by Jody Nagel
Dear [Fundamentalist Pro-lifer],
A pretty gruesome abortion story that you sent to me.
I wonder why you don't view the horror of abortion from a perspective relating politics WITH theology. One has to decide what one values the most: individual adult freedom or infant's lives.
It is claimed God allows suffering and evil on this earth because of His supposed desire to allow man to be free, and, therefore, for fellowship with God to be the result of that freedom. Enforced fellowship is apparently not desirable to God. I am not sure I can accept this explanation and paradigm, however.
- If you view individual freedom (in ALL areas of life) as more important than infant's lives, than I see no way out of the nightmare of continued gruesome infant killings.
- If you view infant's lives as more important than individual freedom, than you better adjust your political thinking. It's plain as day. The "freedom" of American democracy has GOT TO GO. And if you continue to support American democracy, I don't want to hear you whine about killed infants. Democracy can't help but to degenerate to the point of killing infants, and to perpetuate and amplify all the other modern atrocities.
Being against child killings MEANS to be against individual freedom, MEANS to be against democracy, and MEANS to embrace authority. And it does NOT mean to content oneself merely with some abstract belief in the authority of God, and His ability to change OTHERS. We are "Gods instruments", and God is nothing otherwise. If you do not take a stand against the perversion called American democratic "freedom", don't bother taking a stand against abortion.
1. Supposedly God is omnipotent.
2. Supposedly God desires freewill fellowship with man.
3. Supposedly God can not dispense with human suffering, evil, and death within the context of human freedom.
At least ONE of these three statements, therefore, is false.
Individual freedom, in my opinion, is an absurd thing to desire for mankind. It must be fought AGAINST, or our species will go EXTINCT. Starting with the children.
A "Pro-Life" position will eventually be faced with the choice of either to allow the killing of infants, or to begin a Civil War and kill the defenders of infant murder. A "Pro-Life" position must fight to rid the world of capitalism: the economic structure that MAXIMIZES greed and MINIMIZES love. In America, people are too rich and comfortable to engage in real sacrifice necessary for loving others. Giving away excess wealth does not constitute sacrifice, charity, or love. Love cares about long-term good of an individual or the whole population, even at the expense of short-term pain. War in the short-term may be more loving than allowing tens of thousands of regularly murdered babies. I would prefer killing an infant killer over allowing them to kill infants. It would be more loving to the whole human race.
Greed, legally enabled and amplified by capitalistic economics, is what motivates the killing of infants for their tissue. If you are against killing infants for their tissue, you are against capitalism. If you still claim that capitalism is superior to the "inefficiencies" of socialism, then you are in favor of murdering infants for their tissue, and for any other convenient use of other humans for one's own selfish purposes. If you are not willing to go to war to eliminate those that desire legalized abortions, then you might as well simply concede and turn your head away from the subject of murdered children. The military-industrial complex, supporting capitalism and "freedom" and abortion and geriatricide and the punishing of all who defend and believe in ANY principal differing from the current power structure, has won hands down, if you, me, and all other pro-lifers are not willing to organize and fight. And if you think that you can rid the world of abortion while somehow keeping some form of democracy and capitalism, you have understood nothing.
Being against abortion perhaps is not REALLY what pro-lifers want. Or is it?
Dr. Jody Nagel, Atheist Pro-lifer
March 18, 2000
An attempt to rouse passion.