Skip to main content

Sarah Terzo and the challenge of being a pro-life atheist

If you missed it, I recommend you read Sarah Terzo's cri de coeur about the frustration she faces as someone who is a pro-life atheist. Her experiences confirm that the American pro-life movement is overwhelmingly Christian in orientation. While many non-Christians, atheists, or agnostics likely self-identify as pro-life, my impression is that the activists largely approach reproductive politics as an outgrowth of their Christian faith and theology.

Ms. Terzo publishes an absorbing blog, ClinicQuotes, that focuses on the stories and statements of people who have changed from being pro-choice to pro-life. As far as I can tell, her body of work and her methods of activism betray nothing that would make her undesirable as a pro-life ally.

Recently Ms. Terzo contacted several 'crisis pregnancy centers' to ask if they would let an atheist volunteer at their center, and they were pretty clear in rejecting her offer of help. I get the impression that she was doing this to confirm what she already knew and had experienced.

Interestingly, Ms. Terzo is a regular contributor to Live Action News, which is the online news site for Live Action (the famous-infamous organization run by Lila Rose that produces creatively-edited 'sting' documentaries about abortion clinics). By publishing Ms. Terzo's column, they have shown a catholicity that other pro-life activists have not.

Links:

Op-ed in Live Action News (August 1, 2013): On being a pro-life atheist

Sarah Terzo's ClinicQuotes blog

Homepage for Secular Pro-Life, a group for non-Christian pro-life activists. Their web site is worth its own look (if nothing else, to see how their policy vision differs from, say, the policy vision of the Catholic Church)
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Medically necessary abortions: The battle of the experts

Apparently, Representative Joe Walsh is not entirely alone! The assertion that an abortion is never medically necessary has been floating around in the pro-life universe for at least a little while. We are now witnessing a battle of the experts. One the one side is Joe Walsh and friends. Walsh himself released a pdf document with quotations from several doctors-- including some historically prominent pro-choice doctors, like Alan Guttmacher-- making the 'never medically necessary' claim seem quite reasonable. Also on Walsh's side are several doctors  who particpated in a recent "International Symposium on Maternal Health" in Dublin. Ireland, despite a European Court of Human Rights ruling in 1992 , has a total ban on abortion. Irish pro-lifers want the country's politicians to resist pressure to implement even a life exception, so the question of medical necessity is directly relevant there. The "Dublin Declaration," released after the S...
3 comments
Read more

Asking Pope Francis to reexamine abortion

Philosopher Gary Gutting, who always writes something interesting for The Stone column in The New York Times , recently asked if Pope Francis might reconsider the Catholic Church's traditional absolutist opposition to abortion. In doing so, Gutting makes a case for a kind of minimalist justification for abortion-- that is, abortion is immoral in most circumstances but there are a few cases where abortion is justified (in the case of rape, for example).  For that reason, the column makes for informative reading. Still, Gutting puts the cart before the horse: how and why would Pope Francis review the Church's view on abortion before reexamining its even-more-restrictive view of artificial contraception?  Anything can happen, of course, but Pope Francis has not really indicated a willingness to reconsider the doctrine of the Church on sex, conception, and abortion. Everything I have read from and about Francis is that he is advocating for a change of tone and emphas...
Post a Comment
Read more