Diocese of Toledo, Ohio

Browsing From the Pastor

October 21/22 Bulletin Article

From the Pastor:

In my reflection last week on the violence in the Holy Land, and society in general, I mentioned several times that it was connected to the misuse of human freedom. We see that in the very first pages of the Bible with Adam and Eve, and then with Cain and Abel. Bringing evil into the world does not require regular, consistent misuse of human freedom. Sadly, the good from multiple acts of kindness can be negated with one selfish action. The damage inflicted upon people in doing so can last for years and sometimes even a lifetime. As a result, man's greatest responsibility is the proper use of his or her freedom.

It's worth considering at which point human freedom because improper. For example, is it a misuse of freedom to not wear a seatbelt when traveling in a vehicle? State law says yes, however, those who argue to the contrary appeal to personal freedom: It's my body and I should be able to do with it as I wish. The thinking is that the bodily damage that I receive in an accident, on account of not wearing a seatbelt, does not cause bodily harm to others. Therefore, me not wearing a seat belt should be a personal choice.

State law sees it differently. It says you may not be concerned with dying or severe bodily injury to yourself in an accident, however there are other factors to consider, such as the medical cost of treating injuries that the rest of society must finance and the negative publicity of traffic deaths. As a result, state law considers wearing seat belts to be a commonsense law.

Another example to consider of the improper use of human freedom is walking naked on public streets. Those who advocate for doing so contend that they are not physically harming anyone and therefore should be able to do with their body as they wish.  State law recognizes there are other forms of harm, especially to children.

In both of these situations, the state identifies such use of freedom as improper and therefore illegal. It does so by examining the secondary and long-term effects of each action. The state doesn't surrender investigation and evaluation when confronted with the assertion that it is my body and I should be able to deal with it as I want. So, we have to ask ourselves why it is different  with the issue of abortion. It seems on that most basic issue there is willful mass ignorance. Suddenly people are not able to make proper evaluations and to see it for what it is, the ending of the life of another person. 

It's a complete fallacy to morally justify abortion by saying it's my body and I should be able to do with it as I want. The state will not let us drive without a seatbelt, but it will let us kill the innocent among us still in their mother's womb? This is so illogical that we must conclude it is the work of the devil. How else can we justify such willful blindness?



Fr. Miller




RSS Feed


Access all blogs

Subscribe to all of our blogs