Note: This is a companion piece to “Technization of life.”
Robert Stacy McCain writes about how contraceptives birthed an age of anti-reality. He first quotes himself from a piece he wrote 4 years ago:
The Pill fostered a prevalence of the belief that sex without pregnancy is normal. This utterly unnatural idea is the foundation of the Contraceptive Culture.
Throughout human history, recognition of the natural connection between sex and procreation was fundamental to society’s laws, customs, attitudes and behaviors in regard to relationships between men and women. These traditions had varied from place to place, and shifted slowly from time to time, but in all times and all places, social norms had been founded on the understanding that sex and pregnancy were intrinsically linked. Indeed, from a strictly biological perspective, reproduction is the sole purpose of sex.
The Contraceptive Culture, by contrast, is based on the negation of what we may rightly call natural sexuality.
What you see is how something artificial becomes perceived as “normal” simply by being common, and how the New Normal is then taken for granted as, with the passage of time, people simply forget that it was ever any other way.
After four decades of rhetoric about “choice,” and two decades of lectures about “safe sex,” younger Americans apparently assume that it is normal for sex to be sterile, and that for sex to produce its natural result (pregnancy) is something weird.
Think of liberal conceit as an anti-reality bubble, stretching thinner all the time, creating a vacuum for sundry human machinations within. It has to pop sometime. When it does, the dose of reality will be more like a flood, and it will annihilate with nuclear force.
For example, this person thinks she’s proven the inherent inequality of an infant and an embryo by indicating one’s instinctive reaction to save a falling infant instead of a falling petri dish bearing an embryo. Her point would have been theoretical 40 years ago before the advent of in vitro fertilization.
@Mortal_Weight Which has nothing to do with directly comparing an embryo to a baby. It makes it even *less* complicated. That's the point.— AxeGrrl (@Axe_Grrl) October 2, 2014
@Axe_Grrl Except in the real world "complicated" pregnancies w/ internal gestation are natural & normal.— Joseph Dooley (@Mortal_Weight) October 2, 2014
@Mortal_Weight Which has nothing to do with the proposed scenario.— AxeGrrl (@Axe_Grrl) October 2, 2014
The anti-reality here is the artificially created human being divorced from the natural bonds of flesh. Anyone who thinks this is the normal state of things from which determinations of life and death flow is living in an ivory tower.
The rationalization for abortion is that, like Victor Frankenstein, you created this life, and therefore you have the right to end it. The advancement of reproductive science feeds that conceit, cheapening life. Science giveth, and science taketh away.
Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from him. (Psalm 127:3)
If all reproduction was done in test tubes, as in Brave New World, and the prospect of human extinction by some breakdown in the mechanism emerged, how might pro-choicers react? Would that some of them admit humanity is worth perpetuating beyond their age, and they should preserve life against death.
Taylor Lewis rails:
Listening to today’s progressives, you get the impression that we are on the inexorable path to utopia. People are more tolerant and accepting than ever before. Abortion and birth control are readily available. Sex selection of the unborn is on the rise. Marriage has ceased being a sacred bond and is becoming a catch-all term for any contract agreed to by one or more persons. As government takes over more swaths of the economy, promises of material abundance keep escaping the mouths of politicians.
The implicit goal in all of this progress is total domination over nature by man. Poverty, sickness, intolerance, ugliness—the left wants nothing to be left to chance or God’s hands. The power to mold the future so that it fits one grand vision is the Holy Grail of progressivism.
If you believe mankind can conquer the mountains, squash all injustice, and create a society of pure happiness, then it makes sense to push the limits of nature and see if God will truly stand down to His own creation. Of course, in the fight between God and man, man must always lose, or else he wouldn’t be man to begin with. That’s why progressivism’s march to conquer nature nearly always ends in despair.
Pushing too hard against reality is liable to create unintended ramifications that distort and disorder our own well-being and sense of purposeful design. In short, it conflates what we know to be true with what’s false. Pretending the dead are still alive doesn’t bring proper closure. It only delays the inevitable reckoning. Just the same, arbitrarily choosing one’s gender based on personal inclinations doesn’t appear to boost self-esteem. The epidemic of suicide attempts among transgendered individuals says there is something highly disrupting about challenging one of nature’s most embedded realities.