A Diamond in the Raunch Pro-life Positions Emerge in Knocked Up and Waitress

ExileStreet ^ | 6/25/07 | Marc T. Newman

[ParsifalCA]

Knocked Up appears poised to be this summer's Wedding Crashers - a loud, raunchy battle-of-the-sexes film that brings in big box office. Millions of people will flock to this morally reprehensible film, and laugh it up while watching drugged-out, sex-obsessed slackers slouching through extended adolescence do anything to avoid growing up and taking responsibility for their lives. While viewers wallow in profanity, vulgarity, and general tastelessness, they will also see some amazing live ultrasound images of a developing unborn child in the womb - easily enough to give lie to any assertion by abortion rights advocates that what is in the womb is merely a "bunch of cells" or the purposefully vague "products of conception."

Identification of this "pro-life" angle in Knocked Up should in no way be considered an endorsement for the film. Sure, there is a redemptive aspect to the movie, but you have to slog through an awful lot of garbage to get to it. Do not go to see it - is that clear enough? But, that said, millions of people will go see it, laugh, and throughout the film view compelling images of an unborn baby. This same weekend, a PG-13-rated film, Waitress, has also found its way into the box office top ten. It depicts a woman's commitment to her unplanned, unwanted pregnancy and the positive, life-changing effects that follow.

Yes, these films are inappropriate on many levels. But there is no escaping the fact that we are witnessing two Hollywood films in simultaneous release that value unborn life, openly reject the call for abortion, and argue that children can positively affect the lives of those who have them. And that's a far cry from the "kids as parasitic cancers" rhetoric propagated by some in the population control and abortion rights crowd. [more]

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Ultimately, the force of public opinion (influenced by technology) will sound the death knell of abortion.

[Gondring]

Ultimately, the force of public opinion (influenced by technology) will sound the death knell of abortion.

How dare you suggest such a thing, rather than advocate government force the issue against public opinion? </sarc>

Why, changing peoples' minds--and moving the government from that position--might actually have long-term beneficial effect!

:-)

[Cedar]

Here’s some real images that should get the job done of stopping abortion:

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures_3.html

[gura]

"Ultimately, the force of public opinion (influenced by technology) will sound the death knell of abortion."

That's the way it should be. You can't legislate morality, only educate and lead by example.

[California Patriot]

Wow.

[ModelBreaker]

That's the way it should be. You can't legislate morality, only educate and lead by example.

Murder (of the born or unborn) is an issue of morality. It is behavior that we, as a society, prohibit for born people and that we encourage (we pay for abortions, require hospitals to provide them etc) for the unborn.

Just because something has a moral dimension does not mean we throw up our hands and mutter platitudes about not legislating morality. We legislate morality all the time. That's most of what laws are.

I assume you would not mutter your little platitude if someone killed a good friend of yours and now the police catch the killer. Do you say: "Dang, I'd like to put that sucker in jail; but, well, we just can't legislate morality?" What you said in your earlier post is about as silly as the language I just quoted.

What this really represents is a hidden moral judgment on the part of society that killing the unborn is not a particularly serious thing. Most folks realize that this opinion makes them look like a jerk so they find another way to rationalize it. Frequently, they cloak that opinion in cliches about legislating morality that, on examination, have no substance except that they sound good.

[gura]

I completely understand with your point and agree with you, my only caveat being that no matter the current legislative position on something a real cultural change is sometimes necessary.

[ModelBreaker]

. . . no matter the current legislative position on something a real cultural change is sometimes necessary.

This harks back to Will and Ariel Durant's very important point that culture is far more important than law. You are right that we need to win both battles, not just the legislative battle.