Another line of reasoning against abortion
Posted January 20, 2011on:
In a post that starts with the horror story out of Philadelphia of the abortionist who is up on murder charges for killing babies born alive, and also a woman or two, Elizabeth Scalia (aka The Anchoress) goes on to discuss several aspects of abortion culture mindset. This, for instance (bold in original):
To approach such people with a Bible and the idea that there was a real child, begotten of God, torn to shreds within the living tissue of its mother, whose soul (her life-force) might then be in peril due to that act, is so profoundly rude and full of “magical thinking” as to inspire mockery and jeering disdain.
To approach approach them with The Tao and the idea that there was a real being, energetically positive, violently destroyed in a burst of extreme, negative energy — energy that remains within the woman and will affect her chi, her lifeforce is also rude. But it also scares them to fury.
Generally the true believers in abortion, very comfortable with dismissing all that unsophisticated Judeo/Christian moralizing, find it much more difficult to respond to those arguing from the side of Eastern philosophy. For one thing, Eastern philosophy — if it is embraced superficially — seems so modern and smart and permissive; it’s not full of that dread word “no,” and so they can’t accept that it might contain an argument against abortion.
For another thing, hey, all that talk about “energy” that’s sort of science-y right? And science is supposed to be respectable in ways theology is not.
Hmmm. Mars Hill comes to mind. If I remember right, Paul met his listeners where they were intellectually, and led up to the truth using reasoning they could follow. Hmmm.