« Kerry's new campaign slogan | Main | President Bush on Cloning »
September 25, 2004
Five Non-Negotiables
A very polite reader of this site asked me why I think the five non-negotiables are wrong. I appreciate the question, because I think I've answered it in bits and pieces on this site and others, but I've changed sites several times in the last few years and it's time I lay as much of it as I can come up with in one place (in probably a few parts). Now, this isn't all encompassing because it seems there are an infinite number of reasons why I find each of these things to be wrong, but here is a good start. I will create a new category on this site entitled "Five Non-Negotiables." Perhaps as I more perfectly recall branches of these issues I can post to the category, and in turn more perfectly fill in the many reasons why these things are wrong.
I won't pretend to say that I came up with any of this on my own. None of this thinking on either side of any of the issues is completely original, by any means. Before I had the knowledge or desire to perform any kind of research on the topic my conscience was formed by information from my Catholic faith. I have no reservations about saying so, and I don't believe I should be apologetic for such an admission. I do feel that faith in any body of beliefs should be researched and tested to the very extent of the belief. I also wish for myself a better reason for my belief on an issue than "because the Church says so." That doesn't pull a lot of weight with someone who isn't Catholic, or at least Christian.
In doing this or defending my beliefs in conversation I only wish to give people something to consider. I only want people to see the Truth because they believe it to be the Truth and not because I said so. This can be a very frustrating endeavor at times, and I have posted some things that I wish I wouldn't have. Mostly guilt-related types of things, which gives the Church a bad name because many detractors will spread the idea that Catholicism is guilt-based. Catholicism is not guilt-based and, personally, if I really think about that idea it's rather insulting (though I've done my part to spread the idea). Not that the intention of the comment was meant as an insult to me personally, but it's insulting insofar as it is an attack on a Catholic's/Christian's intellect. That we somehow aren't smart enough to realize that there's nothing wrong with abortion, for instance, and blindly follow our faith. Two things on that:
1) The Church actually does explain their views with scriptures and tradition as well as scientific, medical, and philosophical backings.
2) If I am the least bit uninformed about a particular issue, of which there are many, the Church is the perfect body of beliefs for me to blindly accord.
It's so strange to me how people will accuse me of being a Church puppet. To that I say "thanks" and that I wish I was even moreso. But I also find it curious that so many people are unscathingly able to vote according to party lines, union ties, or according to the interests of other types of affiliations. In that, I mean why aren't those people mocked for being "union puppets." Why would people suggest those bodies of beliefs to be more admirable than God, Himself? In the cases of unions or parties they all rightfully have their own agendas, and it's perfectly fine to be a part of that as long as those agendas are working for Truth -- and in that, human dignity -- or at least towards finding the Truth, but the Church's only agenda is Truth. As a Catholic I believe the Church is Truth. But even people who do not believe in Catholic teachings will have a hard time coming up with an agenda other than to move people to Truth. What, do you dectractors, suggest is the agenda of the Church if not for Truth? Don't get me wrong. I'm glad there are organizations and groups that are looking out for the interests of workers, the impoverished, or personal freedoms. But at the point where even one innocent human life might be marginalized in the interests of such people is where we have to stop, if not turn around and start going the other way.
So before I start pointing out reasons why I believe these five things are wrong, I would first like to take the opportunity to point out why we shouldn't do these five things, all current knowledge considered. I think most anyone who will read this site would say that, outside of God (if you believe in Him), the most important and valuable resource we have in our world is human life. If I'm wrong about this, let me know. Even though we, as sinning human beings, fall seeking wealth, pleasure, or whatever, I think we all will agree that human life is more important whether we always live that ideal or not.
And so, each of these issues can be put into one of four categories, but let me insert abortion just for the sake of ease:
Abortion is either...
-wrong, and we don't know it's wrong
-wrong, and we know it's wrong
-right, and we don't know it's right
-right, and we know it's right
If it's wrong, and we don't know it's wrong, we shouldn't do it. It could have grave consequences, and I will go back to my analogy about finding a bare electrical wire in our way. If it's live and we don't know it, we'd be best go the long way around it without touching it (though pointing it out to an expert and hoping they can get right on the task of figuring out if it's live or not, right or wrong).
If it's wrong and we know it's wrong, well duh. Let's not touch the bare wire.
If it's right, and we don't know it's right, it falls into the same category as the first. We could be killing a human life and it's just not a risk we would want to take with our most valuable resource. It's not a good risk to touch that wire.
If it's right and we know it's right, well then all the bets are off. Yank the wire out and be on your way.
However, I've never heard a person come up with a completely perfect reason for why abortion is definitely the right thing to do. It may be our legal right in this country, but that doesn't make it inherently right. And so even if a person, as a pro-choicer, says I don't have a perfect reason for why it is wrong, it's still a horrible risk to take. In other words, the risk of performing an act as serious as this is much more detrimental than the risk of not performing an act such as this. It is much safer to go around the wire than it is to touch the wire.
Now, in the upcoming posts I will state the most powerful reasons as to why the non-negotiables are just that -- uncompromisingly wrong.
Posted by Judd at September 25, 2004 08:02 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.hangingontonothing.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/74
Comments
I think most anyone.. would say that, outside of God (if you believe in Him), the most important and valuable resource we have in our world is human life... I think we all will agree that human life is more important whether we always live that ideal or not... And so even if a person... says I don't have a perfect reason for why it is wrong, it's still a horrible risk to take. In other words, the risk of performing an act as serious as this is much more detrimental than the risk of not performing an act such as this.
Thanks for the words. That's all we liberals were trying to say about Iraq...
Posted by: CmdrSue at September 25, 2004 11:38 AM
But Sue, there was a huge risk in NOT going to Iraq, too. Or at least most nations thought there was a risk. So in this case there are right and wrong reasons for Iraq. Also, there was human dignity involved for the oppressed people of Iraq. There is a wrinkle involved in Iraq that is just not there for the five non-negotiables. If it was as cut and dry as the liberals and some conservatives would like to make it sound, believe me, the Church would be staunchly against the war.
Posted by: judd at September 25, 2004 12:06 PM
VATICAN CITY, March 22,2003 (Reuters) - Pope John Paul, in his first public comment on the outbreak of hostilities in Iraq, said on Saturday that the war there threatened the whole of humanity, and that weapons could never solve mankind's problems.
"When war, like the one now in Iraq, threatens the fate of humanity, it is even more urgent for us to proclaim, with a firm and decisive voice, that only peace is the way of building a more just and caring society," he said.
The Pope, in a speech to members of a Catholic television station, added: "Violence and weapons can never resolve the problems of man."
Posted by: CmdrSue at September 25, 2004 01:01 PM
He's right on. And he would have been right if he would have been talking about World War II. War always threatens the whole of humanity, in Iraq or Nazi Germany.
Posted by: judd at September 25, 2004 01:04 PM