To Tweet or not to Tweet?

My Role on Catholic Twitter

Debating on Twitter develops a precision of thought that my verbose mind bullied out long ago. I’m a nervous talker—I talk a million miles an hour when in a crowd—and I love being in crowds. Thing is, it seems like the human attention span (at least in the West) is contracting. Verbose can’t be the go-to method when communicating with a person for the first time. So, I took to Twitter where I have thrown myself into every hairy discussion that interests me and that I have a modicum of knowledge about. As a training ground for precision, it works. Not that I’m successful in evangelizing, I don’t have droves of atheists and pro-aborts DMing me with stories of conversion, but I get engagement that isn’t always ugly, and likes from those who agree with me. That’s my metric of success—engagement. From a technical point-of-view, I think this is fine. Standards of measurement, used properly, are key to achieving goals and improving day-to-day. But, sadly, I forgot what my true purpose is.

Some random pro-abort guy, anonymous Twitter handle, anonymous name, but listed as a “dad”, had engaged a pro-lifer with a response I found nonsensical. Thus, I engaged. Our exchange did not produce new insight into the issue, and the anon (anonymous user) was clearly not an expert in the matter, so I ended it cordially. Often goes this way. The journey led us through socialism, virtue, slavery, and other social topics of the 21st century so far. Then I saw a cartoon shared by Catholic Twitter, featuring the Grim Reaper, the Angel of Death, himself. It dawned on me—these discussions aren’t about policy, highbrow social systems, or movements—these discussions are about people. Real, actual people, with real, actual problems. Including the person whose very life is on the line simply because, by no choice of his or her own, he or she was conceived. That person, in much of the world today, has NO rights, and has NOWHERE TO HIDE. “Fee, fi, foe, fum, I smell the blood of Adam’s son…”

We have given priority of life to bloodsucking Fear. See, most abortions aren’t done because the mother’s life—actual life, as in the mother would die if the baby were born—is in danger. Why? Well, because not that many mothers are dying in childbirth anymore. It’s tragic when it happens, but moms aren’t often dying because they don’t have quick enough access to an abortion. It happens because life is limited—memento mori. Why, then, have abortions gone from safe and infrequent, to an unsafe human right? Demand. We are in a country with a Capitalist economy, after all, and Planned Parenthood is a money maker with great marketing. What are they selling? Obviously, they’re selling abortions, but what are they really selling? Let’s examine why abortions are being procured to find out. Now, data can always be skewed by one party or another. Scientists are doing it all the time, and often have to in order to stay employed. So, I am including a write up on this data provided by the Guttmacher Institute done by the peeps at savethestorks.com (“Here are the Real Reasons Women Have Abortions”). I don’t know anything about them, but the write up brings up some fair points to consider.

I encourage anyone to look through the Guttmacher report. Just scan down to the data. We find ¾ of women say they can’t afford their child (though, looking at savethestorks.com, seems that data is skewed, as only 20-some percent reported this as primary reason), and ¾ say that having a baby would hamper life plans, like going to school, job etc. Other reasons include not wanting to be a single mom, not wanting to admit to others they were pregnant, being coerced by someone (such as boyfriend or parents), they don’t feel mature enough and other reasons. The general “physical problems with my health”, which by wording alone can include anything from life-threatening to annoying, is 12 percent, with rape at 1 percent, and incest less than ½ a percent. Keep in mind, this data is from 2004, and with the recent changes to thought about abortion as a right, and the secular sliding scale (sss… like a snake, get it?) changing what “threat to life” and “rape” mean, these numbers will likely go up due to rhetoric and marketing. As of now, though, keep the percentages in the back of your mind and ask, “Why are women choosing abortion?”

I repeat: they are afraid. A small, fragile person reclines helplessly in his or her mother’s womb, unable to make a run for a border of any kind, and instead of viewing this life as God’s greatest jewel of potential—a child who could save millions with a word once his potentiality is actualized—this one is torn to shreds, or poisoned, or starved. “I can’t afford her,” she cries in fear. “I can’t finish college AND love this baby boy,” she cries in fear. “I’d never get that promotion while nurturing my tiny newborn daughter,” she cries in fear. “But my mother is pressuring me to kill my helpless son,” she cries in fear. We have coined a new term for “fear” today. It’s called “choice” and is the Satanic mirroring of God’s beautiful gift, Free Will. Free Will is the ability to choose between freedom and prison, between the Kingdom of Heaven and the pits of Hell. Choose Grace and Virtue or reject Grace and get in bed with sin. Choice is what to have for dinner, what pair of shoes to buy, what to name our first child. We should exercise the disciplined Will and make prudent choices, or we can use an unformed Will and feel around in the dark (but, hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day). Pro-choice means Pro-fear, being for the goading of the Will by terror so as to achieve a political or social end, one that will always find itself trembling in a corner.

Choice is simply a this-or-that. Choice is like the sands of the mighty Sahara Desert, always shifting, never the same. Joy can shape choice, just as fear can, and choosing joy over fear is always a possibility. So is choosing hope. The Pro-Choice movement is a lie, plain and simple. It exists to manipulate through the power of intimidation, and hope is the antidote to its venom. So many women, of all backgrounds, have fallen victim to a very persuasive tongue. So, in the particular debate I mentioned above in regard to life issues, where should I have gone with it? What is my purpose on Twitter at all as a Catholic (especially one specializing in moral theology) if not the human response to God? I’m not a policy-maker, not an activist, and I’m no longer a Soldier. God has called me into the fray of the human individual, and in the case of abortion we have AT LEAST two people involved. Protect the life within her by educating on what life really means, yes, but also find ways to communicate hope and love for the mother, her mother, her husband, her boyfriend, her friends, and anyone else in that support group. If we don’t reach out to them, we reach no one. Is the fight for life worthwhile? Is it powerful and supernaturally protected? Or is it not? Are we lost? If the Body of Christ is lost, we all are.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *