Why Marriage is Not a Water Fountain, via Public Discourse

At The Public Discourse, by Anthony Esolen.

Five stars! One of the best pieces I’ve read on the subject of same-sex “marriage” and why opposition to redefining marriage is not analogous to discrimination or segregation. Simply excellent, thoughtful, and solid. Would that this sort of thorough thinking would spread through our culture like a welcome winter flu. We would be healed.

An excerpt:

“Marriage is Not a Water Fountain”

Conjugal Marriage: Not Peculiar, But Universal

“Now, none of these conditions characterizes our efforts to restore and protect the institution of marriage. If anything, they characterize some of our opponents in the debate. Let us see why.

First, the idea that marriage requires a man and a woman is not peculiar to us. It is universal in human culture. Its universality is based upon the obvious functions of the reproductive organs, and the obvious need to propagate the species. We may add, too, that in a multitude of manifestations, wide in variety but recognizably of the same kind, what it means to be a man and what it means to be a woman are also universal in human culture. That too is observed and accepted as natural and good, most nobly embodied in the complementarity of marriage, man and woman.

What is peculiar? The idea that there are no such things as manhood and womanhood; that the sexes are empty of significance, except in the sole case of what must then be considered a mere irrational and inexplicable desire: that this particular male must have another male, and this particular female must have another female. We can pretend that a man can possibly marry another man, because we have shut our eyes to what marriage is, and what men and women are.

That means that we have to shore up a lie. Suppose I say, “A marriage by our bodily nature requires a man and a woman. If we think about it for a moment, it also requires a vow of permanence and exclusivity, because marriage involves the time-transcending act that brings a new generation into being.” What about that is not true? When a man and a woman unite in the congress of the sexes, that is exactly what they are doing, even if they try to thwart its natural result. Nothing in human reality is comparable to that act.”

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2014/09/13730/

 

The Screwtape Epilogue: Pastor Pens Letter Welcoming Planned Parenthood

The Rev. Walter Baer of the Episcopal Church of the Annunciation in New Orleans has penned a letter that could be an epilogue from the C.S. Lewis classic. Screwtape would be proud of this one. The words practically slither off the screen.

Rev. Baer is pleased to welcome the new Planned Parenthood clinic to his area, and wishes to extend his heartfelt support for the clinic and thank them for all the good service they will provide his community. He writes:

“I write to express my support for the right of the clinic to be there and to serve the reproductive needs of our community.” (italics mine)

The business that kills babies for profit has a right to exist? (But those babies do not.)

In the earliest days of Christianity, the Christians set themselves apart from the rest of their culture in many ways, in particular, they refused to expose their infants. They refused to set the “unwanted” or “unplanned” infants on rocks in the desert heat to be scorched and picked apart by animals and birds of prey. But you, Rev. Baer, support the right of the clinic that is the modern-day equivalent of that barbaric ancient practice. And you consider that Christian behavior?

“Lack of access to contraception can be among the chief causes of abortion, to which some are forced to turn in tragic cases.”

First, this myth that contraception is hard to come by is absurd and not worthy of any intelligent person. Birth control is widely available and ridiculously easy to access. The only “lack” is the will of contraception-using women to pay for it themselves.

Second, statistically more than half of women seeking an abortion were using contraception when they became pregnant. More than 25% of women have had more than one abortion, while using contraception. Clearly, contraception is not the answer to reducing elective abortions.

Finally, you are right, Rev. Baer, to say that some women are forced into abortion. Many, many women are coerced and bullied into abortion by family members or partners, and underage girls are literally forced into having abortions by their adult abusers. Or have you not heard?

The very organization you warmly welcome into your community has a history of covering up child rape. They are in it for the money, after all, and not interested in stopping the flow of pregnant girls into their clinics. Who cares about child rape? Who really cares about those girls? Just kill their babies and send them back to their abusers. Just means more money down the road.

“The church supports the right of a woman to make her own choices in these matters, while rejecting abortion as a means of birth control or mere convenience.”

Do fathers have any rights, Rev. Baer? Does the child have any right? Say, to live?

“The official position of our church is that all human life is sacred from its inception until death.”

Sacred, but disposable? Sacred, but not worthy of protection? Sacred, but having no right to exist? Sacred, but not so sacred that it can’t be “terminated” at will? A very strange definition of sacred, indeed.

“While we acknowledge that in this country, it is the legal right of every woman to have a medically safe abortion, as Christians we believe strongly that if this right is exercised, it should be used only in extreme situations.”

Planned Parenthood does not make millions of dollars every year off the “extreme situations.” Abortion is their endless gravy train. No reason to abort is a bad reason for them.

“We emphatically oppose abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection or any reason of mere convenience.”

Why? Isn’t it a woman’s reproductive right? Who decides what is “mere convenience” anyway? And who are you to limit a woman’s exercise of her rights? Now you want to set moral restrictions on this precious “right”?

“The Episcopal Church expresses its unequivocal opposition to any legislative, executive or judicial action on the part of local, state or national governments that abridges the right of a woman to reach an informed decision about the termination of pregnancy or that would limit the access of a woman to safe means of acting on her decision.”  (italics mine)

So, which is it, Reverend? You can’t have it both ways. Either you support, unequivocally, a woman’s unrestricted “right” to abortion at any time for any reason, or you don’t. You can’t place your own ethical restrictions on the decision to abort while still insisting that local, state and national governments cannot do the same.

Now for Rev. Baer’s real money-line. This is the one that truly gives him away.

“As a parish church that is named for the most wondrous conception in history, we welcome the Planned Parenthood clinic to the neighborhood. It will serve a very important role in education, health screenings, contraception, and, when necessary, a safe place for the termination of a pregnancy.” (italics mine)

First, when is it necessary to kill a child, Rev. Baer? Tell me. Tell me when it is necessary to kill a defenseless and innocent child? I want to know.

Second, you are nothing more than a coward hiding behind the euphemisms of the culture of death. You speak of terminating a pregnancy as though there is no life being terminated. You ignore the child and the murder of that child. You disregard the humanity of the child in the womb and speak only of pregnancy. There is no such thing as pregnancy without the existence of a new human being; a human child created by the God you claim to know and worship. You claim for yourself the right to determine who lives and who dies.

And for the record, childbirth successfully terminates pregnancy, without killing.

But for me, Reverend, what makes your letter nothing but utterly wicked is your attempt to correlate the Divine conception of the Son of God in the immaculate womb of Mary with the killing-for-profit, the preying upon innocents, the destruction of helpless, tiny children done by Planned Parenthood every single day.

In that, the serpent is revealed. Satan is terrified of the Virgin Mother of God, for from her came the Incarnate Word that is his total defeat. He despises her humble fiat that ushered in the salvation of the world. It is truly wicked to twist and distort the Annunciation in order to mask the evil of Planned Parenthood and try to elevate it to some place of admiration.

What you have forgotten, Reverend, but what Satan has not, is that Mary’s foot is firmly, eternally atop his crushed head.

Yes, your words are purely wicked and your letter was written with the spirit and influence of the evil one. You are aiding and abetting a greedy, dishonest, predatory corporation. You have attempted to convey upon them the honor of good service and nobility, which makes you either pitifully deceived and blind or a stone-cold liar. Perhaps both.

I realize you’re hardly the only “Christian” pastor in America to support the evil of abortion, and I would say the same to anyone who professes to be a follower of Jesus Christ and a shepherd of souls. The blood of innocent children is on your hands. The agonizing wounds of untold numbers of mothers is partly yours to account for.

Women and children deserve far better than to be brutalized, exploited, and killed by abortion. You claim to be a servant of Christ — you have no excuse whatsoever for raising your voice in support of the slaughter of innocent children. You have no excuse whatsoever for not doing everything in your power to stop the slaughter.