The Moral Treatment of Returning Warriors in Early Medieval and Modern Times by Bernard J. Verkamp

The Moral Treatment of Returning Warriors in Early Medieval and Modern Times by Bernard J. Verkamp. Paperback: 195 pages Publisher: University of Scranton Press; New Ed edition (December 15, 2006).

Bernard J. Verkamp’s The Moral Treatment of Returning Warriors (University of Scranton Press) is a tour de force of research on the practice of the imposition of penances upon warriors returning from war. The author has compiled hundreds of resources into a dense though easily read narrative. In a seamless manner he methodically analyzes how soldiers returning from war have been treated morally. He then takes his readers on a journey into the past in hopes of retrieving the sanity for present, and future, soldiers who will return from the madness of war.

From a reading of Returning Warriors one could rightly lament that western civilization has gone down the dead end road of war for far too long. One might ask whether it is even possible – or advisable – to turn around and return to an attitude of an earlier time in all its exactness.

[1]

The premise of Dr. Verkamp’s book is that in our modern time we have come to accept war as not only a necessary evil but as inconsequential to those involved in the killing. The author attributes this to the therapeutic society whereby “what were once described as wrongdoings and shortcomings are now often extolled as indicative of a liberated ego or dismissed as sickness and social maladjustment. Moral pain or feelings of guilt or shame, which were once considered the natural, interior complements of virtuous behavior are either ridicule, or reduced to psychic difficulties.”

Verkamp argues convincingly that soldiers returning from war today have experienced an “uneasy conscience” with the blood of fellow human beings on their hands. Without calling for an unrealistic return to an idealized Christendom, he discredits the modern therapeutic notion that the moral guilt and shame experienced by returning warriors can be treated and cured like any other neuroses and shows how specific elements of the ancient ritual of penance can be incorporated and assimilated in both secular and religious ways to assist returning warriors to return to society today.

In the first millennia of Christianity penances of one sort or another came to be imposed upon warriors returning from just wars as well as unjust. Though not truly universal in its application, the imposition of penances for killing in a just war could and did often mean something other than the imputation of guilt, namely that of shame; there was great shame associated with the killing of a fellow human being.
As such in the past it was assumed that soldiers returning from battle would feel guilt and be ashamed for their wartime killing and other behaviors associated with the ignoble tasks and abuses of war.

The returning warrior was encouraged to work through such feelings through “rituals of purification, expiation, and reconciliation.” Unfortunately in the modern era today feelings of guilt and shame associated with war are either denied or classified simply as post-traumatic stress or survivor guilt.
Even if the war was just and the soldier had only done his duty by killing the enemy, it was believed that he was still in need of purification in that he had shed the blood of a fellow member of the human family. The guilt and shame associated with the horror sanguinis was taken seriously. Verkamp quotes the ninth-century Pseudo-Theodore Penitential that stated even if a soldier had not committed sin by repelling and killing an enemy, he was still expected to fast and be purified due to his shedding of human blood.


Returning warriors oftentimes received penances owing to the dubious nature of a war or conflict, whether it was just or unjust. Verkamp points out that “even a war that was deemed just could become an occasion for sin” since the “motives and dispositions of those fighting might be less than good…Warriors engaged in a just war had to examine their consciences about their motives for fighting and the traits of character, or lack thereof, they displayed in battle. The battlefields could become an occasion for sins of cowardice, anger, pride, avarice, sloth, or any of the other vices.”[2]



The author takes the time to delineate the difference between guilt and shame: “guilt is aroused by the transgression of boundaries set by the conscience and is accompanied by fear of reprisal, shame occurs when an idealized goal is not reached and carries with it the threat of abandonment. The experience of shame, therefore, is relative to what one is, to one’s plan of life, to what one aspires to do, and to those persons with whom one aspires to associate.” He adds: “Relief from shame will be sought by any kind of good work that will restore confidence in the excellence of one’s person, or in other words, purify one by returning him to that mode of being...most in keeping with the paramount ideal of the culture to which he belongs.”



Transgressions which gave rise to a sense of sin and guilt might also have generated a sense of shame, in that the soldier might have been mortified and disgraced by his sinful deeds.” Yet a soldier might experience shame but not experience guilt. One might have engaged in a just cause, but still feel shame due to his act against the sanctity of life and the Christian call to love one’s enemy. There is evidence to suggest that many a warrior had “frequent misgivings about the killing he was doing on the battlefield.” Some “retired from fighting…perhaps motivated…to some extent by feelings of shame over the killing they had done in battle.” Those who fasted or gave alms “may very well have been trying to prove to themselves, and to their Christian fellows…their continued capacity to do good.”


With the crusades “came the concept of war that was spiritually beneficial to those” involved. In modern times there have been those who, as in the past, have taken delight in war and its spoils, but there are far more warriors who “feel guilty and ashamed of the killing” and other acts of atrocities they have done during combat. Sometimes the guilt is brought on because of “doubts about one’s worthiness to survive when others did not.” It is commonly called “survivor’s guilt”. Many soldiers believe that even if it is necessary to kill they still believe it is wrong to kill a fellow human being, no matter how noble the cause of the war. This has shattered many a soldier’s ideals, leaving him “disillusioned, disoriented, empty, and aimless, no longer capable of sustaining the will to achieve any goal, least of all a lasting relationship of love….they feel bitter, desolate, polluted and defeated—all symptoms of what is meant by the feeling of shame.” Regrettably, the moral feelings of current returning soldiers have by and large not been taken seriously. Verkamp argues that due to “the triumph of the therapeutic modern society has found it difficult to deal with the returning soldier’s pangs of conscience.



Some of the material is reminiscent of Dave Grossman’s book On Killing that details how soldiers are trained to kill and come to consider it just a part of the job.[3] Many of the soldiers who have negative feelings are encouraged to forget about it, and those who do not or cannot are diagnosed as sick with “shell shock” “battle exhaustion” and post-traumatic stress disorder” and psychiatric care is utilized to cure them of their guilt and shame, besides their anxiety, grief, irritability, depression, withdrawal, insomnia, nightmares, and startle reaction. This approach tended to ignore the “profound moral pain” and reduce all symptoms to stress or as neurosis. Those who express feelings of guilt or disturbances of conscience are told that such feelings are inappropriate.



Even religious leaders may attempt to smooth over the concerns with assurances that God is on our side and the war was just. The author points out that returning soldiers “might have very good reason to feel guilt or shame, or at least a sense of regret and tragedy, depending upon how they judge the deeds they have done over against one or another set of religious or secularist principles.”


It would seem that even if war is necessary it is still a tragic event, and the effects of war should elicit at least regret, if not remorse and sorrow. From the example of the bombing of Dresden or Hiroshima and Nagasaki those who ordered the bombing ought to at least feel ashamed of the deed if not guilty.[4]



Verkamp calls for us to go beyond a therapeutic approach by stating “soldiers returning from modern warfare might stand to gain considerably from the kind of examination of conscience,” namely a “moral evaluation of the soldiers’ past deeds on and off the battlefield.” This has to be a lot more than just swapping “war stories” which is often a way of avoiding painful memories or personal feelings connected to the experience of war. This must “’involve a deeper probing’ than psychotherapy is capable of by challenging the returning soldier to objectively “evaluate” their personal actions with reference to “the dictates of the just-war theory” and assess the consequences of their behavior in relationship to others.


The secular and religious benefits of such an examination of conscience might reveal that “’deeply held convictions’ have indeed been personally violated, with terribly ‘real and permanent’ consequences, like the death or maiming of innocent noncombatants, or the destruction of whole villages” and he may identify himself with a military force that was “mechanically ruthless” and share in its heedless “dedication to violence.”


Verkamp suggests, with other scholars, that the returning soldier might benefit from the penitential practice of contritio cordis; such heartfelt contrition is not a self-loathing or self-flagellation, but rather compunction of heart “meant to be an expression of regret over the pain that one’s deeds have caused others.” If a soldier recognizes that his behavior or complicity in war has caused unnecessary loss of life and wanton destruction, then would he not weep with grief?


And soldiers who examine their consciences and humble themselves in contrition can turn from death to “live in the future that makes sense of the past” by paying their debt to the dead by bearing life and peace to the living. They may then profit from confession, if by that it is understood that confession is “a plea for forgiveness from others—from God, but also from one’s fellow human beings” in that they have an obligation to seek forgiveness from those offended.


Keeping with the medieval structure of the rite of penance, absolution would then follow confession. But what could that mean in a secular world? “The absolution conferred…was understood to be in the name of all the members of the corpus Christianum, both living and dead, including those who had been wronged.” As such, the four-step process of penance allowed for “reintegration or reconciliation of the penitents with the rest of mankind,” especially their seeking forgiveness from those against whom they have offended and with whom they want to be at peace.”


The fruit of penance is restitution, an expression of resignation whereby penitents “begin to repair some of the negative consequences of sin to themselves, their fellow human beings, and the world at large. Understood in such wise, the performance of penances by returning soldiers might still make some sense if by such acts they can give something back to the world against which they have sinned” and that the absolution “in the final analysis be a process of reconciliation.”


Though the author is not calling for a return to a twelfth century socio-political framework, he is urging our secular culture to revisit certain features of the religious ritual of penance. Certainly an alternative approach accommodating modern advances in psychiatric care could accommodate the age old ritual of penance.


Through their guilt and shame the returning warriors can be reincorporated into the body of the human community. The only questions: will the soldiers recognize their moral pangs of guilt or shame? And if so, will the community take their moral pain serious?
Verkamp states in his introduction, “I very much have in mind to say something about our present situation.” Indeed he does. In our pluralistic culture secularists and religionists alike have much to glean from this well-conceived treatise on the abandoned practice of the imposition of penance upon the returning warrior, especially when one begins to enumerate the implications it holds for our own time and the current unstable state of world affairs.


[1] Henri De Lubac reminds us in his Méditation sur l’Eglise that “it would be a big mistake for us to think that we could ever rediscover the [faith of the] past in its exact tenor and all its richness, at the expense of all that has been clarified since” nor can we “run away whenever we feel like it into another age – not even if we don’t actually intend a negative attitude in doing so…for time cannot be reversed; even error and revolt, however complete their overthrow, impose a new lifestyle…” Prophetically he declared: “we must also remember that we are a long way off from having either fully listed or completely explored the wealth [of theology] laid down for us throughout the past” for nothing should put “an end to discussion and reflection alike” or discourage “the raising of new questions” (The Splendor of the Church, pp 20-21, 27, Henri De Lubac, Ignatius Press, San Francisco: 1986).

[2] According to a 2004 study conducted by researchers at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine (July 2004), 1 in 8 soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan experience anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic syndrome. Providing counseling to servicemen and service women should be utilized to help soldiers readjust to civilian life, yet an obstacle for many soldiers receiving care has been the stigma of shame that they fear in admitting they are troubled by their war actions. Unfortunately this reflects the popular sentiment that seeking mental health services is only for the “mentally ill.”

[3] Human beings are innately reluctant to take human life and the military techniques developed to overcome that aversion are examined in his book. “We are reaching that stage of desensitization at which the infliction of pain and suffering has become a source of entertainment: vicarious pleasure rather than revulsion. We are learning to kill, and we are learning to like it,” Grossman writes.

[4] Nearly 700,000 Iraqi civilians have died since combat operations began in March 2003. It is estimated that 1.8 million Iraqis had been displaced to neighboring countries, and 1.6 million have been displaced internally, with nearly 100,000 Iraqis fleeing to Syria and Jordan each month.

The Catholicity of Johnny Cash

The Catholicity of Johnny Cash

Here these days one cannot escape Christian music. It’s everywhere. I’m talking about the sweetly syrupy sappy lyrics that focus on “me and Jesus” and remind us that once saved you’re free, the struggle’s over, the rapture’s at hand, and thank God I’m no longer enslaved to tradition, religion, ritual – especially the long dark arm of Catholicism.
I’m sure I am doing many Christian artists an injustice, but so much of the music has no connection to daily life whatsoever. Listening to some of the songs, one imagines a separate ethereal world where charity and love prevail while the rest of sinful humanity is just waiting to be left behind in a world completely devoid of grace or glory.
In 2003 at the death of Johnny Cash, there was much ado about his musical career. Later I saw the film Walk The Line in early 2006 and that summer our family traveled to Tennessee and North Carolina. In the process I immersed myself in the music of Johnny Cash. I was no stranger to Cash for both my grandfather and dad usually had radios set to the local country station, so there was a certain romanticism associated with the songs. In the process I sought to listen to every recording Johnny Cash ever made. I prefer classical music, Gregorian chant, and Rock and Roll, yet there is something to a lot of the traditional country music and their ballads.
The reason I feel compelled to write this article is due to the effect of listening to his music. I dare say Johnny Cash was a Catholic – even if a lower case catholic. Allow me to explain. One of my favorite songs, found on his album Personal File released posthumously, is “No earthly good.” The song begins:

“Don’t brag about standing or you’ll surely fall …
you’re shining your light, and shine it you should,
but you’re so heavenly minded you’re no earthly good.

If you’re holding heaven, then spread it around.
There’s hungry hands reaching up here from the ground.
Move over and share the high ground where you stood…
so heavenly minded, you’re no earthly good.

The gospel ain’t gospel until it is spread
but how can you share it where you got your head?
There’s hands that reach out for a hand if you would…”

What an indictment against some Christians’ ministry which is solely focused upon getting people saved so they can keep a running tally of the number of salvations as they eagerly await the rapture and the destruction of the world.
Another song with a similar theme worth mentioning is “A Half a Mile a Day.” It is written from the perspective of a man who visits a church one evening where several members are witnessing to their salvation. One man reports,

“I’m going to heaven as fast as I can go
like an arrow from a bow.”
Another says,
“I’m sailing into heaven…on a sea of blue,”
Yet another announces,
“I’m flying into the portals of heaven on silver wings!
Sailing over all the troubles and trials down below straight on in.”

Obviously Johnny did not subscribe to this point of view because the last person to stand is a little old lady who claims that she’s making it to heaven about a half a mile a day. The woman admits the difficulties, her stumbling, the way to heaven is not rapid transit. Instead she says

“I believe that if I’ll heed the things he had to say
even I might get to heaven at a half a mile a day.”

No talk of rapture here. She’s too busy living the kingdom. She continues,

“Lord, when I let you lead, I don’t make any speed
because I have to stop and touch the ones who need so much
and then sometimes others pull me off of your narrow way,
and by my mistakes I barely make a half a mile a day.”

Powerful imagery of a Christian concerned for justice and peace.

A poignant scene from Walk the Line involved Johnny’s recording agent and the officials from the record company. The men are concerned that Johnny’s audience – which was, according to the men, predominantly good Christians – would be scandalized by his recording of an album from Folsom Prison. Johnny replied, “Well, then, maybe they’re not really Christian.” Whether or not he actually said it, I do not know, but it would seem to represent his feelings and beliefs for the lost and forsaken of this world.
His signature song Man in Black embodies his credo.

“I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down.
Living in the hopeless, hungry side of town…
I wear it for the prisoner who has long paid for his crime,
but is there because he’s the victim of the times….

“Well were doing mighty fine, I do suppose
in our streak of lighting cars and fancy clothes,
but just so we’re reminded of the ones who are held back,
up front there ought to be a man in black.

I wear it for the sick and lonely old.
For the reckless ones whose bad trip left them cold.
I wear the black in mourning for the lives that could’ve been
each week we lose a hundred fine young men.

And I wear it for the thousands who have died believing that the Lord was on their side.
I wear it for another hundred thousand who have died,
believing that we all were on their side….”

In “Life is Like a Mountain Railway” he sings,

“Life is like a mountain railway
with an engineer that’s brave.
We must make the run successful
from the cradle to the grave;
heed the curves and watch the tunnels,
never falter, never fail.
Keep your hand upon the throttle
and your hand upon the rail.”

The earthiness of his songs are sacramental encounters with a God who is not far away or just waiting in the wings waiting to swoop down and take the “raptured elect” while the rest of us sorry suckers are left behind to suffer the chaos of tribulation.
In his popular song, “Sunday Morning Coming Down,” a man awakens after an all night drunk. On his walk home he sings,

“In the park I saw a daddy with a laughing little girl that he was swinging
and I stopped beside a Sunday school and listened to the songs they were singing…

then I headed down the street and somewhere far away
a lonely bell was ringing
and it echoed through the canyons of my disappearing dreams of yesterday.

On a Sunday morning sidewalk I’m wishing Lord that I was stoned
‘cause there’s something in a Sunday that makes a body feel alone.
And there’s nothing short of dying that’s half as lonesome as the sound
of the sleeping city sidewalk and Sunday morning comin’ down.”

The song “What on earth will you do for heaven’s sake?” Johnny asks,

“Did you turn a frown with a smile?
Did you lift a lowly heart about to break?
Would you also give your cloak
to one who took away your coat?
What on earth will you do for heaven’s sake?

Did you feed the poor in spirit and befriend the prosecuted?
Will you show the bound that all the chains can break?
Will you be one of the meek,
did you turn the other cheek,
would you give a little more than you would take?
Did you shine your little light upon the children of the night?
What on earth will you do for heaven sake?”

There are many songs with these themes, but of particular interest to Cash seemed to be the plight of the imprisoned. In “Give My Love To Rose” a man recently released from a San Francisco prison is found lying nearly dead along the railroad tracks. The former prisoner asks the passerby to give his love to his wife Rose and his son. I find the version from his American IV: The Man Comes Around album. His voice had aged and the way he sings the song has so much more feeling than from his earlier crooner days.
Other songs such as “Another man done gone”; “There Ain’t No Good Chain Gang”; “I Hung My Head”; “I Got Stripes:’ “Busted”; “Don’t Take Your Guns To Town”; “Sam Hall”; “25 Minutes To Go”; Joe Bean; and “Greystone Chapel” all deal with men in prison or men awaiting their execution.
In his American III: Solitary Man he includes the song “Mercy Seat”. The song is about a death row inmate pondering his fate on the very day of his execution. The man claims,
“Well it all began when they took me from my home
and put me on death row –
a crime for which I’m totally innocent, you know.”

The man rambles on and on as his contorted conscience begins to get the best of him.
“…in a way I’m yearning to be done
with all of this weighing of the truth,
an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,
and anyway I told the truth
and I’m not afraid to die.

“I hear stories from the chamber.
Christ was born into a manger
and like some ragged stranger
he died upon the cross,
might I say it seems so fitting in its way
he was a carpenter by trade,

or at least that’s what I’m told...
In heaven his throne is made of gold
The ark of his testament is stowed a throne of which I’m told
all history does unfold…

“It’s made of wood and wire
and my body is on fire
and God is never far away….

into the mercy seat I climb,
my head is shaved my head is wired
and like the moth that tries to enter the bright light,
I go shuffling out of life
just to hide in death awhile
and anyway I never lied.
And the mercy seat is waiting
and I think my head is burning…

“And the mercy seat is burning
and I think my head is glowing,
and in a way I’m hoping to be done
with all of this twisting of the truth,
an eye for an eye
and a tooth for a tooth,
and anyway there was no proof,
and I’m not afraid to die.

“And the mercy seat is glowing,
and I think my head is smoking,
and in a way I’m a hoping to be done
with all these looks of disbelief,
a life for a life and a truth for a truth,
and I’ve got nothing left to lose
and I’m not afraid to die.

“And the mercy seat is smoking
and I think my head is melting,
and in a way that’s helping
to be done with all this twisting
of the truth, an eye for an eye and a tooth for tooth,
and anyway I told the truth but I’m afraid I told a lie.”

Regardless of where one stands on the issue of capital punishment, the song truly rouses the listener’s conscience.
The song “The Green, Green Grass of Home,” affirms the goodness of creation and the human longing for home, as told through the eyes of a condemned man within his cell.
Johnny Cash’s music is rooted in the good earth and embodies an Incarnational theology that echoes John’s gospel, “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.”
Cash even sang the popular tune Paradise.

“Daddy, won’t you take me back to Muehlenberg County,
down by the Green River where Paradise lay?
‘I’m sorry, my son, but you’re too late in asking.
Mr. Peabody’s coal train done hauled it away.”
“The coal company came with the world’s largest shovel,
stripped all the timber and tortured the land.
They dug for the coal till the land was forsaken,
wrote it all down to the progress of Man.”

Such lyrics certainly evince an attitude of reverence for the earth and natural resources, especially the tongue in cheek reference to “the progress of man” and the overt adjective of torture.
A.P. Carter’s song “Keep on the Sunny Side of Life,” encourages us that good will conquer evil. There is no need for despair or hopelessness. The paschal mystery of Christ promises life, hope, and goodness. The words continue:

“Though we meet with the darkness and strife,
the sunny side we may also view.
Let us greet with a song of hope each day,
though the moments be cloudy or fair,
let us trust that our savior always
will keep us everyone in his care.”

“Oh, the storm in its fury broke today,
crushing hopes that I cherish so dear,
storms and clouds will in time pass away
and the sun again will shine bright and clear.”

We hear a man singing about a God who loves all of his creation, as charged with his grandeur. But this is no Pollyanna approach to life, neither is it an escapist theology based upon the preaching of prosperity and a promise of rapture when the going gets tough.

Cash’s music is pious-free and Catholic friendly. Even two of his last songs, “The Man Comes Around” – which seems to be influenced by all the talk of rapture – and the traditional “God’s Gonna Cut You Down,” both deserve to be listened to for within them contain ageless truths.
Johnny admits in the liner notes that the song The Man Comes Around was a difficult song and it took him a long time to write; it is about Christ’s Second Coming. In one line he asks,

“Will you partake of that last offered cup
or disappear into the potter’s ground,
when the Man comes around?”

In this I hear a Eucharistic theme – intended or not. In the Book of Revelation Jesus speaks:
“I stand at your door and knock. If you open the door I will come in and sup with him and him with me.”
In John’s Gospel Jesus says,
“I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst…Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you… Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. (Jn 6:35, 53-55, italics mine).
Christ is with us, and throughout Johnny Cash’s career his songs challenged the status quo and called us to see the worth of every human being, even the men in prison, the men on death row, those killed on both sides of war or the tragic end of the native American Ira Hayes (one of the marines who lifted the flag at Iwo Jima).
“God’s gonna cut you down” may seem harsh to Catholic ears, but the truth is that one day we will all die and render an account to God for the gift of our life. As Saint Benedict wrote; Keep death ever before you.

“You can run on for a long time…
sooner of later God’ll cut you down.

Go tell that long-tongue liar,
go and tell that midnight rider,
the rambler, the gambler,
the back-biter,
tell ‘em that God’s gonna cut ‘em down.”

Is this not the hound of heaven? It is written in Ezekiel 33 that if we fail to call the sinner to repentance we will be held accountable for his sinfulness. As the song says, “What is done in the dark will be brought to the light…” We are our brother and sister’s keepers. We must foster the common good and pursue peace through justice.
I would have liked for Johnny Cash to have sung a few traditional Catholic hymns before his death, but, alas, we will have to be content knowing that he is now singing them in heaven. Imagine Johnny singing “Whatsoever you do,” “We are the light of the World,” Make Me a Channel of Your Peace,” or “I Am the Bread of Life.”

“Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do to unto me.”

The hungry, thirsty, homeless, naked, weary, anxious, imprisoned, soldiers, war veterans, orphaned, abandoned, aged, insulted, and lonely took heart in Johnny’s songs. It was to the poor in spirit, the meek and humble, those mourning in sorrow, those hungering and thirsting for justice, the merciful, the pure of heart, the peacemakers, and the persecuted that Johnny sang for. Sowing love in place of hatred, preaching pardon and peace in the face of injury and war, hope and joy in place of despair and sadness, and self-giving and faith rather than selfishness or doubt were his messages. And he took all of these themes from the gospel message.
Hence the catholicity of Johnny Cash’s music comes through in the sense of God’s sacramental presence in the world around us, the commitment to both faith and human reason, an emphasis upon the communal aspect of our baptismal call and a love for the saints – and sinners.
May we all keep on the sunny side of life, greeting each and every day with a song of hope, knowing that through the storms of life Christ is with us. And when Christ comes to raise our mortal bodies, may we awaken in the sweet by and by of the peaceful valley of paradise, meeting on that beautiful shore of the banks of Jordan our loved ones and the communion of saints with whom we have journeyed unaware.

THE POLITICS OF ABORTION

Let’s face it. There has been a lot of ink spilled over the abortion issue these past few weeks. But let’s be honest. Who is abortion aiding? Women’s right-to-know bills display all the facts of what abortion is, show the ultrasound image of the fetus, and expose the dangers and side effects of post-abortion trauma. Such laws are truly open and informing which clearly illuminate the truth. Such informed consent laws enable women to make fully informed conscientious choices.

When measure are passed to ensure that an abortion procedure must follow certain protocols, many people cry foul and say that a group of anti-woman, anti-choice men are foisting their moral judgments on others. This is nonsense. We have all kinds of laws that prevent certain choices. A teenage girl cannot get her ears pierced or be emblazoned with a tattoo without parental permission. So why the outcry when certain people want to ensure that an abortion procedure meets the same standards as that of a hospital?

If the pro-choice, pro-abortion advocates were really for women’s health, then they would be working hard to ensure that girls knew how to resist sexual pressures. We all know that the gift of human sexuality is a powerful force in our lives, yet if we can teach children and students that they can say no to cigarettes, drugs, and alcohol, then why can’t we apply the same techniques to the sexual drive? Our culture has allowed the children to believe that pregnancy prevention relies upon contraception rather than chastity or abstinence. Yet who is teaching the young boys to respect the rights and emotions of the young women they plan on having sex with?

Although abortion is packaged and sold as a healthy choice of a woman coming of age, all too often it is nothing more than a fast and convenient way for the male and female to deny the reality and the result of their relationship. Many men who support abortion do so for personal and social expediency. Other men won’t readily admit it, but many who favor abortion rights do so for their own promiscuous convenience. They are the types who want the availability of non-consequential sex and any slip up or careless act that yields a pregnancy can easily be eliminated.

Unfortunately, with so much codependency and denial in our country, has abortion become a discreet way for women to get rid of the evidence that they have allowed themselves to be sexually exploited by men?

Slavery

Recall the Englishman William Wilberforce. He was opposed for his stance on slavery, yet time has proven he was a political prophet. Today, no one in their right - or left - mind would attempt to justify slavery. In the days of American slavery, there were many Democrats who were pro-slavery. The prominent Illinois Senator, Stephen Douglas, who was the Democratic Party nominee for President in 1860, held that he was pro-choice, not pro-slavery. Just as some politicians contend today that they are personally opposed to abortion, then there were those that were personally opposed to slavery, but refused to legislate morality. In effect, there are those today who treat the unborn as less than slaves. At least the Dred Scott Decision held that African Americans were 2/5 human, but Roe v. Wade doesn’t afford the unborn any human rights. As we know, Douglas lost to the Republican Party's candidate, Abraham Lincoln, in the presidential election.

No one in their left or right mind would attempt to justify slaveholding today using the pro-choice argument. Perhaps there will be a day in the future when history will judge our own generation as harshly for its pro-abortion stance as it has judged the pro-choice slavery stance of our forebears.

Anytime any group of people in power wanted to extinguish the humanity of a particular group of human beings, the members of this inferior group were deemed as human debris, or less than human. Thus begins a genocidal mentality with the powerful first describing their intended victims as less than human, and finally erasing any visage of their human nature from their beings. All that, and more, with a simple shift in the language.

The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, went on Meet the Press last week and feigned ignorance in regards to the scientific evidence that life begins at conception. But even PBS and NOVA and National Geographic show clearly that there IS a moment of conception. Regardless whether one argues for the beginning of life from conception or implantation, the heart is beating by the 18th to 21st day of pregnancy.

As the U.S. Bishops point out in their recent statement: “Scientists discovered that a new human individual comes into being from the union of sperm and egg at fertilization. In keeping with this modern understanding, the Church teaches that from the time of conception (fertilization), each member of the human species must be given the full respect due to a human person, beginning with respect for the fundamental right to life.”