Conversation on Iowa Abortion Bill

Earlier this month, Iowa Governor Kim Reynold signed into law "the heartbeat bill" which prohibits doctors from performing abortions after they've detected fetal heartbeats in pregnant women. This is a great step in removing the scourge of abortion in our country! Of course, the bill is being fought by many, but at the very least, it allowed for some conversation to be had on the subject.

On social media, one news organization asked readers whether or not the "heartbeat bill" was a good thing or not. Discussion on a friend's social media account ensued, and it's helpful to see at least a little headway made with the second of two people I dialogued with. My words will be in blue, one interlocutor's in red, the other in green, and other commenters in various colors.

Tom: Can’t get behind a bill that says what a woman can do with her body and decisions.

Nicholas: I wouldn't get behind a bill that says that either. What the bill proposes is the protection of the female's (or male's) body that lives in a mother's uterus from outside harm. As for "decisions", there are certain "decisions" that should not be protected by the law.

François Riss- Lullaby

Dialogue With a Pro-Choice Bodily Autonomist

I feel myself forced to agree with something many people (at least in the Catholic world) have observed: dialogue is dead. or at least, it's nearly dead. If one isn't devolving into personal attacks, then they're going in a hundred different directions, or ignoring legitimate questions in the course of a discussion. Below is a prime example of such a "dialogue".

Rare is the person who can be intellectually honest and actually have a legitimate conversation. It has happened before, in my experience... but man alive, is it rare. What you will read below stems from a meme that was posted on social media. The pro-choice person went on many different tangents, so I'll only include relevant portions of the thread. His words will be in red, mine in blue, and other persons' in varying colors. As you'll see as you're reading, I post this (and kept engaging this person) because some people may have encountered his arguments in the past and not known what to say. As this Facebook page gets a lot of traffic, I at least wanted to reply for their benefit, if not my interlocutor's, so as to show how ridiculous his position is. That fact will become increasingly clear as the conversation progresses.

The meme in question

Tom: I didn't realize you were being forced to have abortions.

Harriet: Each baby is forced to die without a choice in the matter.

Tom: "Baby"? I thought we were talking about fetuses. Do people abort babies now?

Harry: Oops, Tom has apparently swallowed the lie that fetuses aren't also babies.

The Commonality Between Millennials and Catholicism

In my latest essay for Christ Is Our Hope magazine, I was able to look at the similarities between secular millennials and the Catholic Church. You may be surprised, but there is some crossover. You can read the full article here, and see a short preview below:

One would probably be justified in calling the secularism that runs rampant in today’s culture a religion. Despite that, there’s actually hope here, as many secular millennials are the type of people who still want to serve others and find fulfillment. It could be that secularism, surprisingly, gets a few things right. As Venerable Fulton J. Sheen once said, “Truth is like [a] circle. It has 360 degrees, and that fullness would be found… in Christ’s mystical Body. Now we are to think of every religion under the sun having something good. Maybe some religion that started this afternoon… that’s got some good in it. We only have 10 degrees, but it’s got some good.” This non-religion that so many of my peers practice also has some good, as evidenced by their desire to help others. But they’ve only got 10 degrees of the truth. How can we bring those “nones” into the fullness of the truth proclaimed by Christ’s Church?

Christ Among the Doctors- Anton Kern

Essay on Alternatives to Planned Parenthood: Why Pro-Lifers Are Against PP

I recently had the opportunity to write a guest article for the pretty awesome website Secular Prolife. These people are dedicated to protecting the unborn, and while we hope for their conversion one day, they are secular and typically agnostic. This sit has proved to be a great starting point for talking to people who think that all pro-lifers are only of such an opinion because they are religious. Rarely, if ever, have I used a religious argument to voice my opposition to abortion. Anyone can do so using natural reason, as the wonderful people at Secular Prolife have. Below is a link to my first essay with the site. A short selection can be found below:

Here’s the thing that those who support Cecile Richards and her associates need to know about their pro-life friends. Even if we were to accept the bogus claim that only 3% of the services done at Planned Parenthood are abortions, how could one in good conscience support an organization that purposefully ends the lives of human beings? Even if that number was 1% or .5% of the time, the percentage would be too high. Why? Because the vast majority of people in this world consider the purposeful and willful killing of a member of the human race to be immoral and wrong.

Read the full article here. 

Separating Brainwashing From Evangelizing Children

I came across an awesome article by soon-to-be-deacon Joe Heschmeyer the other day, where he addressed the following question: "Is teaching children religion brainwashing?" Apparently, as he mentioned in his essay, 86% of respondents to this question on Debate.org thought the answer was "yes". How profoundly sad. Religion, once seen as a virtue (and still seen as one by the Church, see CCC 1807) by virtually all people in the Western world, is now seen as a vice, and has even been called "child abuse" by certain proponents of the new atheism; of which I would argue is a new religion in itself... but I digress.

The entire article is an excellent read, and I urge everyone to read it before continuing. Here's a good sampling from Heschmeyer's essay:

As Christians, we’re called to proclaim the Gospel to the entire world (Matthew 28:19-20), but in a special way, to teach the next generation about the faith. The Shema Yisrael, the core of Jewish morning and evening prayer, comes from Deuteronomy 6:4-7: 

"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you this day shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise." 

So you can’t be a faithful Christian (or Jew) and not teach the faith to your children. But it’s more than that. Christianity isn’t just your dad sitting around musing about what the afterlife might or might not be like. The God of the Universe entered history in the Person of Jesus Christ, and He taught, died, and rose from the dead. And Christians don’t just believe in this as as an abstract idea, but have a personal relationship with this same God. So it’s not just speculation on the Christian parents’ part: it’s rationally trusting the expert, the one Person qualified to tell us these things. It’s also sharing the most meaningful relationship you have with your loved ones. 

And finally, not teaching your kids still teaches them something. If you really believed Christianity was the most important truth in the world, if you really believed it was the surest way to knowing God and to happiness in this life and eternity in Heaven, you wouldn’t hesitate to share it with the people you loved most (especially those entrusted to your care for formation: your children).

That same selection from Deuteronomy is something that I often see included in my recitation of Compline (Night Prayer) at the end of each day. It's a beautiful thing to reflect on, and whenever I read it, I think about my own kids. Heschmeyer brings up a great point; why would you hesitate to share the faith that comes from Truth Himself with your own children? This essay is a great answer to the question that was posed on Debate.org, but I'd like to add a couple of points to my own, piggybacking off of what Heschmeyer has written.

Jesus Falling Under the Cross

Discussion on Abortion and "Personhood" With a Utilitarian

Recently, the ever-awesome Secular Pro Life posted a guest blog by a woman who suffers from turner Syndrome. An excerpt from the article is below:

"Instead of turning 30 reminding me that I'm getting old, it reminds me I'm living—and it's a wonderful feeling. I will wear every grey hair and every wrinkle as a badge of honour. I get to enjoy a life that's all too often left to 'choice' and deemed 'not worth living'—without even being given a chance. 

"My mom is 'pro-choice' and believes it should have been up to her whether or not to abort me if she had known. I'm so thankful that my diagnosis was safe with me in the womb and that I'm alive—instead of my life being reduced to a statistic."

A heart wrenching reality this woman has to live with, that her mom would actually say these things to her own daughter. But what really disturbed me was one of the commenters on the article. This man, from the UK, was a self-professed utilitarian. This was the first time I really was able to get into a deep conversation with one such person. While his ideas are scary, perhaps even monstrous, my interlocutor was pleasant throughout our discussion, never threw any personal attacks, and explained his point of view in an intelligent manner. But it's his worldview that is problematic. While reading through this dialogue, one will see that not only does he reject the personhood of most life in the womb, but also of some people who may be in a vegetative or comatose state, as can be seen by him saying they "often resume personhood". His comments will be in red, mine in blue, and various other commenters in different colors. My interlocutor's initial reply to the article itself is below:

Tom: This is merely confused counterfactual thinking. She'd never have suffered with the thoughts of having not existed or regretted her missed existence had she have been aborted in the first-trimester do it's a moot point.

What Does Gender Really Mean When It Comes to the Transgender Question?

Recently, my friend posted a meme on social media which depicted a person holding up a sign saying "My genitals do not define my gender". On the bottom half of the meme, the following statements were also made:

"My IQ does not define my intelligence."
"My physique doesn't define my fitness."
"My semen doesn't define my child."
"Go on. Make some more stupid cases."

While I thought the meme was a bit crude, I did think it got a valid point across. Another person made a comment, indicating that the view given in the meme was ignorant in his view. The discussion we had is below, with my words in blue and my interlocutor's in red. I think the discussion we had was cordial, as we both felt very differently on the subject, but it never devolved into ad hominem attacks or other insulting banter. I hope to go deeper into such a discussion in the future, but I'm thankful for the time my interlocutor took to engage me and the time they took to read my point of view. Our discussion follows the jump:

Creation of Adam- Michelangelo 

If Planned Parenthood Is Defunded, Will FQHC's Be Affordable For All Women?

Recently, Live Action posted a story on their website exposing the myth that has been circulating around pro-choice circles. That myth is that if Planned Parenthood (PP) is defunded, women will not be able to get accessible healthcare, and the alternatives will be too expensive. Of course, we have to define healthcare, as I (and many others) would argue that abortions and contraceptives are not healthcare. But the biggest issue here, of course, is abortion. Several lively conversations ensued on public social media, and I interacted with two people. Well one, I suppose would be more accurate. And even that one wasn't interested in having a conversation of much substance. What I noticed, in the replies to this story, was that many Americans who are pro-choice and/or support PP are incapable of rational discourse; they are incapable of interacting with ideas other than their own, and instead throw around ad hominem attacks, or simply dismiss any point made with a wave of the hand since they can't come up with a rebuttal. For if they did offer a rebuttal, that would mean they would have to consider the points made by their interlocutor, and it appears that it's too much for many people to contemplate for even a second that they're position on a matter as grave as abortion is wrong.

Christ Blessing Little Children- Marie Ellenrieder

The first "exchange" I had was in response to someone simply posting a meme in reply to the article. In response to my and others' comments, all the person could do was dismiss everything said by saying a condescending "Oh honeys!" This is where intelligent debate dies. Less and less it seems that two people can exchange ideas and have a thoughtful conversation, and instead immediately dismiss the opposing sides thoughts. This is different from finding your opponents logic in actual error. We can't just dismiss someone's opinion, no matter how ridiculous we find it. We still have to interact with it, and not just declare "you're wrong", but prove and demonstrate why this is so.

The other dialogue took place with a woman who felt that Live Action was spreading "lies" and that women would never be able to afford visiting an FQHC (Federally Qualified Health Center). She was mistaken. I'll post my response to the first young woman, followed by pseudo-dialogue I and others had with the second woman immediately after. My words will be in blue, my interlocutor's in red, and other people in various colors.

On Gorillas and Human Children

You know what's really sickening about this whole Cincinnati Zoo situation? That fact that so many people seem to care more about a gorilla than a human boy. That we anthropomorphize an ape and are callous to the plight of our fellow man. I have seen so much vitriol showered upon the parents of this boy, and so much sadness expressed for the death of an animal, yet no one has talked about how this traumatic situation has affected (and will CONTINUE to) affect this little 4 year old boy. This is something that will live with this boy forever and you can be sure that he will have issues that will be prevalent throughout his life due to his 10 minute ordeal in the gorilla's enclosure. Instead of anthropomorphizing a gorilla, we should be worried about the mental (and physical health) of this scared little boy, a human being.

Because of internet anonymity, it seems everyone on various blogs and news outlet websites has become an armchair judge, jury and executioner. There aren't enough facts to go on to call these parents "negligent", and there aren't enough facts to mock the mother who called out to her boy that she loved him by saying "if she loved him why'd she let him get in the enclosure. Nor is it fair to say that these parents are worthy of the "Darwin award" and this 4 year old boy won't make it to adulthood with these parents. These are all comments I've read by people who are making a knee jerk reaction to the situation. Watch the video below and get the facts. Did you know that this boy also had a 7 or 8 year old sister who was horrified at what had happened, and saw the gorilla get shot as her little brother was in between the gorilla's legs at the time of the shooting? Could it be that the parents were tending to this little girl and took their eyes off the boy for a second? If your a parent of multiple kids (as I am) you know that this might happen occasionally, God forbid, and it doesn't make you a negligible parent.

Discussing the Differences Between Transubstantiation and the Sacramental Union

There aren't too many Lutherans that I know in my life, and those that I do are either former Lutherans or the practice of their faith isn't one that has many outward signs. That's why I was pleasantly surprised to have a great conversation with a Lutheran who belongs to the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church. In response to a meme on the different ways that various religions describe the Real Presence in the Eucharist, this person took the time to explain what Lutherans (at least those who claim to be LCMS) actually believe. While we know as Catholics that Lutherans don't possess valid sacraments, we are both close in our theology regarding the Eucharist. This was a very productive and informative discussion we had, and a very civil one as well. Below is the following conversation, with some closing thoughts by me after. My words will be in blue, and my Lutheran friends's (we'll call him John) in red. There were many people taking part in this conversation, but I'll just focus on the relevant parts of John's points and our the conversation between the two of us:

The Victory of Eucharistic Truth over Heresy- Peter Paul Rubens

Discussion With Pro-Choice Advocates on the Beginning of Life

As many are probably aware, today was the annual March for Life in Washington D.C. Even with the impending blizzard coming upon the Northeast, thousands of people from all over the nation came together calling for an end to the horrors of abortion. I even heard that popular stars such as Kelsey Grammer made an appearance. Anyways, I recently had the opportunity to have a bit of dialogue with someone who calls herself pro-choice in a Facebook com-box post. 

I jumped into the conversation a little late, where a few pro-lifers were already responding to this woman's objections. The main objection among them, was that life did not begin at conception, and when pressed, it was really hard to find out when exactly life does begin... that is, objectively and not subjectively. The discussion began from a meme talking about how a mother was showing her daughter her own pre-natal photos, while the mother referred to the daughter as a "clump of cells" Until she decided at birth she was a "human being". So the question of the whole meme was "When does life begin?" Our conversation starts with the pro-choice woman's answer. I've edited the conversation for brevity and have changed names (except my own, still Nicholas) and have also labeled each person by color. My posts will be in blue, Jo's will be in red, Mary's in green, Tom's in orange, and Anne's in purple.

March for Life 2013

Another Reason Why Surrogacy Objectifies Women... and Denies Personhood to Children

Sometimes I have the urge to look around secular news sites. I know, it's an urge I shouldn't give into as much as I do; there's only so much drivel from Yahoo! News a person can take. Usually something catches my eye that disgusts me as I try to keep abreast of current affairs in our country and across the world, but this story in particular made me absolutely sick. Apparently, as publications such as the Washington Post and Time Magazine report, a surrogate mother carrying the triplets of a single father was threatened to abort one of the fetuses growing inside her, or else suffer the consequences of legal, monetary damages. How sad is this?!

To think, in a world where we often hear cries of "My body, my choice!"... we know have a woman who realizes what's inside her is a life. A human life. And she does not want to extinguish that life. Save me the notes about how she may have "signed a contract" and now she's "legally obligated" to have one of the babies aborted. Is someone really going to force this woman to have an abortion? Is that really what our country has come to? Fortunately, in this case, the father has decided to respect the surrogate mother's wishes after threatening legal action, and at least for the time being claims that he will raise all three children. But how sad is that? Let it sink in a minute... this dad wanted to kill one of his children. Specifically the one that was not a twin, because one of the embryos split into two, making identical twins next to their fraternal triplet sibling.

Saint Joseph and Child Jesus- Robert la Longe

But has that sunk in? How will that father look at his child? What will happen if that child learns that their father wanted to kill them in the womb? Or perhaps the more important question is, how can any father arbitrarily decide which of his three children are murdered? This has happened in cases where all the fetuses are fraternal siblings as well, and this is where we get the PC term of "embryo reduction. It's like we're living in some dystopian sci-fi novel... but even authors like Ray Bradbury and Walter Miller could have never predicted the sheer inhumanity of people in what was their near future.

And then this all brigns up the thorny issue of surrogacy in the United States. Obviously, I think it should be illegal in all cases, but we have to be realistic here in a society that often sees nothing wrong with "helping" a couple. But then again many countries, including some from Europe, have actually banned all surrogacy, such as Pakistan, Iceland, Finland, France and Italy. At the very least, the wombs of our women should not be for sale. Many countries only permit "altruistic surrogacy", meaning that the surrogate mother cannot be paid for her services. Some countries that allow ONLY altruistic surrogacy include Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. Countries like India and the US are the most liberal. Even though some states in the US ban surrogacy (such as Michigan), many states are safe havens. Why can so many other countries realize what a bad idea surrogacy for pay is, yet the US just keeps on trucking, even with horrible cases like the one in question? Perhaps prayers for conversion are our best bet. But maybe if more stories like this keep coming up in the news, our lawmakers will have to take action sooner rather than later. One can only hope, because the lives and dignity of both women and children are at stake.

How A Black Cat Tried to Discredit Philosophy

So the other day as I was perusing my news feed, I came across something that made me laugh. No, it wasn't a cat video, but it did involve a feline. Luckily, I've blocked just about everyone from my news feed. It's not even an exaggeration. I just get so tired of seeing updates on food, selfies, and especially seeing all the hateful rhetoric, polemics, and unintelligent memes that is used to insult Christ and Christians alike. Apparently I missed one, because this ridiculous meme came through which tried to compare metaphysics and the like with science. Perhaps you've seen it before:

In the running for most unintelligent meme ever...?

Although I've seen others say so, this meme is not clever in the slightest. The variation I saw took a much more condescending tone ending with "looking for a black cat with a f***ing flashlight." What a great way to get a point across. Anyway, it shows a complete disregard for what all these subject matters pertain to, and all it does is make very apparent that whoever created this meme doesn't adhere to what science actually stands for, but scientism. Let's look a little closer at these claims made, and see why they are so easy to debunk once we try to think a little bit.