Gendercide and Moral Tut-tuttery
Gendercide, specifically the systematic murder of unborn girls for no reason other than being a girl, is a real and present horror occurring today. When we hear of such of such a thing, we naturally think of China where the limits on child-bearing and the cultural pressure for males has, by some reports, led to an imbalance of male to female ratio as high as 120 men for every 100 women. If you do the math, that is millions of dead girls because they are girls. Millions.
While this horrific practice may be most egregious in China, increasingly this practice is finding a home in western countries as well including right here in America.
Lila Rose and Live action set out to expose that these horrors occur here with the complicity of the abortion giant Planned Parenthood. In an undercover sting, Live Action sent in a woman to solicit advice on how to procure an abortion based on sex and the Planned Parenthood counselor was more than happy to oblige. You can see the disturbing video here.
Even in the face of such horror, there are still those who continually decry the undercover tactic as intrinsically immoral and dub it "Lying for Jesus." They continually say that you can never ever ever ever lie for any reason, ever! Even in the defense of millions of lives. Peter Kreeft has called this position "moral stupidity." Indeed.
I find it odd that often the very same people who are so comfortable with shades of gray in so many areas of the moral life, can see only black and white when it comes to tactics in the defense of innocent life? It is this very same type of high-minded moral tut-tuttery that often leads some of these very same people to declare that it is fundamentally immoral to vote against the most virulently pro-abortion (and infanticide) President ever if that means voting for a potential replacement does not meet with their high moral standards.
These high moral standards, of course, include their definition of torture as the use of any coercive measure in the protection of innocent human life from would be (or even actual) mass murderers. While I emphatically oppose torture, it seems that you and I may not even discuss what coercive measures may be legitimate lest we are branded a card-carrying member of the rubber-hose right and have automatically dashed any chance for their support when we might run for President.
I find this type of manufactured fundamentalism very odd in that it almost always seems to artificially restrict what good people may do in the defense of innocent human life and consequently in opposition to the progressive agenda. Curious, that.
In the war against such horrors such as abortion, gendercide, and infanticide I would be proud to occupy the same foxhole as Lila Rose and Live Action, the continuous chants from those in the rear about what caliber bullets we may morally use not-withstanding.