The Shocking Paradox of Being Pro-Life

Currently speaking, the pro-life individual is the most strange and wonderful creature crawling on the face of this earth. He is controversial – wildly, ridiculously controversial, in fact. But the controversy that swirls and flaps around him exists over the fact that he holds one of humanity’s least controversial opinions – that life is good and death is bad. In a world where one must wring with all his might the overused rag of evil for a drop of shock or offense; in a world where crucifixes are suspended in urine, pornography adorns any item in need of selling, and comedy becomes fouler and fouler simply in order to shock the bourgeoisie, all the pro-lifer must do is mention – quietly, calmly – that one shouldn’t kill babies. Uproar ensues. It is as if a riot were started by a man mentioning that the sky is blue. But I suppose this isn’t anything new. The anti-slavery movement was considered – not merely wrong – but vulgar, boorish and rude. In an evil world, virtue is shocking.

The reverse of this fact can be applied to the pro-choice movement. In an evil world, evil is boring. Thus, the pro-choice movement could be largely summed up as a boring movement, a description made more than apparent by their tedious repetition of 30 year slogans, their general weakening of stance, their embarrassing efforts to be hip and with-it, and – though perhaps I’ve had a limited view – the fact that they seem so darn old. I mean really, the counter-protest at the March for Life amounted to 5 or 6 grandmas with ‘Keep Abortion Legal’ signs.

Likewise, a paradox presents itself in the very being of the pro-life individual – he is the Happiest Loser in the world. The pro-life movement – though you wouldn’t know it from the fearful and panicky reactions of the pro-choice – is a reaction against a loss. A defeat. After all, there was no major pro-life movement before Roe v. Wade, and why on earth would there be? Who, 70 years ago, would’ve started a movement seeking to protect the innocent lives of infants anymore that someone now might start a movement protecting the innocent lives of dishwashers?  The pro-lifer is in the marvelously paradoxical position of being incredibly joyful in this defeat. Think on the March For Life, held on the day when abortion was declared legal in this country. Is it a solem vigil? A frustrated venting? No, it is one of the most beautiful gatherings of young people the world has ever seen. The joy and peace and excitement found there is, well, you’ll just have to watch the video I made.

The reason this oddity is present is simple: Hope. The pro-life movement is rooted in the belief that no matter how dark the night is the dawn always breaks. It is grounded in the irrational, ridiculous expectation that good will triumph over evil. And thus the pro-lifer is a potent paradox of sorrow and joy, a man who can commiserate his defeat with song and laughter.

And again, the pro-choice movement represents the exact opposite. It is odd, to say the least, that the group that has emerged victorious is so freaking bitter. The complete lack of joy, hope or even simple pleasantry is enough to make the American population yawn and throw their lot elsewhere. And elsewhere they’ve thrown indeed, as recent statistics have shown.

The pro-life individual is a shocking paradox. And, when it all comes down to it, what else is there to be? What is more inspiring than the man courageous in the face of death, faithful in times of temptation, strong when all else fails, hopeful when all else despairs, and shining stubbornly bright when all else fades to its miserable, boring shade of grey? Truly, it is awesome; being pro-life.

  • Tom

    “crawling” – well if you say so.

    “controversial” – I don’t think so. ‘best avoided’ maybe. Just like those strange people who talk to themselves as they stumble along.

    “tedious repetition of 30 year slogans” – ah, the irony.

    “the fact that they seem so darn old” – selective viewing? There are plenty of ‘pro-life’ protesters who require transport assistance.

    “he is the Happiest Loser in the world” – I’m glad you’re happy with your ongoing status in life.

    “fearful and panicky reactions” – if you’d study a bit of body language you’d realise it’s eye-rolling, face-palming and derisive snorts.

    “It is grounded in the irrational, ridiculous expectation that patriarchy will prevail and women will return to their ‘rightful place in society’ (well in the home anyway). – there, fixed it for you!

    “The complete lack of joy, hope or even simple pleasantry” – ah, we should be good little victims and just smile at our would be overlords?

    “The pro-life individual is a shocking paradox” – oh how true! ‘Pro-life’ is a great misnomer.

    • Amanda

      Thanks for making his point:) And, yes. Pro-life IS the word. The word which describes those who oppose innocent lives taken by their own mothers.

    • Aeroflyer416

      Haters gonna hate. Period. 

      • Jeanna

        You can lead a liberal to logic, but you can’t make him think.  (And I mean that in the most charitable way possible :)   Great article Marc!  One of the best I’ve read.

        • Aeroflyer416

          I was pointing the “hater” finger at Tom… Just to be clear on that…

        • 12angrymen

          Wait…wait just one minute. Are you saying liberals are never right? Ever?

        • Jordan Elizabeth

          Hey, Jeanna–
          Most of us are conservatives, but guess what: logical liberals exist. Illogical conservatives exist.
          Now, you can lead a pro-choicer to logic, but you can’t make him think…

    • Anonymous

      That’s right, condescension will win you friends and make us all see the light.

      I may yet enjoy being an overlord (a.k.a. someone who bothers to question what people do).

  • Anonymous

    Your point was well made – - In a world that’s upside down, one must only point up, and all the world will attack you.

    Some years back I was running sound for a Bill Clinton election rally.  One dear old gentleman (wearing pro-life signage) had the audacity to approach the main area of worshipers while CLinton was droning on about how intolerant the right was.   The sheer audacity of this man to expect any sympathy was short-lived – - he was kicked to the ground and stomped on by a half-dozen of Bill Clinton’s goons, his glasses smashed, his signs torn, and all in the name of tolerance.

    This twisted world where good is bad and bad is good is beginning to backfire. People can’t live in a lie forever, without being affected.. In a few years, we will triumph.  And eventually we will remember where we were, the day the killings stopped. 

    We must begin to consider, where are we going to erect a memorial to the victims of this war?  If we named each casualty, as is done on the Vietnam Memorial, a wall to remember the dead would stretch MORE THAN 96 MILES – it would encircle Atlanta nearly TWICE.

    We will look back in horror.  But look back we must. If we forget the Holocaust, we will repeat it. And as a nation, if we don’t remember the millions we’ve killed, the last fibre of morality in us will be gone.

  • Mommy O

    Tom,
    How is it more freeing for a woman to be used as a sex object, and an income generator as a man? 

    • Tom

      It’s not, that’s why the right for women to choose must be maintained.

      • Anonymous

        The…what?  Tom, it doesn’t make any sense.  This culture holds that certain women who have the audacity to get pregnant from sex (!) have done a Bad, Bad Thing, and it is largely their responsibility to kill their own offspring — because baby is her enemy and killing will solve all her problems, doncha know!  And if one of them gets uppity and resists, then commences the subtle or not-so-subtle emotional blackmail (or heck, physical violence, why not?  Homicide is rather well known to be a leading cause of death among pregnant women).  Maybe this kind of knowledge has a little something to do with the position of Susan B. Anthony or Elizabeth Cady Stanton, hmm?  Man, I feel liberated already.

      • Micaela S

        to choose what? murdering her child in womb? or do you want to water that truth down with some pro-choice deception and call it “abortion”. Its the same thing, and the Law aint able to change that with fancy language.

  • http://brightlightbigdarkness.blogspot.com Estreitta

    Great Point!

  • 12angrymen

    I would say this is one of the most generalized and stereotyped articles I have ever read. 

    • Marc Barnes

      Excellent! I am glad to make your top list, and feel strongly that I deserve a prize.

      • 12angrymen

        If you feel that will help you sleep at night, then by all means be my guest; here, have a cookie. In fact, take an entire pie. It’s called the hypocrite pie, I’m sure you’ll find it very tasty. 

        • http://www.facebook.com/mymacguy Mark Hartman

          @12angrymen – sounds like it’s a staple of your diet.

        • Micaela S

          Makes no sense….
          because one stands for the defense of the innocent unborn, he is called a hypocrite? Called a hypocrite by a very person who does “not” stand up for the innocent unborn, a very place where he once was-the womb. Thats so tragic. How deceived these pro abortionists are.

  • Pingback: Catholic Phoenix