Pro-life sign at St. John’s Catholic Church in Onawa, IA.
Photo credit: Katrina J. HoudekĀ (CC-By-SA 2.0)

We dwell in a land of subjectivity. All truth is relative, all stances are subjective, and on and on we go. Realistically, this is false, and all objective truth remains objective truth, no matter how much people complain or try to consider it otherwise.

An issue that is found to be officially regarded by culture as subjective is the argument over life in the womb. ā€œPro-choice?ā€ culture asks. ā€œGreat! Whatever you do with your body is your choice. Pro-life? Ugh, if you have to be, itā€™s your choice, but donā€™t condemn those who donā€™t think like you!ā€ It is all labeled subjective, masquerading as personal choice.

This is so extremely twisted from the truth. If thereā€™s one issue in the United States where subjectivity cannot be afforded any longer, it is this.

For too long has this issue been allowed to pass under the guise of ā€˜subjectiveā€™, even from the pro-life movement. We may tell pro-choicers that we disagree with them, but even in our arguments against abortion, we allow room for subjectivity, differing opinions. We say ā€˜we thinkā€™ instead of ā€˜you areā€™; there is too much gray left.

In the matter of life, either youā€™re right, and a fetus is just a clump of cells the mother can dispose of at any time, or Iā€™m right, and a human is being slaughtered with each abortion that takes place.

This is a matter of urgency, and in urgent matters, you canā€™t afford any gray area.

It is when we are sleepily content in letting things remain somewhat subjective, even things of urgency and great importance, that culture is destroyed. Blaise Pascal, a French mathematician and Christian philosopher in the 1600s put it well when he wrote, ā€œPeople almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.ā€

We cannot afford to have our opinions on issues be mere opinions anymore, based on what we find attractive. They must be concrete beliefs, imbedded in proof. They must be factual, real, and carry the ability to disprove the other side. We cannot fight for life with subjectivity.

In a great battle, you bring with you tested weapons of war. You wouldnā€™t use something that has not been effectively proven to protect life and demolish the enemy. That would be suicide. In the same train of thought, we cannot battle for life in the United States when we approach it as a great battle of opinion. It must be viewed as a war for the lives of Americans, a war fought over wrong versus right.

We have been conditioned into subjectivity because it is much more comfortable to tell someone that you disagree with them rather than boldly saying, ā€œYouā€™re wrong.ā€ If we climb out onto a limb, weā€™re afraid that it will break, and we donā€™t want to fall. Yet, by doing this, not only are we kidding ourselves into complacency, but we are not fighting for the lives of unborn people like we truly should.

Know your facts, know them backwards and forwards. Fight a good fight, and donā€™t be afraid to stand up boldly for the unborn and tell culture that abortion isnā€™t a matter of disagreeing opinion, it is murder, and it is wrong. Wars arenā€™t won with complacency, culture isnā€™t won through subjectivity.

You May Also Like

Thereā€™s More To Black History Than Slavery

Marilyn Singleton: In todayā€™s climate where some black leaders imply that white Americans are racists, only personal experiences can slay that fire-breathing dragon.

Caffeinated Thought of the Day: Progress on the Right Road

Shane Vander Hart: We are not making progress if we find ourselves headed unimpeded down the wrong road. Progress may mean making a u-turn to get there.

Charlie Sheen’s Traveling Train Wreck

He calls it his ā€œViolent Torpedo of Truthā€ tour.Ā  A more accurate…

A Movie We Don’t Need

Shane Vander Hart: The Hunt comes at a time of escalating political vitriol and a growing acceptance of political violence in our country.