What else can his position be called when his published words include, "What is pro-life about forcing the birth of a child, if that child will enter a world of rejection, deprivation (etc)"? The entire screed can be found in this New York Times op-ed piece that he penned. Of course the NYT published it with joy - the same kind of "joy" that Caiaphas experienced when Judas betrayed Our Lord to him. Forcing the birth of a child? So the preferred alternative, according to him, is to allow the murder of that same child? Apparently so.
While this saddens me greatly, it does not surprise me in the least. Last August he was making pro-abortion noises. He also had been making other liberal/progressive noises in regards to gun control, amnesty for border-crashers, etc. His posts on facebook have focused more on these progressive pet causes than baby-slaughter. These positions have as common factors the absolving of crime perpetrators of any moral responsibility for their crimes. Perhaps therein lies some cause for his fuzzy thinking on baby-slaughter. He is not the only one in whom I've noticed this phenomenon.
Let's return now to Schenck's announcement of his betrayal. Many prolifers have been giving him well-deserved rebukes. Ryan Bomberger, founder of the Radiance Foundation, is a pro-life leader who was himself conceived in rape. He penned an open letter to Schenck that is well worth the time to study it. In it is truth that Schenck (and any other "woke" people enamored/seduced by "social justice" clap-trap) would do well to take to heart.
I myself might suggest that he read Ezekiel 18:24 and take warning and repent while he can. In the meantime we shall all pray for that repentance, and for wisdom and humility so that we too don't fall into those sins.
random thoughts on a Wednesday afternoon
10 minutes ago