Friday 25 April 2008

Suzanne takes you down to her place near the river

Those of you in the over 50 crowd that Suzanne Fortin sees as a very different group from her own will recognize that my title is taken from an old Leonard Cohen song that still gets played a lot on the golden oldie stations.

At any rate, Suzanne Fortin (the eminence grise behind Big Blue Wave) has been providing interesting and useful critique of certain thoughts that I have been posting lately. I have quibbles with some of her ideas, and downright opposition to others. But we are definitely in the same hymnbook if not on the same page.

I would like to make the briefest of comments concerning a few of her thoughts posted today. As I'm rushing out in about half an hour, and because I usually take 2 to 3 hours to compose a post, this will lack my usual incisive commentary!!

I think this is the attitude of the over-50 crowd, of amateur pro-lifers. I feel that the younger generation is better prepared and more optimistic.

While not intending to be tactless I'm sure, Suzanne has fallen into a bit of habit of stereotyping some of us outside her crowd as too old and too remote. I've been following this whole issue since long before Morgentaler was making headlines. I was picketing an abortion clinic when Suzanne was still learning arithmetic. I may be 60 now Suzanne, but believe it or not, I can still read, I can still reason, and I am still open to learning. I'm also still waiting with bated breath to see where the young professionals have made a big difference.

In the meantime, I will have to be content with my memories of focusing on the Viet Nam War, environmentalism, sexism/sexual harassment, and consumer rights. Sigh.

We don’t have to convince the pro-abortion activists. Most people are not so dogmatic about abortion that, left to themselves, they will not look at the other side of the coin. We cannot let the pro-aborts define the terms of the debate. We’ve been doing that for too long. I have found that the most effective way for arguing for fetal rights is to simply invoke commonly accepted values and use plain English, logic and good biological science. That’s not right or left. That’s not secular or religious. That’s just smart. People who are not already ideologically committed to the abortion-free-for-all ideology will give your position some consideration if you do this, and some even change their minds.

There is something to what Suzanne says here about the common person vs. the convinced ideologue. But as long as the mass media and the politicians are held captive by the pro-abortionists, Joe and Joan Sixpack will continue to be fed a steady diet of highly distorted material. Here at Abbotsford (BC) Right to Life we have been sponsoring a series of free public lectures on various life issues, the most recent being last night on Robert Latimer and mercy killing. Unfortunately, getting hands on enough money to do the kind of on-the-ground educating that is necessary is extremely difficult.

One must also make a distinction between fetal rights and creating a “culture of life” or a “civilization of love” as Pope John Paul II said. Most fetal rights activists want it. But many do not. They’re not interested in fighting against contraception, pre-marital sex, gay marriage, divorce and other social ills. The pro-life movement has a particular worldview.

Apparently the pro-life agenda, according to Ms Fortin, comprises fetal rights, contraception, pre-marital sex, gay marriage and divorce. I heard one of Suzanne's pro-life professionals speak about the twin evils of abortion and contraception. I would have thought that this was primarily a Catholic perspective. Most Protestant pro-lifers that I know would never put those two together in the same breath.

In addition, I would have thought that a consistent life ethic would include not only fetal rights but, as a minimum, euthanasia, capital punishment, perhaps even peace-making. I would also include poverty, racism, ageism and sexism.

Or is Suzanne reserving the right to define what pro-life means. In my day, it meant a lot more. But oh yeah, I'm over 50 so my views are amateur and no longer relevant (sorry, as a crotchety oldster my sarcasm came leaking out there--terrible habit).

Pro-lifers want not only to promote fetal rights (which is first and foremost) but a whole culture of life. And many pro-life feminists, gays, atheists and socialists do not. It’s an entirely different culture....We need all these people in the struggle for fetal rights, but we need many streams of activity. I don’t think the Christian and non-Christians streams of the fetal rights movement can really gel.

I may be reading more into this than Suzanne meant, but she seems to be distinguishing between Christians and gays, feminists and socialists. If that is so, that is a much bigger stereotype than her view of those over 50. I know a number of lesbians who are feminist, socialist and pro-life, and gays who are similarly pro-life.

Now I know from reading other things that Suzanne has posted that she tends to see feminism in a pretty harsh light. But no one group has the corner on what constitutes feminism. And I would guess that she can't reconcile a person as genuinely having Christian faith and being gay. Sorry Suzanne, you are just wrong if that is what you believe. And is she going to argue that capitalism is Christian? As a business professor I say, Good luck.

Suzanne, you and your young professional friends are doing very good work in the pro-life field. You are the future of the movement, and a good part of the present. But don't disparage the past. Don't allow your mind to be narrowed by your denominational priorities and your stereotypes.

And don't alienate your friends.

1 comment:

Jen R said...

Hi,

I found your blog via a Google News alert on the phrase "consistent life ethic", and I like it a lot. In fact, I read pretty much the entire archive last night and added you to my blogroll. :)

Apparently the pro-life agenda, according to Ms Fortin, comprises fetal rights, contraception, pre-marital sex, gay marriage and divorce.

It's people like that who give pro-choicers ammunition to paint the pro-life movement as being not about life at all, but about a particular view of sexual morality. And though their generalization is false, I fear that in some cases they're right.

(Sorry if this posts more than once -- I got an error when I tried before.)