure and convenience ahead of everything and everyone else would never consider such a thing.) Personally, I think every female who has voluntarily killed her own child should be sterilized, as she has proven herself to be totally unfit for being entrusted with the life of another innocent and vulnerable life. It should be Put Up Or Shut Up—-accept reproductive responsibility or don’t, but if you don’t it is off the table for good.

    • Cluster October 8, 2014 / 10:35 am

      I always like reading your opinions and I agree 100%. Abortion should be stigmatized, avoided, and educated against, not championed or celebrated. And where in the hell are the fathers ?????????

Comments are closed.