Sunday, March 4, 2012

My Reasoning Against Destructive Errors

This is just a comment that I left in response to a person posting as "Anonymous" on someone else's blog. I wanted to share it on my own blog in order to get my message out to more people than just this one person~

Anonymous,

I, too, am glad that you have reasonable moral limits, and I do believe that people in all areas of the spectrum can agree that late term abortions and infanticide are hideous and must be fought. However.. Some things that I was thinking as I read through your post:

Your argument is a very classic one for someone in our modern age of desensitized conscience. It poses a lot of problems to society at large. Even if you don't believe in quote "a magic soul," it is in the best interest of humanity to base our actions on the presupposition that there is intangible worth in any human being at any age or stage of development, regardless of "practical" or "scientific" value, function, or likeness. Why? Because what you're essentially saying is that human value and worth is determined by some exterior action or nature that 1) must be 'observed' in order to be 'recognized' by other human beings, and 2) completely denies any intrinsic value in the human being. Now, this order of thinking may not show its bad consequences for humanity at large right away, but all you have to do is contemplate the consequences for humanity and you begin to see how problematic it is. Once you fail to recognize intrinsic worth of the human being as a person interiorly, without recourse to "scientific observation," any human person of any age can be judged to be a "potential person" simply due to disability, mental illness, or any other real or contrived outward justification of observable humanity. This is 1) where the rubber meets the road, the sacred meets the scientific, and where the God concept (ie Supreme Value) meets man, 2) is a radical departure from the most noble and necessary basic spiritual moors of all cultures and all human beings regardless of religion, and 3) represents a callousness of conscience that could be the very ruin of humanity.


Think this through for a moment. Humanity is continually moving into more and more knowledge and more and more technological capability. The Scientific revolution has, in about three or four hundred years, completely revolutionized how human beings interact with the physical world. These things like recognition of inherent humanity are absolutely vital to all human society because they set the precedent of whether mankind is going to preserve his sanity, his view of inherent spiritual dignity not based on any outside observance or approval, and his understanding of himself. I completely agree with Chris B in what he said about erring on the side of caution- to be so callous regarding inherent and intrinsic worth in humanity so as to support the destruction of fetuses because 'we know better now, we're scientific, educated, advanced, progressive people living in a progressive age, we observe that there is no physical worth about this genetic tissue and equate it to a frog embryo,' is in my opinion an inexcusable and dangerous playing of God; it's the sort of lack of conscience that will lead humanity, with all of its vast array of tools and technological abilities, into a very dark place where we will no longer recognize ourselves five hundred or a thousand years hence. It is basically saying that just because we have the ability to scientifically understand the physical plane of existence of the mystery of human conception, therefore that means we have the right and privilege to assign the inherent and intrinsic worth of that developing human being.

I don't consider it a religiously exclusive thing to see this development and attitude as bad, I think that any rational man or woman who takes the time to meditate on what this callous, conscience-free, "modern, scientific, and progressive" attitude of spurning every sacred thing until it is reduced to mere physicality, and of implicitly declaring that human value is something agreed on by other humans (a concept that I think most reasonable and moral people will abhor if they think it through) and not recognized as an intrinsic dignity that is transcendent and inherent, will come to realize that the consequences of those beliefs endanger all humanity, and our own societal and cultural development, into the future of the Earth. I think that free exercise of religion and spirituality simply cannot be used to justify this, at some point human civilization is going to have to make a stand as to whether or not it is going to accept the consequences of this radical freedom, or whether it will act in the best interests of humanity and "provide new guard for our future security" as mankind.

~Jonathan







"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... That was the True Light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not."- Gospel According to St. John, chapter one


May the Mind of God, Eternal Reason Himself, continue to guide and enlighten every man that is born into the world, so that we may work together in a common knowledge of the Truth that sets men free. This Way, this Truth, this Life, the Only-Begotten of the Father, He who so loved humanity that He assumed humanity into Himself in the person of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Jesus Christ our Lord, is the Prince of Peace and Reason Himself. May we all follow Reason and obey His precepts on our conscience, that we as humanity may come to experience His peace. To the Lord Jesus Christ be all glory in the Church in all ages, world without end. Amen.

3 comments:

  1. Your reasoning seems very clear and well-composed to me, Jonathan. This is an issue fraught with peril when discussing with non-believers and I think you met the challenge well. However, there is a whole world of authoritative defense behind you. Take this for example:

    'But another very grave crime is to be noted, Venerable Brethren, which regards the taking of the life of the offspring hidden in the mother's womb. Some wish it to be allowed and left to the will of the father or the mother; others say it is unlawful unless there are weighty reasons which they call by the name of medical, social, or eugenic "indication." Because this matter falls under the penal laws of the state by which the destruction of the offspring begotten but unborn is forbidden, these people demand that the "indication," which in one form or another they defend, be recognized as such by the public law and in no way penalized. There are those, moreover, who ask that the public authorities provide aid for these death-dealing operations, a thing, which, sad to say, everyone knows is of very frequent occurrence in some places.

    'As to the "medical and therapeutic indication" to which, using their own words, we have made reference, Venerable Brethren, however much we may pity the mother whose health and even life is gravely imperiled in the performance of the duty allotted to her by nature, nevertheless what could ever be a sufficient reason for excusing in any way the direct murder of the innocent? This is precisely what we are dealing with here. Whether inflicted upon the mother or upon the child, it is against the precept of God and the law of nature: "Thou shalt not kill:"[50] The life of each is equally sacred, and no one has the power, not even the public authority, to destroy it. It is of no use to appeal to the right of taking away life for here it is a question of the innocent, whereas that right has regard only to the guilty; nor is there here question of defense by bloodshed against an unjust aggressor (for who would call an innocent child an unjust aggressor?); again there is not question here of what is called the "law of extreme necessity" which could even extend to the direct killing of the innocent. Upright and skillful doctors strive most praiseworthily to guard and preserve the lives of both mother and child; on the contrary, those show themselves most unworthy of the noble medical profession who encompass the death of one or the other, through a pretense at practicing medicine or through motives of misguided pity.'

    - continued -

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'All of which agrees with the stern words of the Bishop of Hippo in denouncing those wicked parents who seek to remain childless, and failing in this, are not ashamed to put their offspring to death: "Sometimes this lustful cruelty or cruel lust goes so far as to seek to procure a baneful sterility, and if this fails the fetus conceived in the womb is in one way or another smothered or evacuated, in the desire to destroy the offspring before it has life, or if it already lives in the womb, to kill it before it is born. If both man and woman are party to such practices they are not spouses at all; and if from the first they have carried on thus they have come together not for honest wedlock, but for impure gratification; if both are not party to these deeds, I make bold to say that either the one makes herself a mistress of the husband, or the other simply the paramour of his wife."

    'What is asserted in favor of the social and eugenic "indication" may and must be accepted, provided lawful and upright methods are employed within the proper limits; but to wish to put forward reasons based upon them for the killing of the innocent is unthinkable and contrary to the divine precept promulgated in the words of the Apostle: Evil is not to be done that good may come of it.

    'Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven.' -- Casti Connubii, Pope Pius XI

    :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your compliments, and thank you for the wonderful and enlightening quote from the Holy Father :) may his spirit pray for us before the Lord our God, that we be not judged in His wrath along with those who sacrifice their children to powers that they know not, and who shed innocent blood, which cries for vengeance.

      Delete