Biological Science and consistent, sound logic already support the Pro-Life position; so there is no reason why ending abortion and upholding the human rights Christianity first brought into Western Civilization should not be the first Victory of Christians working together inspired by their first millennium Unity in Diversity . . .
This is a Call for Celebrate Human Life! Centers in Every City and Abundant Life! (Human Fulfillment) Political Movements or Parties in Every Country as part of Pro-Life 2.0, A Concentrated Effort of Christians as Salt and Light in the World Protecting Human Life and Democracy Itself by Learning Themselves and Then Reminding Western Civilization that All the Human Rights We Enjoy Were Made Possible Only Because Christianity Replaced the “Pro-Choice”/Human Life is Cheap Mindset of the Ancient Pagan World with the “Pro-Life”/Human Life (Without Exception) is Precious Mindset Rooted in the Christian Doctrine of God’s Infinite Love for Humanity Made in His Image; and that the Modern Democratic Freedoms We Enjoy Were Made Possible Only Because the Christian Church Taught Western Society That Any Governments’ Job Was No Longer to Lord it Over Individual Humans Who Served the Greater State (Including Governments’ Having the Power of Life and Death Over Citizens, and Setting Religious Policy, as Was the Worldwide Norm), But That Any Governments’ Job Was Now To Provide Safety and Security For Human Persons Made in the Image of the One God in Three Persons Who Is Love to Freely Seek and Find This Life-Transforming Truth About Their Supreme Human Value
“Pro-Choice” Abortifacient Potions and Infanticide Were Banned in Western Civilization for over 1600 Years During Which Christian “Pro-Life” Beliefs about the Supreme Value and Dignity of All Human Persons Without Exception Developed Logically Only in Western Christian Civilization into Modern Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms; The Recent Return to “Pro-Choice” Philosophy and Recent Legalization of Abortion after over 1600 Years of Abortion and Infanticide Being Illegal Because All Human Life Without Exception is Precious Strikes a Great Blow to the Very Foundation of All Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms (Note that All Totalitarian States Ancient and Modern Violate Human Rights and Freedoms Specifically Because They Do Not Share the Christian Beliefs That All Human Life Without Exception is Valuable and Must be Free From All Coercion so as to Seek and Find God, and So Their List of “Exceptions,” Which Human Lives are Not Valuable and Will Not Be Protected by the Government, Always Gets Longer and Longer); Thus We Christians Who Established the Basis of Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms In the First Place Must Protect Human Rights and Democracy Itself By Reminding Western Civilization Where Its Highest Values Come From and What Is Thus Necessary to Maintain Them, Or Else Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms Will Increasingly Be Lost as is Already Happening
[This Exciting New Page officially Launching PRO-LIFE 2.0 on August 29, 2014 (after the Success on August 5 of the Founder’s first PRO-LIFE 2.0 Initiative to help block doctors’ rights to refuse to facilitate abortions being taken away) is still UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Come Back Often and watch as Pro-Life 2.0 Develops, God-Willing and with YOUR Help and Prayers, into a Worldwide Movement that not only ends abortion but in doing so buttresses the Christian Foundations of our whole Democratic Western Society (Which leads the World), Foundations which have been so eroded in the last few decades, to the great danger of all human lives and to democracy itself in the long run.]
As some further reading, for now . . . An excerpt (from before the final submitted version)from my letter to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, urging them not to take away doctors’ rights to refuse to facilitate abortions, which developed into a treatise:
The Education Necessary to Preserve Democracy Now Under Attack
by Peter William John Baptiste SFO
The History of Human Rights and Democracy in Brief: “Pro-Choice” Philosophy Ruled in the Brutal Ancient World Where Human Life Was Cheap, Easily Enslaved or Killed Even by the Government, Before the “Pro-Life” Principle Starting in the 4th Century Made Society Humane Because Human Lives Without Exception Were Now Considered to Have Supreme and Equal Value, Laying the Foundation for All the Human Rights and Democratic Freedoms Which Gradually Developed Only Within this “Pro-life” Context; the Later Governments Which Abandoned the “Pro-life” Principle as in Russia and Germany Degenerated into Totalitarian States Threatening the Lives and Freedoms of Citizens Just like Those Back When “Pro-Choice” Philosophy Was the Ancient Norm; Recent Developments in Countries Which Abandoned the “Pro-Life” Principle by Legalizing Abortion Outlawed since the 4th Century, Taking Away the Unborn Human Right to Live, Follow the Same Pattern as the Early Stages of the Gradual Loss of Democracy in Germany after it Abandoned the “Pro-Life” Principle by Taking Away the Jewish Human Right to Live; Thus to Protect Democracy for the Long-term All Who Love it must Learn this History of the Principles Democracy Historically and Logically Depends on
This article was originally written as a response to a recent major attack on democracy in Canada which would force Canadian doctors from Ontario instead of healing human lives to facilitate the killing of human lives against their will, or else lose their jobs and livelihood, something unheard of in any democratic state until recently in Europe (though similar things are common in totalitarian states). This attack was brought about by great ignorance of the long history and gradual but logical development of the principles underlying all human rights and democratic freedoms. As the American, European and other democracies are undergoing similar severe erosion of the foundations of their democracies due to similar ignorance, this badly needed lesson in the history of ideas is offered to all who love human rights and democracy, so that they have the education they need to effectively work to rebuild the historical and logical foundations of democracy now so badly eroded, to help ensure our grandchildren will be raised in a democracy as we were.
It is well said that those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat its mistakes, and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) [in Canada] has shown great ignorance of history and thus made an exceptional mistake in drafting a new policy that will force doctors to facilitate the taking of human lives (against the great medical tradition of healers to “do no harm”) or else lose their licences to be doctors in Ontario (which would greatly impoverish medical care, if precisely those doctors who most value the human lives they treat are not allowed to be doctors).
There is a gravely serious aspect of the current discussion about this which most people likely miss, but which stands out clear as day to me as a scholar with a wide breadth of historical knowledge and as a professor of a course approximately covering the First Millennium (107 AD to 1014 AD), during which period the groundwork for all later human rights and freedoms was laid. The CPSO’s intention to take away a doctor’s rights to refuse to participate (including by referral) in procedures against their conscience, including abortions which end the human lives of the unborn human babies involved (and including the just recently legalized euthenasia/assisted suicide of old and/or sick humans), ACTUALLY UNDERCUTS THE VERY HISTORIC AND LOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF ALL OUR MODERN DEMOCRATIC FREEDOMS AND HUMAN RIGHTS. These things only began to be possible after Western Civilization learned to value ALL human life, without exceptions, and protect human life without exceptions, starting in the 4th Century AD.
What Western Civilization Was Like Before the 4th Century
Before the 4th Century it used to be the norm that human life was cheap, not valued very highly except as it could serve the greater State (whatever form the State took). Governments provided a basic societal stability but had no interest at all in helping individual humans find their individual human fulfillment (“life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and such), governments had no interest in providing health care or education for all their subjects, and governments could even be the biggest threat not only to individual human freedom but also to individual human lives. Even in the most highly civilized society, the Roman Empire, the popular entertainment – the “TV” of the day – was public torture and murder in the Roman arenas, where human lives were taken in various ways, such as wild animals tearing them apart, and athletes like gladiators murdered each other with government approval. No surprise then that in this most advanced and civilized of ancient western cultures where even here human life was so very cheap a “pro-choice” philosophy ruled the day, where parents (particularly fathers) had the right to choose whether to raise or kill their children, whether before birth by abortifacient potions and other abortion methods or after birth by exposure or other forms of infanticide. Thus the sewers of ancient Rome were clogged with dead babies who ran afoul of their parents’ choice, and some ancient cities had convenient garbage dumps outside of the city specifically for human children (girls were particularly targeted for infanticide). Parents could sell their children as slaves, since there were no human rights or basic freedoms. Many citizens became slaves if they could not pay their debts, and governments could enslave or kill their citizens whenever they felt it suited them. Fully 1/3 of the population of the Roman Empire were slaves. Slave or free, full citizens or lesser conquered subjects, all were NOT free to seek and find their human fulfillment and meaning in life through searching religion/spirituality or any other means. It was normal worldwide for the government – whether a tribal chieftain, a national king or international emperor or even a republic (as the Roman Republic before the Empire) – to set religious policy. The government normally decided which religion was the Official Religion, and which other religions were tolerated and which were persecuted, and to what degree. Religious freedom to seek and find meaning and fulfilment in life was unheard of. Even in the ancient experiments with republican democracy as in Greece and the Roman Republic before the Empire, only upper-class free men could have any say in government. Most men and all women were excluded from voting because there was NO PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY AMONG HUMANS but quite the opposite. Greeks considered the less civilized “barbarians” to be profoundly inferior. Roman citizens and subjects might be proud to be part of the Roman Republic or the Roman Empire, the greatest the world had ever known, but they still did not expect their government to necessarily protect either their lives or their freedom.
So what happened to change all this? What led to the human rights and freedoms we have and enjoy today? What turned us from human individuals serving a greater State which frequently threatened both our freedoms and our lives to being human PERSONS who are instead served BY the Democratic State (which is why our political leaders often now call themselves “Ministers” – because they minister to the needs of human persons, and provide safety and freedom to help their citizens seek and find their human fulfillment).
What Changed in the 4th Century That Made Modern Human Rights and Democracy Possible
What happened is that in the 4th Century Western Civilization learned that ALL human life, without exception, was inherently valuable and precious, and started to treat ALL human life as valuable and precious. Gladiatorial fights to the death and other entertainment killing in the Roman arenas, and parental “pro-choice” abortion and infanticide were soon outlawed, and further centuries of reflection on this “pro-life” conviction of the SUPREME value and EQUAL dignity of every human life without exception would naturally and logically lead eventually to the end of slavery in any form, modern democracy (for all) and human rights, including previously unheard of human rights to health care and education which enhance all our human lives. Governments from the 4th Century on would be judged and remembered by the standard of how they treated their subjects – because all human subjects were now seen to be immeasurably valuable.
A Brief Overview of the Development of Modern Human Rights and Democracy Starting From Their 4th Century First Principles
Where did this great and immensely fruitful 4th Century insight into the supreme dignity and value of all human life without exception, which is at the very foundation of our safe, free and democratic civilization, come from? It came from Western Civilization first legalizing Christianity in the 4th Century and then embracing Christianity’s religious convictions that every human life (male and female – Genesis 1:27) is created in God’s Image and is extremely valuable and precious to a Loving God, and thus that humans must LIVE and be FREE from government coercion so as to seek and find their human fulfillment in this great Truth about humanity’s outstanding value. In fact, the very term and concept of “personhood” comes from Christian theology. Human individuals were not called “persons” until after Christian theologians developed their terminology of One God in Three Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – Parenthood, Childhood, and the Bond of Love which binds them, a Divine “Family” in who IS Love in its deepest essence, reflected in loving human families made in God’s Image). The Christian message effectively told the government – first in the Roman Empire, then in the later Kingdoms of Western Europe, and in the Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire which lasted 1000 years after the Fall of Rome – that any government’s job was no longer to lord it over the lives of human individuals who served the greater State, but that any government’s job was now to provide safety and security for human PERSONS made in the Image of the One God in Three Persons, so that they may be free to seek and find their human fulfilment and a meaningful life as their Loving Creator desires for them. Human individuals had lives that were cheap, and the government could use human lives to serve the greater State, or take or enslave human lives, at will. But human PERSONS made in the Image of the One God in Three Persons had HUMAN RIGHTS rooted in God’s Love for them, starting with the right to Life which is why murderous entertainment and parental abortion and infanticide were almost immediately outlawed (and remained outlawed until very recently); and human persons had the right to be FREE from religious coercion, free to seek and hopefully find their human fulfilment in this wonderful Truth about their supreme human value which no other religion taught. Against the pre-Christian worldwide norm of the government being in charge of what citizens may or may not believe, Christianity insisted upon religious freedom not only for itself, since human beings had the God-given right to freely explore and hopefully discover the wonderful truth only Christianity taught about the supreme and equal value of every human life without exception, but also for others, since Christianity by its own principles could not be forced, coerced or imposed but must be accepted freely as a free act of love for God. Thus when Roman Emperor Theodosius in 381 AD, following the pre-Christian norm of the government setting religious policy, started restricting the public practice of paganism, making Christianity for the first time the only “official” religion of the State, and then in 390 AD ordered a massacre of revolting pagans, Bishop Saint Ambrose of Milan (where Theodosius held residence) stood up for the human rights and freedoms of pagans too (since Christianity’s new human rights were independent of creed, and included all human lives, even those of non-Christians). At great personal risk since no-one had ever so stood up to a Roman Emperor before, Bishop Ambrose boldly excommunicated the Emperor and did not allow him to enter a Christian Church to receive Holy Communion (hence he had been “ex-communicated”) for 8 months, and Ambrose did not lift the excommunication until Emperor Theodosius had passed a new law Ambrose insisted on which delayed all death sentences from being carried out for 30 days, effectively preventing any rash killing of citizens and subjects by the government, and for the first time limiting the previous norm of governments having the power of life and death over their citizens. The Christian principles of the supreme and equal value of all human lives without exception would continue to CHANGE THE WAY HUMANS ARE GOVERNED, and from this point on, instead of the political State being the highest authority and using individual humans however it wanted, all States would be held accountable to a Truth higher than any State which had revealed in the Bible that slaves and their masters, political rulers and their subjects, were all EQUAL, and EQUALLY PRECIOUS, before God who made them all in love,and therefore slave owners and those who govern were now accountable before God to treat their slaves and subjects accordingly (e.g. Ephesians 6:9). The Bible further testifies that neither nationality/ethnicity, social class or status, or gender make any difference to a human person’s exceptional value before God (e.g. Galatians 3:28). Thus Christians, who invented hospitals, typically provided health care and education to all (Christian or not) wherever they spread as missionaries, as a service of love appropriate to the great value and dignity of all human beings without exception, and later Christian governments would start to take this function on themselves since governments now served the people instead of the people serving the State (and now we take these things for granted having forgotten where they came from).
Old habits die hard. The new Christian ideal Pro-Life values took many centuries to really penetrate into Western Civilization’s societal mindset. Only gradually did some of these Christian values overcome the long established pre-Christian norms so as to eventually yield more of their full logical fruit, like the end of slavery as an institution and equal opportunities for equally capable women. Indeed this process still continues. Yet the foundations for these were laid in the 4th Century and the long but natural and logical process towards the human rights and equal democratic freedoms we have today began in earnest right away: human life was no longer considered cheap but valuable, and protected by new laws; extremely common female infanticide was almost immediately banned, by 318 AD, 5 years after the 313 legalization of Christianity [I digress here to note it is near the height of absurdity to claim that legal abortion is about “women’s rights,” since it has in fact effectively brought back the long-banned common female infanticide in the new form of sex-selective abortions of females just for being female, which in many locations has worryingly skewed nature’s balance of nearly 50-50 female to male births; the supreme height of absurdity is to claim that legal abortion is somehow a “human right,” since it kills a human life in violation of the very first human right, the right to live, on which all other human rights historically and logically depend. Human rights were unheard of before ancient abortion and infanticide were banned]; slavery and its worst abuses were also reduced and eventually slavery ended in any form in Western Civilization (human trafficking still acceptable in other cultures), notably by dedicated Christians like William Wilberforce in Britain insisting the laws reflect those Biblical Christian values that made slaves equal to their owners before God, meaning that it was ultimately entirely inappropriate for any human being to say they “owned” another; the lingering after-effects of slavery in the U.S.A. were also successfully combated by Christians like the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. insisting on Christian values being put into practice at the societal level.
The specifically Christian British Empire, the largest and most advanced Empire the world ever knew, starting with the 1215 Magna Carta which limited the monarch’s power from its pre-Christian norms, very gradually and by many small stages developed modern democracy in an entirely Christian context and then spread its (Christian-based) ideals all over the globe through colonization, including the colonization of America, “land of the free.” The Parliament in London gradually gave more and more say in government to gradually more and more of the people, entirely in a Christian cultural context and in practical development of the Christian belief in the immense and equal value of all human persons: that regardless of social strata a king and a peasant were EQUAL before God, and equally loved by God. The various colonizations from Christian Europe, for all their sad failures and lack of respect for some indigenous cultures, still also imported these Christian values of human rights and freedoms worldwide, these taking root to greater or lesser degree in the colonies. Thus it is that Biblical and Christian “Pro-Life” religious values are the historical foundation of all International Law, including all Human Rights. The countries which are today described by the UN as the most notorious violators of human rights are precisely the most markedly non-Christian countries, precisely because these governments do not share the Christian religious and moral conviction about the immense value and worth of all human life without exception. Not sharing this foundation, rooted in specifically Christian religious conviction, makes democratic freedoms and human rights a very foreign concept to the governments of these countries. And worst of all, history shows, are countries with a Christian background whose governments specifically rejected their Christian heritage: they eventually revert to totalitarian states just like the totalitarian states before Christianity which typically threatened the lives and freedom of their own citizens. The two worst genocides in history were perpetrated by such governments, who actively rejected and persecuted their countries’ Christian heritage – Stalin’s Soviet forced starvation of 7 million of my fellow Ukrainians in 1932-33 just as the occultist Hitler’s Nazi Holocaust of 6 million Jews was starting (Hitler’s ideal “Aryan Race” comes from occultic mythology; thousands of Catholic priests and others who stood against Hitler’s rounding up of Jews as sub-human and no longer protected by the government were sent to the death camps as well). All totalitarian states have in common the rejection of the specifically Christian beliefs about the supreme value and dignity of all human lives without exception.
New or Proposed Law and Policy Changes Attack and Erode the Very Foundation of Our Modern Democracies
Because of this history of the development of our modern democracies, it is ridiculous to claim, as CPSO does [in Canada, and as many other countries do], that religious and moral beliefs are private and have no place in public policy or in doctor’s offices – specifically Christian religious beliefs, including the Pro-Life Principle, are NOT MERELY PRIVATE BELIEFS BUT ARE THE PUBLIC FOUNDATION OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC FREEDOMS. They are not incidental to them, they are logically essential to them, and where they are lost, human rights and democracy are logically (if gradually) lost, as in Germany and the Soviet Union. The Pro-Life Principle historically made democracy possible in the first place, as demonstrated above, and it is the very best long-term guarantee of democracy, simply because it is only the Pro-Life principle that says every human life without exception MATTERS such that every human life must be allowed to LIVE and must be FREE from coercion in living that life. “Those who are ignorant of history are destined to repeat its mistakes.” The legalization of abortion in many countries since the late 1960s and early 1970s ignorantly reversed the banning of abortion and infanticide by 318 AD which had made all subsequent development of human rights and democracy possible because it was the first legal recognition of the immense and equal value of all human lives without exception. Legalizing abortion after this long history of the development of our modern human rights and freedoms flowing logically from abortion being banned is LOGICALLY TANTAMOUNT TO OUR GOVERNMENTS NO LONGER RECOGNIZING IN ANYONE AN INHERENT HUMAN RIGHT TO LIVE, JUST LIKE IN ANY TOTALITARIAN STATE. If you and I could have been legally killed when we were of fetal age, this must logically mean our government does not recognize in either you or I any INHERENT right to live just for being human and for being alive. Others than ourselves decide if we humans live or die: Our mothers before we were born merely allowed us to live (lucky us), and after we were born our government decided to protect our lives with laws (but many other governments did not and do not protect all human lives after birth, particularly totalitarian states). But democracy only ever developed in the “Pro-Life” context that taught that all human life without exception was precious regardless of any State’s laws; governments that violated the “Pro-Life” principle by treating their citizens badly since the 4th Century were judged against this principle of supreme human value, higher than any particular State. By abandoning the Pro-Life principle our democracies have already taken the first big step towards becoming totalitarian states such as were common before the Pro-Life principle entered Western Civilization in the 4th Century, and now it is just by simple logic starting from that abandonment decades ago that current new and proposed law and policy changes will take us even closer to exhibiting characteristics of a totalitarian state. RIGHT NOW in Ontario, Canada, doctors are SCARED that they can lose their jobs because they value human life like doctors as healers traditionally have – this is not something that happens in a democracy! Recent developments like coercing doctors to participate in killing human lives against their will (even by “effective referral” to someone willing to kill), OR ELSE LOSE YOUR LICENCE AND JOB AS A DOCTOR, as the CPSO’s draft policy will make happen in Ontario, [Canada], strikes at the very heart of not only the doctor’s personal democratic freedoms but strikes at the very foundation of democracy itself.
What Does The Science of Biology Say About Human Life and How Does That Properly Inform or Affect Law and Policy?
Usually “Pro-Choice” advocates will try to downplay “Pro-Life” objections by claiming that abortion is not the same as killing human lives, and therefore not morally objectionable, because they claim the human fetus is somehow not really or not fully human, or somehow not yet a human person but only a “potential” human person. But on what hard science, and on what philosophy of personhood, are these claims based? It is good to here clarify some things which uninformed and unclear thinkers have used past and present to justify not protecting human life before birth as after. Abortion was originally legalized back when scientific, medical knowledge about the full human life-cycle was much more murky than it is today. I still remember pro-abortionists calling the human fetus a “tissue blob” that was merely part of the mother’s body in such a way that implied “if we knew for certain the fetus was human, we would want to protect it, but we think it’s just a tissue blob and therefore its OK to remove it.” Abortion was presented as allowable in the “grey area” of being “unsure” about the true and full humanity of the fetus. It is important to notice that this argument, which helped abortion be made legal in the first place, is never used by pro-abortionists anymore, because hard biological, medical science makes it completely untenable. There are no more shades of grey about the human life-cycle but rich scientific data including full colour photographs and video from micro-cameras that can go inside the human body. According to biological science “the first stage in a unique organism’s development” is the zygote (fertilized egg). The zygote has absolutely unique human DNA distinct from the mother’s and therefore constitutes a separate living biological organism (a living human organism: not bovine, not feline nor anything but human!). This new human life (exactly the same as YOUR human life) as it grows progresses through life-cycle stages such as embryo; fetus (Latin for “little one”); neonate (“newborn”); baby; toddler; child; adolescent; adult; senior adult. From zygote to senior adult it is (and YOU ARE) the very same unique living human biological organism with absolutely unique human DNA: The zygote and embryo (and YOU when you were a zygote and embryo) are as much a unique human life as the toddler, just younger – and just as dependent upon their mother to live. Even children are likely to die without their parents (or any other human adults) taking care of them, and certainly all the human life-cycle stages from toddler down to the original human zygote are totally dependent upon their parents, particularly their mother, to stay alive. Wikipedia’s “Fetal Viability” article indicates human fetuses (from Latin: “little ones”) born about 3 months early or 26 weeks after their biological human life began as a zygote have a 90% chance of surviving and being healthy outside of their mother’s womb (despite this, older, full term babies before their birth can still be legally killed by abortion in Canada, the U.S. and other countries). Under 26 weeks gestational age premature births either do not survive or are likely to have health problems. But although before this age the unique new human life is dependent upon its mother to survive, it is still so distinct a human life from his or her mother that (science now knows) the baby does not even share blood with the mother; the baby can even have a blood type incompatible with the mother’s blood type! Nutrients pass between the mother’s blood to the baby’s separate (and possibly incompatible) blood through a membrane by the process of osmosis to feed the baby.
The pro-abortionist “tissue blob” argument used when abortion was legalized implied that “if we were absolutely sure the fetus was human life, of course we would want to protect it,” making it seem like pro-abortionists at least still valued human life, in common ground with Pro-Lifers. It is very disturbing that the pro-abortionist side apparently showed their true colours, that they never really cared about the value of human life at all but only about the personal convenience of abortion, because as ever-more-rich biological science about the human life-cycle made it excessively clear that a unique separate human life distinct from the mother was being killed in abortions, they did not stop abortion to preserve the value of human life now that they could be sure the fetus was a human life. Instead they just looked for a new excuse to justify their convenient abortions. Thus they developed the “Pro-Choice” philosophy, apparently because the word “choice” made it sound like it had to do with freedom. But, as I noted at the beginning, those who are ignorant of history are destined to repeat its mistakes. In their great ignorance of history they did not realize that the “Pro-Choice” philosophy they adopted is not new at all but ancient, and is a philosophy very contrary to human freedom. The “Pro-Choice” right of parents to raise or kill their children is what Western Civilization had back in the days when human rights and freedoms were unheard of, specifically BECAUSE “Pro-Choice” philosophy DENIES any INHERENT human right to live, just for being human and being alive, and thus “Pro-Choice” philosophy is specifically CONTRARY to democracy which historically and logically DEPENDS on every human life without exception being regarded as SUPREMELY and EQUALLY valuable and precious, which is why ALL humans SHOULD be allowed to live and have a free say in how they are governed.
The Bottom Line: Human Life Is Inherently Valuable and Precious or it Isn’t. What Logically Follows from Each Position?
The bottom line is: Either human life is inherently valuable and precious wherever it exists, or it isn’t. When you say it IS, then human rights and democracy naturally and logically flow from this Pro-Life principle: every human life has a right to live and seek human fulfilment and every human life MATTERS, which is why all humans should have a say in how they are governed, and government’s purpose is to provide safety and security for supremely valuable humans. But as soon as you say that human life wherever it exists is NOT necessarily valuable, as soon as you say that having human life itself is NOT enough to compel any government to protect that human life but there are exceptions to which human lives merit government protection – any exceptions – then there is no potential end to how the “exceptions” to protected human life may be defined by future governments, and because you have denied the logical First Principle underlying all human rights and democracy, you already have the foundation for totalitarian states where human lives serve the greater State instead of government serving human lives. Most worryingly of all, denying the INHERENT value of all human life without exception means the STATE makes the laws that define which human lives are worth protecting and which are not, since States are no longer held accountable to a higher principle of the supreme and equal value of every human life without exception which governments must serve – the principle which historically and logically grounded the development of our current democracies.
The practical result of this that just being human and alive is no longer enough to guarantee government protection of your life. Being human and alive but Jewish or Ukrainian meant your government could kill you with impunity in the two biggest genocides of history, in 1930s Germany and the Soviet Union, because in the absence of a recognized principle of the inherent value of ALL human life, the government defines the exceptions. Being human and alive but still young and still located in your mother’s womb are the new exceptions defined today here in Canada and other countries. But even one exception always brings others. In Germany being handicapped meant you didn’t have a right to live and the Nazis targeted you for the death camps along with the Jews (as more “genetic deadwood”); today in Canada being possibly handicapped (according to prenatal tests which are not always accurate) and still located in the womb means doctors actively target you for abortion and repeatedly pester mothers to abort. In both cases the same underlying value is that handicapped human lives are not worth living. In keeping with this (Nazi) value, assisted suicide and euthanasia are now in some countries (and Canada is foolishly considering it) so that if you become handicapped, before you have a chance to adjust to your new reality and eventually overcome the challenges of your handicap and live a meaningful life despite it, in your initial depression you can choose to have a doctor kill you, or, as also happens where euthanasia is legal, a doctor may choose to euthanize you without your consent, since, after all, according to the above principle shared by Nazis and doctors who pester women to abort handicapped children, “handicapped human lives are not worth living.” Where this value logically goes in the long run is that taking care of the handicapped becomes seen more as a burden on society instead of seen as an expression of the supreme value and dignity of every human being regardless of nationality, class, gender, or handicap. In this philosophical environment what started as an “option” for doctor-assisted suicide eventually will logically become an obligation to euthanize so as not to put burdens on the healthy. Of course starting with the same principle the Nazis had, that handicapped human lives are not worth living, eventually (in the long run) leads to the Nazi solution of killing the handicapped (and saving all that money it takes to accommodate them). This is just one example of how making one exception to which human lives are protected logically leads to more. If we value our human rights and democracy at all, if we want to make sure our grandchildren are raised in a democracy, we cannot afford to continue making ANY exceptions to the INHERENT value and worth and dignity of ALL human life.
The Law and Policy Changes since the Legalization of Abortion (Which Logically Declared Unborn Human Lives “Less than Human” and Removed the Legal Protection Unborn Human Lives Previously Had, Logically Ending Western Civilization’s Belief in the Inherent Value of All Human Life since the 4th Century) Follow the Same Pattern as the Early Stages of the Gradual Loss of Democracy in Germany after it Similarly Abandoned the 4th Century “Pro-Life” Principle by Declaring Jews Were “Less than Human” and Removed the Legal Protection Jewish Human Lives Had Previously
Where this logical progression of one exception leading to others comes perilously pertinent to the current discussion about doctors’ freedom to refuse to participate (even by referral) in abortions is as follows: When a government, abandoning the Pro-Life principle which grounded Western Civilization since the 4th Century, now defines that some human lives are no longer protected by law, as in Nazi Germany, some people, who still believe in democracy and the value of every human life without exception which undergirds it, will be brave enough to stand up and oppose the government and its anti-human laws, protesting in defense of those humans whose right to live has been “legally defined away.” If the government is serious about denying protection to ALL human lives for whatever reason, it is a very simple matter for such a government to legally define those protesters who defend all human lives as somehow seditious against the government and arrest or imprison them or otherwise curb the free speech of their protest with sanctions (such as losing their jobs and livelihood) intended to silence their protests. If, despite these measures, they should persist in protesting the legal de-humanization of Jews or whichever humans, declaring their belief in the extreme value of ALL human life and its right to live, which is the first of all human rights, any government which already denies the right to human life to some can always take away the right to live of protestors against anti-human laws. It is a mark of a totalitarian state to arrest, imprison, or otherwise sanction those who stand up for those human lives the state has devalued, and, at the extreme, devalue the protestors’ human lives as well (after all, they already deny any INHERENT human right to live. It is most convenient for totalitarian states to deny the right to live also to those who protest such policies). Nazi Germany used all kinds of sanctions and arrests and imprisonments early on to convince those who opposed their first gradually restricting Jewish freedoms and later entirely de-valuing Jewish human lives, to be silent. Most good people in Germany were bullied by these tactics into not expressing the esteem they had for all human life. Those brave enough to still stand up anyway eventually had their human right to live taken away by the government also, and thousands of Catholic priests and others who defended human life were sent to the death camps as well.
While of course our current situation in Canada is not yet near so extreme, there are already many disturbing parallels. People can be and have been jailed in Canada for PEACEFULLY protesting the taking of human lives by abortion, and now doctors who refuse to be party to the taking of human lives are about to be forced to or they will lose their jobs and livelihood. Just like Nazi Germany in its early stages: “shut up about the value of all human lives or lose your position.” Indeed, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. People who disagree with the recent legal “defining-away” of the human rights prenatal babies had since Canada was founded (and since the 4th Century), who peacefully protest this devaluing of human rights near an abortion clinic, can be jailed. I will say that again in case you missed the significance of this. YOU CAN ALREADY BE ARRESTED AND JAILED IN CANADA FOR PEACEFULLY EXPRESSING YOUR BELIEF IN THE VALUE OF ALL HUMAN LIFE WITHOUT EXCEPTION WHICH IS THE FOUNDATIONAL VALUE OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC FREEDOMS WHICH DEVELOPED IN WESTERN CIVILIZATION SINCE THE 4TH CENTURY. Just think about that! It’s already a crime in Canada to express belief that all human life is valuable and shouldn’t be killed. That fact alone ideally should make any thinking human frightened. What happened to free speech? This is not the legitimate censoring of hate speech for any group of humans, but quite the opposite. You can be arrested and imprisoned in Canada for expressing belief in the exceptional value of all human life! Shouldn’t this only happen in a totalitarian state? But oh, I forgot – by recently legalizing abortion after over 1600 years of it being banned in Western Christian Civilization, Canada already adopted the view shared by every totalitarian state, that NOT every human life is equally valuable and precious. It always takes time for new ideas to show their full logical effects in society. I guess it has been enough decades now we should expect signs of the erosion of democracy in Canada like this: that you can be arrested for your belief in the pro-life principle which historically and logically grounds our democracy. And we should expect such signs to continue, and they have. The brand new sign is that now the CPSO has drafted a policy which will force doctors who refuse to be party to the taking of human lives to lose their jobs and livelihood if they do not facilitate killing at least by ensuring that the young human lives whose long former protection has been taken away get delivered to other doctors who are willing and ready to kill them.
To use the terms of the CPSO’s new draft policy itself: CPSO insists morally-objecting doctors MUST at least ENSURE patient access to abortion etc. through an EFFECTIVE REFERRAL “to a non-objecting, available, and accessible physician or other health-care provider.” This is closely parallel to the Nazi government telling a German career soldier who thought his job was to protect his country that if he isn’t willing to kill Jews himself he MUST at least ENSURE the Jews get delivered to the Death Camps where a “a non-objecting, available, and accessible” soldier will do the killing he is unwilling to do, OR ELSE HE WILL LOSE HIS JOB. This is tantamount to a doctor’s “forced accessory to murder” AGAINST HIS WILL which has no place in any democracy and is only to be expected from a totalitarian state.
As I said at the start: It is well said that those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. As an educator I have taught the Nazi Holocaust through memoirs of surviving Jews. What is striking about the loss of democracy and human rights in Germany is how gradual it was, and how most good people who opposed the gradual changes kept silent for fear of repercussions, always thinking that it couldn’t go much farther, things couldn’t get much worse (though they kept getting worse). Also striking is that there was no military coup that finally ended democracy in Germany: though not without political maneuvering (and no democracy is free of this), it was through a democratic process that Hitler was first appointed Chancellor by the elected President, later became the legitimately elected President, and was finally VOTED emergency powers to deal with the Communist threat which finally ended democracy in Germany (at the final vote, Hitler’s thugs prevented some from entering who they knew would vote against him; but by this time he was already the legitimately democratically elected President!). In a sense the German people got what they asked for, since they democratically elected a government which manifestly did not value all human lives as equally valuable and precious, therefore they democratically voted in a government that did not respect the foundational, “pro-life” principle underlying all human rights and democracy. No wonder they lost democracy in the long run! (Politicians take note: voters would be foolish to similarly vote in a government that manifestly does not respect the principles human rights and democracy are founded on, so construct your platform accordingly if you want informed voters who love democracy and human rights to vote for you). The fortunate thing is that in our case I doubt there is a “Phantom Menace” lurking in the shadows actively manipulating things towards the end of democracy in Canada (though who knows? Similar things have happened not only in Star Wars but in real history, such as the Roman Republic to the dictatorship of Caesar, democratic to totalitarian Germany, even through the established government without any military fight). But in that case it is pure ignorance of the history of the principles underlying democracy which have led to the disturbing parallels with totalitarian states we are already seeing in Canada (and other nations which legalized abortion after over 1600 years banned). This ignorance that is seriously eroding the foundations of our democracy and human rights must be erased (reading this article/my letter to the CPSO is a good start; my facts are easily enough verified), for the long-term safety of our democracy. Even in the probable lack of a single manipulative conspirator, history warns us that if we let our foundations be eroded long enough, there are always political opportunists around to take advantage of the situation and at the right moment take control. We must not let our foundations erode any further than they already have. Educating the ignorance which got us where we are is key.
[This important article has been finished and will be made available here when some file and text conversion issues are sorted out]
© 2014 Peter William John Baptiste SFO