Lake of Fire

Is a Tony Kaye documentary which chronicles the abortion issue in the United States. It was shot over a period of 15 years and released in 2007. If it makes an argument, it is that the issue is deeply complex, which is ultimately an argument for choice. However, the documentary does not present abortion as an easy choice, or as one without grave emotional and physical cost. It includes graphic recordings of abortions in progress and many images that visually argue and demonstrate that developing fetuses are human. It's portrayal of the pro-life movement largely consists of religious fundamentalists who seem to be a very unhappy and hate-filled group, but is balanced by some very sane pro-life commentary.

It left me thinking.

Abortion policy is all about a conflict of values. Everyone is basically pro-life. Everyone has certain values that may come into conflict with their belief that others lives should be preserved. Some people cross this line very easily.

I think of war. Soldiers kill people, and one should ask why it is alright for them to do so. If we consider Iraq, we would conclude that it becomes okay to kill other people, if we come to be afraid that they or their leaders might mean us or our friends harm. The fact is war is not about killing only people who are a direct threat, but about killing whoever happens to be between a soldier and their target. The news is full of reports of civilians and children who are routinely killed, and it is also well documented that the killing of civilians is often misreported as enemy kills. As a pacifist, this is not acceptable for me. A consideration of war forces us to admit that our society considers it acceptable to kill other people for having values and interests which conflict with our own; or economically interfere with our plans. This is the story of Vietnam, and many other conflicts which the United States has engaged in South America and around the world.

Surely anyone who thinks war is acceptable must also think abortion, as a microcosm of economic inconvenience, is also acceptable. I am not pro-war. I am a pacifist, so I would not be able to serve in the military. I suppose if I got organised I could hold pro-life rallies which were against war. It would make sense. I'm not able to see a legitimate difference between the two.

I think of capital crimes. Some people think it okay to take a life of someone who has commited certain crimes. Unfortunately there is great debate over which crimes should be capital. Some people would say murder and rape. Other people would include theft and treason. Others demand death for adultery or pre-marital sex. Or homosexuality. Or blasphemy. Or swearing. Or dissent. The list goes on and you can look at some countries and see where it leads...stonings on the street. Or lynchings. Or dropping a drunk outside city limits in sub-zero temperatures. And I have to wonder why some people feel so justified in killing people who (so seemingly mildly) offend their sensibilities.

My wonderment only lasts until I remember by own evangelical tradition, which in too many instances, holds values derived from a bloody, death oriented religion. When one believes that other people are essentially evil and deserving of death (and eternal torture) it certainly effects one's assessment of other people's value, as well as one's notion of what values God Almighty may have. The answer to the question, "What Would Jesus do?" changes radically depending on whether one imagines the humble Jesus of the gospels (for the vast majority of his life the answer to WWJD was carpentry) or the apocalyptic avenger who will supposedly return to judge all sinners, damning all who have not submitted to his reign.

Despite some claims that the Bible presents a coherent and consistent view of God, to me it seems to chronicle radically different views which cannot possibly be reconciled. But that's what thoughtful reflection and prayer is for. My own experience of God, in prayer, reflection, and study, is that he is a loving God who yearns for us to find our real selves in union with him. The theology doesn't matter. God is present, and when we loosen our ties to our own selfish wants, we lose some of our false selves, and find some our real selves, which is The Self which ultimately resides in God. This is deeply relevant, because it follows that God is present in other people, and I can't do violence to them without doing violence to myself and, let's continue to call it: God.

So back to abortion. I am truly pro life. And because of that I must be pro choice. Life is full of harrowing choices and experiences precisely because God/The Universe does not attempt to control our actions. We are free. Choice is not a right - it is the nature of existence. Life is making choices; and the meaningful life is learning from and growing because of the choices we and others are forced to make.

As we learn and grow may we find ourselves more and more able to love and help each other.