Standing Up for Minority Beliefs in Public
“The Wellingtonian” weekly newspaper, during March, provided a topical and newsworthy report on the 40-day anti-abortion prayer vigil outside Wellington Hospital (New Zealand). The article quoted both pro-life and pro-abortion spokespeople.
I don't speak for any organization. I do, however, disagree with Nicole Stews, a feminist spokesperson, who described a tiny prayer group, standing on the sidewalk with three placards, as "invasive".
To my mind, a prayer vigil is the quietest, least intrusive form of social protest. (Compare it with mass marches and noisy picketing, for example.)
Ms Stews is also quoted as saying that the venue for the vigil was inappropriate and that praying could be done in private. In my opinion, the vigil served to remind people that there is still a pro-life viewpoint in society. Encouraging women to reflect beforehand on their choices - even at the last minute outside an abortion clinic - may spare them from later grief, and save lives.
There are many girls and women around the world who deeply regret having had an abortion or having taken part in the process as medical staff.
During my hour with the vigil, our small group was taken to task three times by passers-by with very strongly-held views.
The first was a young man in a hurry, who simply called out, “Jesus died for his own sins not mine.”
Then the mother of a child being pushed in a stroller by her partner paused to debate the point that women who are raped should be able to choose an abortion.
The third was a young woman, very upset, who claimed that she knew three other young woman who, because of their drug-habits had given birth to babies with mental disabilities. “Would it not,” she insisted, “be better for those children to have been aborted?”
They each made me feel very sad.
It was a useful practical lesson on how divided society is over the termination of life and of how difficult it is to change another’s perceptions. At least it was a blessing that no passer-by hurled abuse.
All I can say is that, despite assertions to the contrary, pro-lifers do feel compassion for women who are (as required by New Zealand law) authorised to have an abortion. From my perspective, these women are victims of a morally regressive and selfish mainstream in the world.
An unborn child also deserves compassion and, in pro-life values, that compassion is not best served by a termination of pregnancy.
Feminists like Ms Stews are quick to defend their rights. They should therefore model respect for the freedom of expression and freedom of religion of those who do not agree with them on every score.
I don't speak for any organization. I do, however, disagree with Nicole Stews, a feminist spokesperson, who described a tiny prayer group, standing on the sidewalk with three placards, as "invasive".
To my mind, a prayer vigil is the quietest, least intrusive form of social protest. (Compare it with mass marches and noisy picketing, for example.)
Ms Stews is also quoted as saying that the venue for the vigil was inappropriate and that praying could be done in private. In my opinion, the vigil served to remind people that there is still a pro-life viewpoint in society. Encouraging women to reflect beforehand on their choices - even at the last minute outside an abortion clinic - may spare them from later grief, and save lives.
There are many girls and women around the world who deeply regret having had an abortion or having taken part in the process as medical staff.
During my hour with the vigil, our small group was taken to task three times by passers-by with very strongly-held views.
The first was a young man in a hurry, who simply called out, “Jesus died for his own sins not mine.”
Then the mother of a child being pushed in a stroller by her partner paused to debate the point that women who are raped should be able to choose an abortion.
The third was a young woman, very upset, who claimed that she knew three other young woman who, because of their drug-habits had given birth to babies with mental disabilities. “Would it not,” she insisted, “be better for those children to have been aborted?”
They each made me feel very sad.
It was a useful practical lesson on how divided society is over the termination of life and of how difficult it is to change another’s perceptions. At least it was a blessing that no passer-by hurled abuse.
All I can say is that, despite assertions to the contrary, pro-lifers do feel compassion for women who are (as required by New Zealand law) authorised to have an abortion. From my perspective, these women are victims of a morally regressive and selfish mainstream in the world.
An unborn child also deserves compassion and, in pro-life values, that compassion is not best served by a termination of pregnancy.
Feminists like Ms Stews are quick to defend their rights. They should therefore model respect for the freedom of expression and freedom of religion of those who do not agree with them on every score.
No comments have been added yet.
