What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.


What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

Roe v. Wade--37 years

Today is the anniversary--if one can use so positive a word for so horrible a thing--of the lying court declaration in Roe v. Wade that a woman has a constitutional right to have her unborn child murdered. Redstate has an excellent post here.

Whenever this yearly remembrance of the atrocity that is Roe v. Wade comes around, I am left without words. I have not always put up a blog post on the day. And I have little to add to the Redstate post or to the words of Fr. Neuhaus (below).

But I do have this to add: As pro-lifers, we must keep our eyes focused on the goal. Our goal is that every child be protected in law and welcomed in life. Our goal is not merely to counter the latest insanity being visited on us by the left, such as abortion funding in nationalized healthcare. Our goal is not merely to reduce the number of abortions, as though abortion were merely some unhealthy activity like eating fatty foods rather than murder most foul.

Our principle is that unborn children should not be legally killed. The legality of their murders, the fact that their murders do not simply happen de facto but are protected de jure, is no small part of the horror that we fight. Pro-lifers believe that women should not have the legally protected choice to kill their babies and that doctors should not have the legally protected choice to kill women's babies. It's that simple. That's what being pro-life means, what pro-lifers stand for.

There are, and always have been, differences of opinion about strategies and compromises within the pro-life camp. Doubtless there will be for as long as this issue remains on the national scene, and probably even if (God speed the day) Roe v. Wade is overturned.

But let us make no mistake: If individual pro-lifers choose to endorse or vote for pro-choice candidates, candidates who openly and entirely oppose the legal protection of unborn children, then that is what they are doing. Such candidates do not magically become "pro-life" by a kind of weird, nominalistic baptism, simply in virtue of being the "lesser evil." If compromises are made, they must be strategic and temporary, yet they will be permanent if "pro-life" becomes a term of radically shifting definition.

On this sad anniversary of an evil judicial act, let us commit ourselves once more to keeping our eyes on the goal--the legal protection of unborn children.

The words of Fr. Neuhaus (and if you have not read the whole speech, you will be refreshed by it, so read it all) speak to us today as freshly as on the day when they were uttered:

Whether, in this great contest between the culture of life and the culture of death, we were recruited many years ago or whether we were recruited only yesterday, we have been recruited for the duration. We go from this convention refreshed in our resolve to fight the good fight. We go from this convention trusting in the words of the prophet Isaiah that “they who wait upon the Lord will renew their strength, they will mount up with wings like eagles, they will run and not be weary, they will walk and not be faint.”

The journey has been long, and there are miles and miles to go. But from this convention the word is carried to every neighborhood, every house of worship, every congressional office, every state house, every precinct of this our beloved country—from this convention the word is carried that, until every human being created in the image and likeness of God—no matter how small or how weak, no matter how old or how burdensome—until every human being created in the image and likeness of God is protected in law and cared for in life, we shall not weary, we shall not rest. And, in this the great human rights struggle of our time and all times, we shall overcome.

Comments (8)

Great post, Lydia.


Reading your post caused me some pain and sadness -- for many years I considered myself "pro-choice" (oh, how I hate that euphemism now) and never gave more than a passing thought to the deeply corrupt and sinful nature of the idea that our society would pass laws allowing women to kill their unborn children.

I just read this piece today and I thought it makes a powerful companion to your own excellent post:


I shudder at the horror of the crime of abortion and I can only repent now for my past complicit support of this crime and work in the future to make sure "every child be protected in law and welcomed in life." God bless all those who have been fighting this good battle for years.

God bless you, Jeff.

Looking forward to reading the Weekly Standard piece.

As pro-lifers, we must keep our eyes focused on the goal.

And not lose hope in that goal no matter how far away it seems, or unlikely to be achieved. We _will_ win in the end, because we are with God.

Go, Lydia.


Jude, that link is alarming. Here's the printer-friendly one, and I'm passing it on to some people:

Now, in my country, pre-meditated human-caused abortion is still considered murder. But my Siginificant Other is from a country where teenagers are even subtly encouraged to get abortions. I've sent this link along.
Someone should put it at the front of WWWtW; some editor. The mood is right, and the link needs some publicity.

It's interesting that the conversions the article talks of make radical pro-lifers out of former accomplices. (We can never help becoming extremists, once we convert to what seems to be a truth long-hidden. See also: St. Paul of Tarsus. Or Prof. Edward Feser - hehehehehehe.)

Jeff, I read the article. It reminded me of the post we had here called "No such thing as not guilty by reason of ideology." The article kept emphasizing that the people in these abortion clinics were committed in theory to the right to abortion, yet that didn't shield them from the psychological trauma of actually committing abortions and dealing with the dead babies. What's astonishing is that people keep going nonetheless. Talk about suppressing the warnings of conscience! Here they are having nightmares about killing unborn children, yet they keep on.

One thing the article didn't make clear concerned the doctor who killed an 18-week baby when she herself was 18 weeks pregnant and felt her own child move: That abortionist still performs those abortions. When she advocates the opportunity for honesty, etc., for abortionists, she is talking about helping them to go on doing it! Letting them by "honest" so they can deal with their feelings and continue aborting! It's horrifying. She literally said in the piece (which someone posted a link to at Facebook and I read) that it would be violence to women not to abort their babies, so she has to go on doing it for them.

This is a woman who is without excuse.


Great point about that doctor -- what I immediately thought of (which probably fits in well with your post "No such thing as not guilty by reason of ideology") was Stalin's top henchmen which I read about in the book "The Court of the Red Czar". These were men who were committing almost daily evil and were slowly going mad by doing so (many were drinking heavily or seeing multiple women, etc.) but they kept going because they were believers.


I'm sorry, I forgot to wish you a Happy Homicide Day.

Post a comment

Bold Italic Underline Quote

Note: In order to limit duplicate comments, please submit a comment only once. A comment may take a few minutes to appear beneath the article.

Although this site does not actively hold comments for moderation, some comments are automatically held by the blog system. For best results, limit the number of links (including links in your signature line to your own website) to under 3 per comment as all comments with a large number of links will be automatically held. If your comment is held for any reason, please be patient and an author or administrator will approve it. Do not resubmit the same comment as subsequent submissions of the same comment will be held as well.