The Pro-Life Hypocrisy Of The GOP

Being pressed for time because of a busy schedule, it is useful to write this review on an article that is a must read and needs little to no further explanation. John Pavlovitz (click here for his short self description) on how the GOP is political party that is not really interested in being pro-life. Rather, that political party's concern for human life outside of the womb shows the duplicity of its claim to be pro-life.

If the GOP is not pro-life, then what is it? Pavlovitz describes it perfectly in the following sentence (click here for the article):

The unborn are easy to advocate for because you can idealize them into something palatable to you, something benign and comfortable, something in your own image.

Pavlovitz concisely and correctly points out the inconsistencies between the GOP's pro-life claims, which, btw, are based solely on its stand against abortion, with its lack of concern for the lives of others, especially those of non-whites. This selective approach of choosing which victims to defend is an age-old undertaking. It consists of helping only those one can canonize as being guiltless. Perhaps that is one reason why groups from the poor to immigrants to Black Lives Matter to Palestinians and others do not merit any sympathy from the GOP. For faults can be found in each of those groups. And for as long as the GOP can be associated with protecting little angels, they have a lock on the votes of many a ignorant religiously conservative  Christian voter. 

Because faults can be found in most other groups of victims, there remains not compelling reason to do what requires the most energy of any human task: to change. Thus, doing something to save the lives of those other than unborn children is not necessary for many a religiously conservative Christian. That is because changing might mean abandoning materialistic riches or admitting sins. So being able to find faults in victims excuses many of these Christians from changing.

I won't say anything else about the article. There are a couple of minor points he makes with which I could disagree. But Pavlovitz's article is one of the best articles I've read and I prefer people reading his article instead reading whatever insights I could offer.