I'll be discussing this article this morning with John Harper on Relevant Radio's Morning Air (9:30am EST). With all due respect, in winning so many pro-life battles, we may have [temporarily] lost the war, and we cannot recover until we acknowledge the root of the lie:
If you look at this chaos in terms of cultural Marxism, it becomes clear, especially as we review the stages of confrontation specific to the pro-life movement. The first battle was enormous and urgent -- to save the life of the child. It took years, but technology was on our side. Education about fetal development was key, and what fetal models did at the outset, the ultrasound perfected, so that there are very few people who have not seen the marvelous images of the unborn child: they are in scrap books, on refrigerators, and even in a handful of television commercials -- this is a tremendous a victory for life!
The second battle was for motherhood, which was to underscore the strength of women everywhere, to show that they were strong enough to handle pregnancy in a host of adverse circumstances: while still in school, while working stressful jobs, after having suffered abuse or rape, while encumbered financially, while feeling emotionally fragile, while responsible for other children, and even when facing special needs or medical emergencies -- this is a tremendous victory for women!
But the greater battle has yet to be won, and this is where Marxism and its insidious lies have prevailed, even here -- despite the political changes that accompanied the fall of the Berlin Wall, its cultural footprint remains. The majority of millennials are pro-life -- in that they want the unborn child to be given the benefit of the doubt, a chance at life. Gone are the days of stigma, where a woman would have an abortion because of the shame of a child out of wedlock. Schools and workplaces accommodate pregnancy no matter what the particular details of the situation, and in this realm we see that choice has won.
Having a baby at any stage of life, within marriage or without, has so prevailed that we now come to the root horror of our predicament: fatherhood is no longer an essential component of family life. The quest to defend life and to empower women has left men completely out in the cold, and few people see their value -- even though a woman cannot be a mother without a man: the child exists only because of his seed...
For the complete article, go here.
Comments
“People have realized that the complete removal of the feminine element from the Christian message is a shortcoming from an anthropological viewpoint. It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity."
This is just another of the unintended consequences of the cultural acceptance of contraception and abortion! Men's sexuality has been robbed of its creative essence. It is now viewed as something that imposes a burden on women (when conception happens to occur), something used to control women or something that is purely recreational. Why would men bother?? In taking away their responsibility, we've also robbed them of their significance! In the big picture of humanity, men have been made into nothing more than a nuisance women have to figure out how to control in order to bring about the next generation. Men don't see it as their task to protect the vulnerable because they see themselves as the vulnerable ones. A few well preserved vials of sperm would make men entirely obsolete in the world's ethos today!!
That is astounding Robin, and good for you for standing up. At the heart of that matter, I think, is even worse than a gender mixing message. There is an increased sharper and sharper focus on the "self." Solid Catholic teaching returns our focus away from ourselves to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The original sin, Eve denied her womanhood when she desired to be like "gods." Since the only god she knew was the Father. Where was Adam? He stood impotent... in other words, they were divorced. There's a young girl at Robin's son's high school who was just told that she is the center of the universe and it's a tragic disservice to her.
Ditto what Mary said! A lot of high schools have very poor math and science depts, for boys and girls. I also am educated as a chemical engineer, but chose to teach the two years before we had children because its hours were more suited to spending time with children. (I was looking ahead). When it came time and I was pregnant with our first, I realized that I did not want to leave him with someone else, and was able to stay home full time. I am not sure it would have been that easy if we were used to another engineering income and not just a private school teacher income. Also some of my first job offers were out on oil rigs - I had no interest in that at all even though I enjoyed my engineering classes and did well in them. No one discouraged me from an engineering job, on the contrary I got a lot of flack for my decision not to pursue an engineering career.
I've been lurking, but this is one that irritates me. Beats the heck out of me what these "barriers" are. I was educated as a chemical engineer, where 1/3 of our class was women. However, in electrical engineering, only 1 or 2 out of 30 were women. Is it possible that women are Just Not Interested in some areas? Nah, it must be The Man keeping us down so we must legislate (and, I agree -- when they say "legistlate", I hear "quota"). And actually, I have a friend that was also a chemical engineer. When she lost her job, she decided not to go back into engineering and started working from home so she could spend more time with her 3 kids. Also, if nothing else, there are all kinds of incentives for women to enter science and engineering -- scholarships not available to men, guaranteed housing on campuses that do not guarantee housing to the general population, etc. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that schools in general are not preparing students for the hard sciences. It is truly a sad state of affairs, the lack of science education these days.