"Critics are the unpaid guardians of our souls," claimed Plato, a Greek philosopher not to be confused with that colorful modeling clay. (And I'm not sure he still believed that when critics sentenced his friend and fellow philosopher, Socrates, to death!)

Critics were also waiting for the thousands of "Right to Life" advocates gathered in Washington D.C. to mark the 29th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling that declared abortion legal. The day started off well when the President of the United States addressed the group.

"Every life is valuable," the President said. "Our society has a responsibility to defend the vulnerable and weak, the imperfect and even the unwanted." (Applause) A generous society values all human life. A merciful society seeks to expand legal protection to every life . . . not just the healthy or the strong or the powerful. " (More applause.)

But Ann Retman, an abortion advocate from Boston, Mass., followed the "pro-life" marchers from the mall to the Supreme Court building. "If they're so proud of living in a free nation, then there needs to be freedom," she said. "I'm sick of them pulling out their religion when it's convenient for them and then when they want to oppress people, the Bible doesn't come in anywhere."

So, would Plato consider Retman a "guardian" of the anti-abortionist's souls? I think so. As one who considers himself "pro-life" (or "a "right-wing religious radical" if you prefer), I'm concerned that many in the "Right To Life" movement may not be as "pro" as they would like to think when it comes to "life."

The President noted, "a generous society values all human life." Capitalize, bold-face, and underline that word ALL.

It is tragic that 3,600 unborn babies are aborted every day in this land of freedom. That's a million each year.

But did you know that 24,000 people worldwide die every day from starvation and malnutrition? That's over 8 million each year. Three of four who die are younger than five years old.

Did you also know, that hunger relief groups estimate that it would take 13 billion dollars a year to end hunger for the Earth's poorest citizens? Wow, that is a lot of money, but did you know North Americans and Europeans spend 18 billion dollars a year on pet food?

Retman would probably have a fit, as well, to realize that many "pro-lifers" are pro-death penalty. I haven't figured that one out, yet, either (see my column on capital punishment). It's particularly disturbing when 381 death-row prisoners in the United States were declared "wrongly convicted" and had their sentences thrown out. In a scathing series of articles in the January 1999 issues of the Chicago Tribune, reporters found "With impunity, prosecutors across the country have violated their oaths and the law, committing the worst kinds of deception in the most serious of cases."

And I'm not sure about the company we keep. In 2000, 88 percent of all known executions were carried out in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USA. According to Amnesty International, during that year 3,058 people were sentenced to death in 65 countries.

I do applaud the Justice Department and military for it's "pro-life" treatment of terrorist "detainees." It seems to me that moving suicidal maniacs who have lived in dark, dank caves with no sanitary facilities for the last several months to a sunny tropical climate with modern plumbing is actually a major improvement in their standard of living. (And I should remind Ms. Retman -- and the prolifers -- that Jesus commands his followers to love their enemies and to treat prisoners as they would treat him.)

And, speaking of Christ's disciples, "More than 160,000 Christians were martyred in the last five years in a monumental escalation of religious persecution . . ." according to Dan Hodel, president of the Christian Coalition. "More Christians have been killed for their faith in the 20th Century than the first nineteen centuries combined!)

I'm probably being a bit self-serving in this "pro-life" stance since four journalists covering Afghanistan were captured and executed on the spot by Taliban soldiers. Twenty-four journalists were killed in 2000 and 34 in 1999. "Truth is the first casualty of war" and ten reporters covering the civil war in Sierra Leone were hunted down and murdered by rebel forces angry at the reporting of their human rights abuses.

And this doesn't include those whose lives are in imminent danger.

Over 800,000,000 people in our world are seriously under-nourished with physical and cognitive consequences.

The United Nations estimates there are 20,000,000 "bonded laborers" worldwide.

Over 700,000 to 2,000,000 women and children are "trafficked" each year for forced labor and prostitution. Women and children sold or kidnapped into prostitution number up to 800,000 in Thailand, 200,000 in India, and 50,000 right here in the United States (Asian women "sell" for $16,000 each in North America).

So, what's the solution?

How ‘bout for every bag of pet food we buy, we send a check for the same amount to World Hope, or other groups fighting hunger throughout the world? (No pets? Donate what you spend on snack foods.)

How ‘bout every time we're waited on by a minimum wage server at a Chinese or Mexican restaurant, we send a comparable donation to organizations fighting forced labor in those countries such as the Salvation Army's "Initiative Against Sexual Trafficking"?

How ‘bout every time we sing praises in our comfortable churches, we pray for our brothers and sisters who are imprisoned, tortured, and killed for their faith?

And how ‘bout being "pro" for all "life"?

Copyright © 2002 James N. Watkins

Yeah, you are right and you wrote that well. The concern I have is Evangelicals—and more so the conservative right—pick and choose things to be against and are not consistent. And, thus, I don't believe their (our) views are really rooted in anything other than opinion. Opinions don't last!

I really do not think our pro-life anti-abortion position will last the next 30 years even—it is a temporary position like anti-divorce was. We will cave in on it not just in the world but in the church as well. Why? Because we don't really believe our position "life begins at conception." We are not willing to pay the price of that belief—we only want to scold the world.

I believe Evangelicals believe just about what the rest of America believes: "the fetus is sacred in some sense" and not merely a "bolt is a Buick" but it is not "fully" life. It is potential life, and thus more than a fingernail, but it is not to be treated as if it is equivilent life as a born person. Does that match your perception of the church's "real" position (assuming that our behaviors are the only true indicators of our real positions). Keith Drury (November 2004)