Welcome Friends!

A Catholic blog about faith, social issues, economics, culture, politics and poetry -- powered by Daily Mass & Rosary

If you like us, share us! Social media buttons are available at the end of each post.

Friday, March 6, 2015

Pro-Life Coffee: A Lifeboat Tendered to Those Drowning in the Great Sea of the Culture of Death

by Susan Fox

It’s come down to this.

What kind of coffee you drink may mean the difference between life and death.


Many pro-life and pro-marriage individuals thoughtlessly walk into Starbucks. But a portion of every cup of coffee you buy at Starbucks goes to fund a corporate assault on marriage and its fruit – human life.

I faced this reality in 2012. Though I loved their coffee, I stopped drinking it. I wrote them a letter: Dear Starbucks, My gold level card became a green level card, you say? (That means I hadn’t been using my rechargeable Starbucks card that earns rewards.)  While I was once a happy customer of Starbucks, I am no longer.

I will not stop in any of your stores for a Frappuccino. I will no longer buy your Via Ready Brew at Wal-Mart for my son in college. Anything manufactured by you -- I will not touch. I will not pay for it and I will not consume it in another's home. I have found out that you have legally challenged the Defense of Marriage Act. You have committed economic suicide. Where do you think your future customers are coming from???

At the time I was ignorant of the fact that Starbucks was also a major donor to Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States. Not only were they bent on destroying Marriage, the cradle of human civilization, but also the baby in the cradle – human life itself. Ug, that coffee doesn’t taste so good anymore.

But once you throw that deadly coffee out the window, where do you get your daily fix?  I wandered aimlessly through malls, sighed in frustration at coffee kiosks, stared glumly at the options at Wal-Mart. I tried alternatives at Catholic bookstores, but the beans were frankly old. I never found a good source of delicious fresh whole beans. We went for three years with no fragrant coffee in the house! A kindly priest came to visit, asked for coffee, and he got tea! It was Lent 365 days of the year.

Then a wonderful pro-life family man offered me a lifeboat!

His name was John Lillis. He and his family (wife, seven children and in-laws) started the Lifeboat Coffee Co. in 2013 out of his home in Omaha, Nebraska.  

Every one-pound bag of coffee purchased at Lifeboat goes to fund pro-life causes and parishes -- whichever one the customer wants! My pound of coffee from Lifeboat netted about $1.25 for Students for Life of America, and unbelievably you can get up to two pounds of reasonably-priced fresh coffee with shipping that costs only  $2.99. It arrives in three days. And it is really good coffee.

This Lent, I am not fasting from coffee. But as always I am fasting from Starbucks.

So who is the man who started the nation’s first pro-life coffee company?
 
Lifeboat Founder
John Lillis 
John Lillis is a survivor of the abortion holocaust that began in March 1967 in the state of California. John was born only five months after the abortion law was put into effect, and then he was abandoned in a hospital in San Francisco. Things started looking up then because pro-life Catholics George and Rita Lillis adopted John. 

Being pro-life was “kinda in my genes,” John said in an interview with me. Rita, John’s 81-year-old mother, worked as the director of the Respect Life Commission in the Archdiocese of San Francisco. She was a volunteer at Birthright International, a grassroots response to the insecurity faced by many unwed mothers.  “I can’t say (count) the number of women that came through our house that had a newborn or were about to have a child, so it was just imbued upon us that was the proper thing to do (support life).”
Rosary Prayer Walk to End Abortion 
Then growing up in a Catholic family, there were Rosary prayer walks through San Francisco – “As a young kid that always left a permanent mark on my heart,” Lillis said.

While Lillis never abandoned his pro-life beliefs, he did take a detour out of Catholicism at the age of 16.  I decided I no longer needed to participate in the faith even though I was a product of Catholic schools. We’re talking 1970s, early 80s –- we sang songs about Jesus and had poetry, colored pictures. I’m not sure what else I might have learned so I kinda quit for a while.”
The Joyful San Francisco Archbishop
Salvatore Cordileone
Fascinating to both Lillis and I is the Cross that San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone has embraced: he is trying to get Catholic School teachers to support the Church’s position that homosexual acts, masturbation and pornography are “gravely evil.”

Fully 80 percent of the faculty and staff at the four archdiocesan high schools have rejected his amended teacher’s handbook, and they have signed a petition to that effect. If Cordileone is successful in his reforms, life stories like those of John Lillis may become a thing of the past. People may actually receive a Catholic education at a Catholic school.

Ironically, it was the Rosary in the context of the staunchly Catholic Franciscan University of Steubenville that brought John back to the Catholic Church in 1993 at the age of 26. After having worked for a while, John wanted to go back to college, but none in the San Francisco area would accept him.

His mother lured him into applying for Steubenville, and amazingly he was accepted. John went and took a peek at the campus before he accepted.  I had not participated in the faith for some time – the only thing that crossed my mind was  ‘Wow look at all the beautiful Catholic women that are on this campus. It’s going to be a great place to go!’” As he learned later, grace works through nature.

So he packed up his truck and drove from San Francisco to Steubenville, Ohio. He planned to live in the dorm and immerse himself in campus life and prepare for a Master’s Degree in Counseling. But when he got there, there was no room in the dorm for an older student, so he was given a “$2 hotel” for three days, so he could look for an apartment.

A guy from New York named David shared the hotel with him, and of course, they shared their life stories. Out of the blue David asked John, “Do you want to pray a Rosary?”

Lillis responded, “Don’t you do that when somebody dies and you go to the wake?” “No,” David said, “You pray it all the time,” and then added, “What harm could it do?”

Put like that John Lillis, age 26, couldn’t say no, and David threw him “one of those powder blue plastic Rosaries that are so famous in Catholic homes.”


He got to the second decade of the Rosary. “It wasn’t quite a Pauline Christophany, but I was zapped by a moment of grace, and I realized everything I'd been doing on my own for the last 10 years was really displeasing to Our Blessed Lord,” John said. “And I started to cry like a little baby.”

“That was just a sign to this guy to say, ‘Okay now you need to go to confession.’”

So John tried, though he honestly believed alarms would go off when the priest heard his confession. He had to go back several times, as the lines were so long. Finally, he got in after waiting 90 minutes.

To his shock, there no longer was a nice little screen to hide behind. “The confessional opens and there’s the priest sitting right there,” John recalls.  “‘Hey, come in and sit right down!’  I was like, ‘Whoa!’  So after ten plus years away, I had this wonderful face-to-face confession with a priest who is now gone to the Lord. But all he said to me was, ‘Welcome home.’”

John found within himself a passion to learn “what the Church actually teaches (and) why she teaches what she teaches.” No more songs and coloring books. He wanted the real thing.

So began the life of a passionate pro-life Catholic who attends Mass almost daily. He became a Catholic radio journalist – not a counselor, and joined the Board of Directors for Nebraskans United for Life, the largest pro-life group in the state. He also became a paid lobbyist for the pro-life cause and helped shape several laws in the state of Nebraska.

“I worked on creating alliances between pro-life groups and being able to help find funding for pro-life groups,” Lillis said, adding, “I think the funding issue has always been a big battle.”

That’s when the idea for the Lifeboat Coffee Co. came into being.

“We are still in the start-up mode so we are not yet in the black, but it takes two to three years to get a start-up running efficiently,” Lillis said, adding that they hope to be making a profit by 2016.

Still with the intention to donate 10 percent of receipts less shipping to pro-life charities, Lifeboat Coffee is already fulfilling its mission – to provide funding to groups that will work to save lives. They donated approximately $3,000 to pro-life groups in their first year of operation, 2014. “We just need to increase traffic (sales),” Lillis said, and if they do that,  pro-life charities will benefit further.

Parishes or Right-to-Life groups can get in on the charity bonus by putting a passive link for Lifeboat Coffee on their web pages. Coffee purchased from that link will automatically earn the 10 percent reward for the charity that sponsored the link. 
lifeboatcoffee.com or
1-855-88-4-LIFE (5433)
Where did the name, Lifeboat Coffee, come from? It grew out of John's life experience. For nothing happens accidentally. God gifts everything providentially. Like St. Don Bosco, who shepherded sheep in his youth, and then became a priest who shepherded boys, Lillis was carefully prepared for his role in life: husband, father, pro-life radio journalist and the mission of selling the pro-life message in the great sea of the culture of death.  Growing up, he was a member of the Sea Scouts of America – part of the Boy Scouts, but on the water. Then he worked as an adult in the U.S. Coast Guard.

“One day when thinking about the name, I thought we want to help save lives, what about a life boat?” Lillis said, “It’s just that easy.”

Besides saving the lives of unborn people, he is also saving the souls of us, who must make a discerning choice about where to spend our dollars.

Almost every year, Lillis and his family attend the March for Life in Washington, D.C. So he was there again this year, but the hotel he was staying in did not permit him to serve coffee to the pro-lifers staying there. So nobody could taste Lifeboat, although they got free coffee samples to take home.

“The point is everybody from the director of the March for Life to almost every pro-lifer that had a booth (drank) Starbucks Coffee,” Lillis said, “And I said to them, ‘Do you understand what you just did? You took two steps forward and one step backward.”

I feel great sympathy for the squirming pro-lifers who had to look the founder of Lifeboat Coffee in the face, while holding their Starbucks latte.  Their excuses were “there’s no other coffee.” And when he reminded them of McDonald’s, they said, “If you dig deep enough everybody is bad.”

“It was a disappointment,” Lillis said, adding, “You don't have to dig with Starbucks. They are just bad from the get-go.” 

But Lillis and those boycotting Starbucks for their pro-gay and pro-abortion stances are making a difference. Planned Parenthood – as recently as 2014 – proudly listed its major corporate donors on its web page, including Starbucks. But that link was removed sometime since last year, and now they only sport a partial list of corporate donors, and Starbucks isn’t on it. Apparently bowing to pro-life pressure, Starbucks decided to hide their involvement with the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood *

However, on the issue of same sex “marriage,” Starbucks has simply become more strident.  Starbucks was among the 379 companies who just  filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, pressing it to overturn a lower court ruling that upheld bans on same-sex marriage in four states.

“They (Starbucks) are technically our nemesis. I don’t really think about them per se. Obviously they are the 800-pound gorilla so it’s hard to beat them," Lillis said. "But someday -- God willing – there will be Lifeboat coffee shops in cities around the country.” 

And that’s the good news. The pro-life, pro-family Lifeboat chain will grow. John is exploring all types of options for selling coffee on the street. On one hand, he could begin a chain of stationary coffee cafés similar to what Starbucks has nationwide. Who knows there may be some Starbucks cafés coming up for sale soon?  Or he has looked at partnering with Newman Centers and Catholic groups on campus to put pro-life coffee in the hands of every collegian.  One of his most exciting ideas is that of a mobile café.
 
My Pound of Lifeboat Coffee
With a mobile café, Lifeboat Coffee could be at every major pro-life, parish and civic event and “just be there rather than having people trying to find us in one spot,” Lillis said. People could enjoy fresh homemade coffee to drink, buy Lifeboat’s one-pound bags, and take home its pro-life honey. “We might get really radical and put a small 5-pound coffee roaster on the truck, so people can get fresh roasted coffee.”

At one point in his life, Lillis was interested in becoming a priest in a religious order. But another young man made a pass during his last year of summer camp, sponsored by the order, and he never went back.

Perhaps that was for the best because the alternative suits John to a T. I asked him what was the most defining experience of his life, and the staunch pro-lifer answered: Marriage and Fatherhood.

“I’m a command-and-control kind of guy.  I’m 6 foot, 2 inches, big broad football kind of guy. I don’t really have a lot of fears. I understand what the Church teaches. I talk about It unabashedly sometimes to my detriment -- people get offended ... But being a better spouse and father is really my biggest challenge and the thing that's changed me the most,” Lillis said, admitting that he was still growing in that vocation.

“Trying to understand another human being in the way that spouses have to, that has been the biggest dimension in my walk with the Lord,” John humbly admitted.
 
It's a Family Affair:
Lifeboat Coffee Advertising Model,
six-year-old Maura Lillis 


*Bowing to pro-life pressure, Starbucks apparently decided to hide their involvement with Planned Parenthood.  This link of the Family Council, “Starbucks, and OtherCompanies, in Partnership with Planned Parenthood” sports a link to a list of corporate donors to America’s largest abortion provider, but when you click the link that says, “Click here to see the list,” Planned Parenthood has removed the list. 
Life Site News in this article, “Starbucks, American Express Still Support Planned Parenthood,” also sports an Error 404 message when you try to view the list of corporate donors to Planned Parenthood.




Also please click on the comments below for further listings of companies supporting same sex "marriage" and abortion. 


Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Share the Journey of the Transfiguration: Listen! This is HIs Beloved Son

Sermon by Rev. John Paul Shea
Second Sunday in Lent, March 1, 2015
Saints Peter & Paul Parish, Tucson, AZ
From the cloud came a voice, "This is my Beloved Son. Listen to Him." (Mark 9:7)
Today’s Gospel takes us on a journey. 

Jesus takes three of His disciples up a high mountain (Mark 9:2-10). When I was in the seminary our class went to the Holy Land. While we were there, one of the places we visited was the mountain of the Transfiguration. 

It is a high mountain. As we rode the bus up that steep mountain, I was thinking that it was not an easy or short climb. I imagine that it took much time and effort for Our Lord and His disciples to climb it. Our Lord’s disciples were probably wondering, what is the point of doing all this?

  Yet, when they got to the top of the mountain, I assume the three disciples realized it was worth the climb. Our Lord transfigures in front of their eyes, manifesting His divinity. His face shines with the brilliance of the sun. His garments become dazzlingly bright. Moses and Elijah appear conversing with Jesus…


As we reflect on the Transfiguration, we are reminded that this special time was not for the sake of Our Lord. His Transfiguration was for the sake of His disciples and for us.

My brothers and sisters, each one of us are on a journey. We each have a purpose in life. The Transfiguration of Our Lord shows who He is and reveals what we are to become. Our Lord Jesus is the Son of God. We are to become sons of God though Him. However, we are reminded that the Transfiguration does not come simply by climbing a mountain. It comes from accepting the Cross. Jesus and His apostles had already begun the final journey to Jerusalem.

When our Lord was transfigured in His glory, Peter wanted to stay on top of the mountain. He wanted to build three tents, one for Moses, one for Elijah and one for Jesus. But Our Lord reminds Peter that this could not be. 

No. They had to come down from the mountain so that Our Lord could share His glory with the rest of humanity. How did our Lord share His glory with us? By dying on the Cross.
"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." (John 12:32)

Our Lord Jesus is the image of God. He calls each one of us to be transfigured in His glory. This journey of transformation begins at our Baptism, but it is not yet complete.

If we want to share in the glory of Our Lord, we too must share in the cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 

This means that we must die to the sinful nature of our humanity and live in the Spirit. We must strive to overcome our disordered desires and strive to live pure lives. It is then that the Light of the Lord lives inside us. As our Lord offered His Body as a living sacrifice, we too are to offer our bodies as a holy, living sacrifice acceptable to the Lord….

If we want to be transformed in Jesus, than we are to live in faith. Even our Lord Jesus who is God had to rely on faith. He prayed in sweat to His Father while in the Garden of Gethsemane. He cried out on the Cross, “Father, why have you abandoned me?” 

Through faith, the power of Christ is manifested in us because we rely not on ourselves but on God. It is through faith that we can allow our relationship with God to change our personal identity.

Sometimes God gives us special glimpses of His glory in order to strengthen us for our journey of faith. We see this in the lives of many saints who had special revelations of God in order to strengthen them in their trials.

Yet, God calls us to not rely on personal revelations. God wants to see what we are made of. He wants to see if we truly love Him. It is when we faithfully abandon ourselves to God that we discover He not only gives us what we need, but He gives us strength we never knew we had.

“Do not lay your hand on the boy,” said the messenger.
“Do not do the least thing to him.
I know now how devoted you are to God,
since you did not withhold from me your own beloved son.” (Gen 22:12)
In today’s first reading we hear that God put Abraham to the test (Gen 22: 1-18). God also puts us to the test. He wants to see if we truly love Him. Yet, we find that if we are obedient to His Word, He blesses us tremendously.
Again the LORD’s messenger called to Abraham from heaven and said: “I swear by myself, declares the LORD,that because you acted as you did in not withholding from me your beloved son, I will bless you abundantly and make your descendants as countless as the stars of the sky and the sands of the seashore; your descendants shall take possession of the gates of their enemies, and in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing— all this because you obeyed my command. (Gen 22:15-18)

Finally, if we want to share in the transfiguration of our Lord, we must listen to God. 

When our Lord was transfigured the voice of the Father said, “This is my Beloved Son. Listen to Him.” We should listen to our Lord. He says a lot of good stuff in the Gospels. He tells us what marriage is. He explains adultery… He tells us about lust, pride, sloth… He calls us to have faith and to persevere in prayer. Our Lord tells us about all the things we need to do to attain eternal life. Most importantly, Our Lord backs up His words by His cross.

Fr. John Paul Shea 
My brothers and sisters, each one of us is on a journey. The goal of our Christian life is to one day be transfigured into the light and glory of Our Lord. Our Lord has given us the means to get there. The question is, are we willing to pick up our cross?



Would you like to read more homilies from Fr. John Paul Shea? Here is one from the first Sunday of Lent: Climb Aboard the Ark of Our Salvation!


Wednesday, February 25, 2015

LIBERALS ARGUE ABORTION HOMICIDE IS JUSTIFIED


The Moral Battle: 
So What if Killing is Wrong?

By Christopher Ziegler
@CZWriting on Twitter

In my last essay on the subject of abortion, I posed the question I think everyone should have to answer when deciding his or her position: Is a fetus a human life? I said that if our answer to this question was “no” then we have very little reason to be outraged by abortion, but that if our answer was “yes” then we have every reason to be outraged. Around the same time, Michael Novak published an article in Patheos titled Abortion: the intellectual battle has been won. Novak argues that advances in science and medicine since the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court Decision that legalized abortion, Roe vs. Wade, have inarguably answered my question in the affirmative.

At the moment of conception, an individual and unique strand of human DNA is created, one which never existed before and will never exist again. This DNA strand contains the complete instructions for building a person. Advances in medicine now make it possible for premature babies to survive outside the womb at 20 weeks, half the time of a full pregnancy. Meanwhile, ultrasound technology has given us a clearer picture than ever of just how fast life progresses in the womb.

At 22 days, the baby’s heart beats for the first time. It will beat 54 million times before birth. The human brain is sometimes called the last frontier of science, yet this organ makes its first appearance a mere 3 weeks after conception! Now that we know this, those who still believe the old Darwinian folktale that a baby goes through the stages of a fish are deserving of ridicule. As Novak concludes, “This great fact may take a decade or more to become evident to all, but the intellectual underpinnings of the abortion regime have been washed away.”

Let’s not pop any corks just yet. After all, the abortion debate has never really been a question of facts. It is a moral battle between those who see human life as inherently valuable and those who do not. It is another chapter in the enduring American debate over who we define as a person and who we define as a non-person. Indeed, the scientific evidence that abortion ends life does not upset the abortion regime in the least. Their premise remains what it has always been: so what? In fact, this is the basis of an article written by liberal blogger Mary Elizabeth Williams titled, “So what if abortion ends life?”

Published by the progressive blog Salon in
Salon writer Mary Elizabeth Williams
She suffers from melanoma
Please keep her in your prayers
2013, So what if abortion ends life? is a startling example of nihilistic liberalism. Beginning with the statement, “I believe that life starts at conception,” Ms. Williams makes it clear where she stands on the “life” question: “I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life,” she writes. She even chastises pro-choice folks for trying to invent their own definitions of when life begins, which she says leads them to draw “stupid semantic lines in the sand.” Nevertheless, she says this doesn't make her “one iota less solidly pro-choice” and that, in her words, “if by some random fluke I learned today I was pregnant, you bet your ass I’d have an abortion. I’d have the World’s Greatest Abortion.”


She hurls all the usual invective at the pro-life community, scolding us as “wing-nuts” and decrying the “diabolically clever” move of co-opting the word “life.” She hisses at the “sneaky, dirty tricks of the anti-choice lobby” for trying to appropriate what she calls “the concept of life.” She clearly can’t stand the idea that any pro-life person could ever have the audacity to think, “That if we call a fetus a life they can go down the road of making abortion murder.” I suppose it would not help to point out to Ms. Williams that the killing of one human by another is, in fact, the very definition of murder.

 As I said, the abortion debate is at the most
fundamental level a struggle between those who see human life as inherently valuable and those who do not. This comes through clearly when Ms. Williams excoriates what she calls “the sentimental fiction that no one with a heart—and certainly no one who’s experienced the wondrous miracle of family life—can possibly resist tiny fingers and tiny toes growing inside a woman’s body.” The sarcasm makes clear that Ms. Williams regards family life as neither wondrous nor a miracle. I invite the reader to contemplate what a society would look like in which our notions of babies and mothers were generally regarded as “sentimental fictions.”

Despite the vitriol, Ms. Williams’ central point is not a novel one. What she is arguing is simply this: abortion may indeed be a type of homicide—but it is justifiable homicide. To Ms. Williams, the fetus is just collateral damage in the feminist war for equality. Hence, she can’t get all sentimental about life and babies. “Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal,” she writes. The more important thing to her is “the roads that women who have choice get to go down.” For the sake of this progress, she is willing to
think of a human fetus as a “life worth sacrificing.” 

Williams’ case hinges on this statement: “a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides.” But of course a fetus can be a human life with having the same rights as a woman! She is equivocating on what she means by “same rights.” No rational person believes that a fetus and an adult should have the “same rights.” She seems to be saying that the pro-life argument depends on the claim that the fetus should have rights equal to its mother. Again, this is dishonest because she is omitting the difference between natural and civil rights.

Civil rights are the written laws found in the amendments to the US Constitution and in other legislation. Our natural rights are enumerated in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Natural rights do not exist in law because they cannot exist in law. They are, by definition, natural—that is, not man made. We do not have our natural rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness because we are good looking, smart or talented. We do not have them because we are able-bodied or healthy. We do not have them because we are wanted or loved. We have them just because we are human, and nothing more. Civil rights, on the other hand, are legal interpretations which have been derived from our natural rights.

No one seriously argues that a fetus has the right to bear arms or the right to vote or the right to an attorney. No one seriously argues that a fetus is equal to its mother or any other adult in terms of its contribution to society. But that is not the question. The question remains what it has always been: is the fetus a human life? Ms. Williams already answered that question when she said: “Thats what I believe a fetus is: a human life.” But if it is a human life then it is, by definition, entitled to its natural right to human life. If so, then abortion, which takes away that life, is wrong.

Ms. Williams’ fundamental premise that, “A fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides” is false because it is possible for a person to have natural rights without being entitled to civil rights, and a fetus is just such a person. Nor can one person’s civil rights trump another person’s natural right to life without due process, because life is the most fundamental natural right and the basis of all other rights. Perhaps Ms. Williams does not see this because she does not believe there is a difference between natural and civil rights. 

The Declaration of Independence says that our Creator has endowed us with our natural rights. But if there is no Creator then men have not been created in any meaningful sense. This means that men have no essential qualities and are but the purely accidental products of blind forces, hence they can’t be said to naturally possess “inalienable” rights. It follows that rights are nothing more than legal fictions conferred by the powers that be. Hence, according to a purely atheistic view, there is no real distinction between natural and civil rights—all rights being merely civil rights.

Some atheists will undoubtedly argue that this controversy does not matter because we can just choose to respect people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as civil rights even if there is no such thing as natural rights. But there is a problem with this quiet assumption. If humans do not exist by a special act of creation, then there is no basis for drawing a distinction between human life and other forms animal life (other than for purposes of taxonomic classification). 

Peter Singer 
We’re then left to the slippery task of explaining why it’s okay to kill a fetus but not a worm. There are three options: either we’re going to have to respect literally all life; or, conversely, have no respect for any life at all; or, decide by the arbitrary dictates of taste which life we choose to respect and which we don’t. I’m not making this stuff up: atheist ethicist Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton University, actually argues that we should extend human rights to chimps but that infanticide is a-ok.
Infanticide???
He also once argued that bestiality is quite all right, provided that the sex is “mutually satisfying” for both man and beast. Again, I invite the reader to imagine what society would look like if Mr. Singer’s views were widely held.


And there is an additional problem. If there is no God then there is no reason to regard humans as an exceptional species. But when we lose our belief in human exceptionalism we necessarily also lose the view that people are inherently valuable just for being people. We then have to pinpoint the moment in time that they do become valuable, and explain how this can be. Now Ms. Williams makes clear that she believes life begins at conception. She also makes clear that she believes it’s acceptable to kill life even after conception. What her article fails to specify is that magic moment when it becomes not okay to kill life. 

She writes that, “It seems absurd to suggest that the only thing that makes us fully human is the short ride out some lady’s vagina. That distinction may apply neatly legally, but philosophically, surely we can do better.” This same point is often used as a pro-life argument: that it’s absurd that the difference between a person who can be killed lawfully and a person who is protected under the law comes down to a matter of inches. But the recognition of this absurdity sounds ominous coming from the mouth of Ms. Williams, given her stated support for “unrestricted reproductive freedom” (my italics). This would seem to suggest that Ms. Williams would justify infanticide, or what her ilk now likes to refer to as “post-birth abortion.” To be fair, she does not say she supports infanticide, but her argument offers no serious philosophical objection. 

Abortion is wrong because it clearly falls short of the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Atheists often like to boast that they can uphold the Golden Rule, too, without having to believe in the supernatural. I would like to think that this is true—that all people can assent to the objective reason found in the Golden Rule regardless of their personal beliefs. But although atheists like to say this, they do not live up to it when they fail to apply it in the case of abortion. I think our 40th president summed up this situation well when he said, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”
Into the Woods: Christopher Ziegler 

Did you enjoy this post. Read others by Christopher Ziegler:
The Battle for the Identity of Man: A House Divided


To be Human or Not to Be: That is the Question About Abortion



Also on Abortion in this Blog: 
MURDER OF INNOCENTS: Out of Evil Comes a Greater Good

REASONS FOR ABORTION: Fear Tops the List