Didn’t Jesus offer choice? He also offered blunt assessment, remember the woman at the well? I think he would support the stated goals in many ways but he would see through to the true goals and the directing of the ‘movement’. Jesus did not advocate uprising against the corruption of Rome or it’s government, rather he summed up to give unto Rome that which is Rome’s. He would have compassion and forgiveness for the women who have had abortions…harsher words for those who provided them. On one hand we hear how fragile women are when they come to an abortion clinic. On the other we are told that those clinics that offer alternatives to abortion are taking advantage of that fragility. Which is it?
The truth, as you point out, is that abortion would decline fully in a world where it was never seen as a need. Barring that, as we do with other forms of murder, we ought to attempt to shut down the means of obtaining it easily and work on addressing the situations that cause it. In the end it is all about free will though. We can never deny a woman the choice of having an abortion any more than we can deny the killer the choice of killing. We can, as a society, make one choice seem more desirable than another. We can focus on the emotional damage (and sometimes physical damage) abortion does to the mother. We can focus on the arrogance of deciding that anyone knows the value of a life unborn. That looking at the circumstances of birth as a way to gauge worth and quality of life are the most pessimistic of outlooks. Imagine if we as a society set a goal of zero abortions. Imagine that as a whole, instead of as the isolated efforts of the churches and individuals who adopt and work tirelessly to end the scourge that has wended it’s way through history.
You point to the idea that the number of pre-Roe-V-Wade abortions was higher than today. You credit education and contraception with lowering the rate of abortion. I missed your real numbers and statistics on those ideas. If education and focusing on circumventing the natural results of behavior to avoid natural consequences is a ‘win’ then I suppose I would agree with your reasoning.
Contraception has been the biggest boon to men of low integrity, bigger than it could ever be to women. It allows them to sidestep natural consequences too. It allows them to be the deadbeat…perhaps not the deadbeat ‘dad’ but deadbeats nonetheless. It weakens the resolve of girls not yet ready for emotional rollercoaster that is sexuality and sex in a relationship. It effectively takes control over sex away from women if for no other reason than they now have no natural argument against it. They can deny sex. Is that feminine in any sense — to take a gift meant for creation and intimacy and to weaponize it? Not in any Christian sense of the idea.
When you rationalize the worth of joining into an enterprise so fraught with contradictory messages and leadership go back to something simple. Are women better off today? If so why and in what areas. We are led to believe that women are better off financially and in terms of freedoms than they were. I have recently had two millennials reference the ‘fact’ that only two generations ago women were essentially property or owned. Really? Where does this fiction come from? I am no millennial, not even near it but let me tell you my mother nor grandmother were ever owned by anyone. The men they were married to, if they chose, could probably still ‘own’ these two young women. We are mistaking true power for a veneer of affluence and arrogance. The narrative of the architects of ‘movements’ like this march runs that men have consistently and widely held women down and mistreated them…and all for the benefit of said men.
Frankly, men have rolled over pretty easily and quickly on most women’s rights. The real complaints of women today are boiling down to not liking things that men have simply dealt with pretty much throughout their existence. Low pay, time away from family, stress, health issues from that stress. These are not things that are unique to women. Men would have been better suited by forcing women to go work the coal mines, build the railroads and canals and skyscrapers while they stayed home and raised the next generation in their mold.
There are aspects of issues in the march that are worth marching for and I suspect that most of your intent is well placed. Unfortunately there are intentions beyond your own that this march is serving. Most of those would be intentions that Jesus would see as he saw the intentions of the Pharisees. When Jesus had compassion for the prostitutes and tax collectors it was because they saw and came to an understanding that what they did was wrong and they were encouraged by Jesus to go and sin no more. This is not the main message of the march or the leaders of that march. Rather they are urging go and sin and we will mitigate the consequences of those sins; at least on the physical and material fronts though not on the emotional or spiritual. Hopefully you marched this day too; if so did you notice a difference?