The Irony of the Left-Wing Narrative

It is 1808. Secretary of State, James Madison, is running for the 4th President of the United States against federalist candidate, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. Already a political heavyweight for his role in drafting and promoting the Constitution and Bill of Rights (earning him the name “Father of the Constitution”), James Madison is by far, the more seasoned and favored choice.

I mean, there was that whole part about Madison supporting and likely authoring the three-fifths compromise (reminder: the three-fifths compromise counted three out of every five slaves as a person when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes). But who cares, right? James Madison is responsible for the very fabric of our nation’s laws.

Oh, wait. Didn’t James Madison own about a hundred slaves? Slaves, which he didn’t even free in his will, upon his death. But it’s not all bad. He clearly has experience and cares about America’s citizens.

So, do you vote for him?

Given the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, started in large part, in reaction to the shooting and death of Trayvon Martin, and energized by several other cases in which African American men were shot; I think we can say with assurance that few, if any in our nation would vote for James Madison now, regardless of his other views and excellent contributions to our nation’s foundation.

In other words, the fact that James Madison supported the legal dehumanization of the African-American men and women in our country would automatically disqualify him from any meaningful chance at office today.

Why? Because black lives, like all other lives, matter. Because our country was founded on the idea that all men and women are created equal and are naturally deserving of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This first right is so important because, without it, you don’t have any other rights. It is for that reason that government is created and required to protect the right to life.

Therefore, any political figure or leader who would support withdrawing or compromising the right to life would be rejected, and rightly so.

And yet, reading the cultural narrative of the liberal ideology, expressed largely through groups like Black Lives Matter, the Pro-Choice Movement, and the LGBTQ movement (all groups which publicly condemn violence against human beings) is like reading satire.

Each of these movements build their platform on the assumed and simple belief that human beings have value and should be treated as such. And yet, following James Madison’s example of dehumanizing some human beings so that we can live the type of life we want, they support a woman’s right to have a “physician” rip her baby apart in the womb. Such irony is in a league of its own.

Of course, many people reject the comparison between slavery and abortion because “the unborn is not a human person” they say.

This pro-choice mantra cuts off the entire branch that the movement claims to stand on; namely science. Science is clear that conception “marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”[1] We know that the beginning of this unique individual is the beginning of a human individual because the law of bio-genesis teaches us that every living thing reproduces after its own kind. It is in the biological nature of human beings to only reproduce other human beings.  

Many supporters of “abortion-rights” acknowledge these scientific truths, but then make a philosophic argument for the morality of abortion by saying that the unborn is not a person because it doesn’t possess certain functions (such as consciousness, cortical brain activity, ability to feel pain, self-awareness, etc.).

Despite the fact that supporters of “abortion-rights” have not provided any reason as to why these functions are value-giving in the first place, this performance-based view of humanity doesn’t just disqualify the unborn from human value, but many born people as well. Lack of consciousness is found in born people when we are sleeping or knocked out; cortical brain activity is often absent amongst those in a coma; congenital analgesia is a disease found in some born people where they cannot feel pain; and self-awareness only begins to develop between fifteen and twenty-four months of age.[2] And yet, few people would suggest that it ought to be a moral and legal right to kill born people who lack those functions.

While the unborn may not possess certain functions that pro-choice advocates declare are necessary for human value, that doesn’t mean we have the right to end the life of the unborn child. The reason for this being, that there is no essential or value-giving difference between the embryo we once were and the adult we are today that would justify taking our life at that earlier stage, in the womb. The unborn does indeed differ from us. But they do so in much the same way that we differ from each other.

So the science of embryology tells us what the unborn is: a human being. And philosophically, we know there’s no value giving difference between the child in the womb and the adult outside the womb that would justify us taking the life of the child in the womb.

The irony of the left-wing narrative becomes clear: Black lives, female lives, LGBTQ lives; they all matter, so long as they’ve already been born. You cannot march and proclaim that black lives, female lives, and LGBTQ lives matter without firstly admitting that all lives matter. And if all lives matter, then why are these movements defending a mother’s right to end the life of her unborn human offspring?

The irony of the liberal ideology proves that its narrative is in fact a lie. They don’t believe black lives matter, because they support abortion, the number one killer of the African-American community. They don’t believe female lives matter because they support abortion, which ends the life of half a million female babies each year in the United States. And if we’re to believe the liberal narrative, that sexuality is not chosen, but it’s part of one’s identity, then they don’t believe that LGBTQ lives matter since abortion kills unborn children who are also a part of the LGBTQ community.

If President Donald Trump was rejected by liberals, in large part because of how he talked about certain people groups, we can be confident that those same people would reject a James Madison today for owning and dehumanizing black lives. And yet, these same individuals voted for Secretary Hillary Clinton, who dehumanizes unborn lives by defending a mother’s moral and legal right to take her child to a “clinic” to be ripped apart.

The left-wing can continue weaving it’s ironic, satirical propaganda, but we can all see the lie upon which their narrative is built. They don’t believe all lives matter; only those which they deem valuable. And if you’re in the womb, you’re screwed.

[1] Keith L. Moore and T. V. N. Persaud, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2.

[2] Rochat, P.; Broesch, T.; Jayne, K. (2012). "Social awareness and early self-recognition". Consciousness and Cognition. 21 (3): 1491–1497