Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rise Of Pro-Life Atheism
Poletical.com ^ | October 1st, 2012 | J. Hodgson

Posted on 10/02/2012 5:37:59 PM PDT by PingPongChampion

2009 marks the turning point for mainstream culture. The number of people who self identify as pro-life is now constantly on the rise. In the United States, pro-choicers are being whittled away rapidly.

In Canada, the results are a little more varied, but the numbers for supporting restrictions are similar.

Why the trend? Jojo Ruba thinks he knows why...

“The question now is: what is the pre-born child? A secular person can take a pro-life position, but only if they believe in right and wrong.”

We meet in downtown Calgary over lunch and while the other patrons discuss light-hearted topics over their sandwiches, Jojo and I immediately launch into abortion and atheism. Jojo Ruba is a pioneer of new wave pro-life activism and he has a very clear idea of why abortion is moving in a pro-life direction. It hinges on two elements.

#1. Science has caught up to the debate.

In the ancient days of bell bottoms and disco, the nature of abortion was more mysterious than it is today. When mass abortion arrived in Western culture, the science wasn’t developed to the point where we could definitively address the issue of when life begins. The debate, very quickly, became packaged up as a war between religious folks adhering to traditional beliefs about life in the womb and modern beliefs about the rights of female autonomy superseding the rights of a “clump of cells".

As technology and medical science have evolved, there is no doubt about life beginning at conception.

(Excerpt) Read more at poletical.com ...


TOPICS: Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; atheism; canada; sex

1 posted on 10/02/2012 5:38:04 PM PDT by PingPongChampion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion
"...but only if they believe in right and wrong."

If one doesn't believe in God, how can they believe in right and wrong? What defines right and wrong if there is no higher power setting down a natural law?

2 posted on 10/02/2012 5:41:24 PM PDT by Wyrd bi ful ard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion

People are starting to realize what is in there.

Needing faith to be pro-life becomes less of a factor once the knowledge that it is human, becomes common knowledge to even the indifferent.


3 posted on 10/02/2012 6:01:21 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion
As technology and medical science have evolved, there is no doubt about life beginning at conception

There was no doubt in 1970 either, at least among competent honest adults.

4 posted on 10/02/2012 6:04:21 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion
A parent is morally obligated to provide basic care, food, and protection to their born offspring

I would like to ask the atheist: without God, what exactly makes something "moral" - and even requires, in their words, an "obligation?"

I am glad they are against abortion - but otherwise this is a case of "a blind cat catching a dead mouse."

5 posted on 10/02/2012 6:06:27 PM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
Natural law is the part the atheists studiously avoid. They seem willing to believe that a human life is worth protecting and defending. But they have no answer to the simple question, "Why?"

If there is no God, then human life is not sacred, not different from any other animal life; and essentially anything is permitted.

6 posted on 10/02/2012 6:13:34 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd

There can be no Laws of Nature if there is no Designer of Nature. To have Design—always takes a Designer.

It is why Atheism is arbitrary Ethics and irrational, since all Natural Laws prove design in Nature. When they throw out God, they can believe anything. Law becomes arbitrary and about “feelings”.

It is actually unconstitutional to throw out the idea of God from a country where we get our unalienable Rights from God. Our whole legal system is built on Universal Truths (which come from Natural Moral Law and Revelation). Both believe in the same Creator—a Universal Right and Wrong.

We can’t dump God—without dumping the entire premise of our Constitution. It is Unconstitutional to take an oath to office if one does not believe in Universal Truths and unalienable Rights which are also Absolute.

BTW, Since O. W. Holmes, Jr. our legal system has posited thousands of unconstitutional laws. John Marshall would have declared them Null and Void because they are contrary to the meaning and intent of our Supreme Law of the Land.

We need to get back to “Justice” and Just Law which can only promote Virtue and equality under the law—as described by Revelation and Natural Moral Law.

A Just Society HAS to be a Virtuous Society-—everyone since Socrates has known that! Justice IS a virtue-—and all the Virtues are connected and can’t exist separately.

As Socrates said; “Knowledge is Virtue; Ignorance is Vice.” Since all men want Happiness-—the ignorant are just uninformed as to what really determines long term happiness. They are misguided—thinking pleasures that really destroy all future happiness or great relationships will bring them happiness...but they never can. Knowledge is key.

It is how the Marxists are collapsing culture-—they took Knowledge out of the schools (John Dewey). They do not teach Virtue-—the only reason for education according to all Greek Masters and all the Founding Fathers and great Thinkers in their time (The Age of Reason).

The public schools now teach and condition our children into Vice and Atheism. They normalize evil and mock God and the idea of Universal Truths. Kids are ignorant when they graduate if not intercepted by good people in their lives. They force children to think in irrational ways—to think in Marxist way that there are no Laws of Nature and No God-—by forcing literature like Heather has two Mommies, And Tango Makes Three, Daddy’s Roommate, and the Evolution of Calpurnia Tate.

Children can be easily shaped into believing anything. Lenin knew this. All Marxists know to get the kids—you have future Marxist Atheists at best and useful idiots if not. Their ideas teach cognitive dissonance-—they teach “Lies” as Truth, which prevents children from forming logical, natural thinking patterns.


7 posted on 10/02/2012 6:31:08 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie
"We can’t dump God—without dumping the entire premise of our Constitution."

Which is precisely what many of these people want. They believe, somehow, that they are capable of revoking rights given by God Himself! The arrogance there is truly mind-boggling.

8 posted on 10/02/2012 6:40:14 PM PDT by Wyrd bi ful ard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
If there is no God, then human life is not sacred, not different from any other animal life; and essentially anything is permitted.

If there is no God, there is no afterlife. If there is no afterlife, then killing a human being robs them of the only life they have. Killing them before they are born steals nearly their entire life, and should be the greatest crime to a secular person.

9 posted on 10/02/2012 6:41:50 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd

I just can’t understand how people can fall for this irrational thinking—that Law can exist in a vacuum without God. AND WORSE, that our Supreme Law of the Land doesn’t enshrine Christian Ethics!!!

Of course, I know that we are being infiltrated by Communists who want God and Family erased so our culture collapses. They are in positions of great power—and included John Dewey in 1930 and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. both who destroyed education and law in America. Then, the creepy Jimmy Commie Carter established the unconstitutional DOE and with it destroyed and corrupted millions of minds of our future leaders who now are these irrational idiots, who don’t have a brain, or are confirmed ideologues, Marxists, who can not process Truth.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in 1952 (Witness) that there was a culture war in America and Europe: God v. Man and that Man was winning. He feared for our children-—because Fear is all there is in Communist State—that and the dehumanization and loss of all freedoms. All become slaves.


10 posted on 10/02/2012 6:55:58 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
If one doesn't believe in God, how can they believe in right and wrong?

That part is easy - most secular humanists carry certain socialistic premises as intellectual baggage, most popularly that whatever benefits society as a whole is to be desired from the point of view of the individuals making it up. That premise is, to say the least, a little weak - it evinced itself in the thoroughly embarrassing atheist billboard campaign of a couple of years ago that proclaimed earnestly that one should "Be good for goodness' sake." Over and above the fact that this formulation came from a Christmas carol there is the difficulty that "goodness' sake" is quite a different thing from the point of view of the collective and the individual, and that apart from the cute phrasing there is nothing to suggest that the individual is in any way obligated to subordinate his immediate interests to those of society.

What defines right and wrong if there is no higher power setting down a natural law?

That one is much harder. Where there is no God there is no real ethical authority, nothing to prevent society from descending into nihilism. Friedrich Nietszche pointed this out, and when he famously suggested "God is dead", he was mourning.

But a principled atheist - never mind what source those principles, in fact, you'd be better off not inquiring too closely, because more often than not they'll be Christian - a principled atheist who does respect life for life's sake cannot avoid the conclusion that the unborn is human because it can be nothing else and alive because it can be nothing else - he or she can avoid this conclusion no more than the rest of us who have heard it from God's voice. Think of the lies you have to embrace to deny it - that the unborn is "undifferentiated tissue", "parasitical", and most of all, something less than human life. You have to swallow that stuff without regurgitating. Best of luck.

So yes, I do believe that an atheist with a sonogram and a book on embryology can conclude that abortion is an act of murder, even without divine authority backing him or her up. It's a step, a step toward enlightenment, a very dangerous step, because it's a step toward God. All IMHO, of course.

11 posted on 10/02/2012 6:59:17 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd

I am not an atheist but I would surmise that it doesn’t
take a believer to understand the usefulness of societies
and that for societies to succeed there are “do’s and
don’ts”


12 posted on 10/02/2012 7:06:57 PM PDT by Sivad (Nor Cal Red Turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion
Why are animals naturally drawn to, and extremely affectionate to pregnant women? (Yes, it is both documented and true).

The reproduction of life is part of the fundamental nature of this planet. Willful destruction of that life is not only a crime against nature, it is against the very essence of life on this planet.

If the head of every organized religion on the planet came out tomorrow and said, “whoops, we got it wrong, abortion is OK” - it would still be wrong.

You don't need God to tell you abortion is wrong. You only have to have the basic sense and values of a dumb animal to realize it is, and always will be, murder - plain and simple.

13 posted on 10/02/2012 9:21:17 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion

It just became too difficult to explain to young people that a bald eagle’s egg has more value than a human egg.

Also, I’m sure many people look at the demographic disaster unfolding in this country (much more quickly than the media will ever tell you - towns that are officially 90% “white” have school-age populations that are 70% “other”), and realize the intended targets of abortion aren’t availing themselves of it frequently enough.


14 posted on 10/02/2012 9:30:11 PM PDT by kearnyirish2 (Affirmative action is economic war against white males (and therefore white families).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
If one doesn't believe in God, how can they believe in right and wrong? What defines right and wrong if there is no higher power setting down a natural law?

Atheist do not realize that they get their concepts of right and wrong from a culture that has been based on the belief in God. They think that they get their understandings of right and wrong from their own self reasonings, without realizing that their whole lives have been steeped in thoughts arising from the concept of God. Unless a change comes, the basics of right and wrong will disappear as the knowledge of God and righteousness quickly washes out of a society that has left it behind.

15 posted on 10/02/2012 9:45:58 PM PDT by Bellflower (The LORD is Holy, separated from all sin, perfect, righteous, high and lifted up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PingPongChampion

Life is a humanitarian issue. That’s not to take anything away from Christians.


16 posted on 10/02/2012 9:54:03 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer
If there is no God, there is no afterlife. If there is no afterlife, then killing a human being robs them of the only life they have. Killing them before they are born steals nearly their entire life, and should be the greatest crime to a secular person.

That's how I always saw it. Thanks for putting it up here. As for ethics, the Principle of Reciprocity is the source of it all.

17 posted on 10/02/2012 10:03:58 PM PDT by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer; hinckley buzzard

Hinckley Buzzard said, “If there is no God, then human life is not sacred, not different from any other animal life; and essentially anything is permitted.”

Vince Ferrer replied, “If there is no God, there is no afterlife. If there is no afterlife, then killing a human being robs them of the only life they have. Killing them before they are born steals nearly their entire life, and should be the greatest crime to a secular person.”

VF’s reply would seem to indicate that atheism is the highest form of pro-life belief one could achieve. Yet, what do we see in atheistic societies?

They degrade human life until it is simple animal life. The Christian ideal is real and worthy and best. Where is the Emerald City, the Nirvana, the Utopia of Atheism? It doesn’t exist because it cannot.


18 posted on 10/03/2012 5:54:31 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

I am not defending atheism, I am just laying out a pro-life case that atheists could accept.


19 posted on 10/03/2012 6:01:22 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

No, I thought your post was brilliant and articulate. It hit it right between the eyes. I just made sure it was dead. ;-]


20 posted on 10/03/2012 7:41:32 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
As technology and medical science have evolved, there is no doubt about life beginning at conception

There was no doubt in 1970 either, at least among competent honest adults.

There was no doubt in the 1930s, for that matter. Jojo Ruba is a personal friend of mine—in his debates he has cited a medical textbook by Alan Guttmacher in which he states that the humanity of an embryo should be self-evident.

21 posted on 10/06/2012 5:41:44 PM PDT by RansomOttawa (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson