From a reader, remarking on the comments of Archbishop Chaput:
I’m writing to you as a Lutheran (which can be pretty catholic in the grand scheme of things, you know) pastor and seminary professor. In my experience dealing with life issues, I’ve found that every argument for life has a convincing argument against–not correct, and not to every person, but convincing enough to find women young and old in my office begging for forgiveness for committing abortion (which forgiveness I give upon such confession), and a host of culturally-conditioned people who still don’t respect life.
It was just this week, in fact, in my continual thinking upon this sad state of affairs, that the only appeal remaining–not that the fight is over–but the only appeal remaining without a convincing rebuttal is your Archbishop Chaput’s: So the two of us are in a discussion about life, and you are pro-abortion; I say:
“Which side do you think God will take when I stand before him in judgment? That I protected the rights of a woman over her reproduction or the rights of the unborn to live?”
Very few people, religious or not, can withstand this particular argument, because very few people are that irreligious. What I mean by that is, even if an atheist is engaged with you at this point, it is not a terrible leap of logic to replace “God” and “judgment” with “moral imperative” or some such nonsense. Very few human beings are without a primal sense of transcendent, or authoritative, morality, despite vocal protestations contrariwise.