Living in today’s world

While Jan. 22, the anniversary of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision, is still fresh in our minds, my mind is unsettled and torn.

Recently I came upon a piece of writing by a group called American Life League asserting that five major U.S. companies are contributing to Planned Parenthood, the League calling for a boycott of their products.

I wrote to each of the companies and asked if it were true that they gave money to Planned Parenthood. Four responded to me. I have not heard from the other firm.

The four answered yes, they support Planned Parenthood, but only insofar as the nation’s No. 1 abortionist provides educational services, or said their money went for “family planning education for low-income people” or “ongoing heath care services.”

They thanked me for my comments. A couple said such comments were reviewed when it came time to give more money from the corporate coffer.

I guess I’m disturbed about these circumstances. One thing is for sure: There is no room for compromise on the question of abortion.

Suppose I buy a product from a company that provides support to Planned Parenthood. There is no question that I have thereby contributed to the support of the No. 1 abortionist in the nation. The companies make their money by the sale of their products to guys like me. They, in turn, direct some of their profits to outfits like Planned Parenthood. The question is, am I compromising on the question of abortion by buying these products?

The argument always goes that these Planned Parenthood activities are simply educational. Therefore, why is that not good? Let’s take this analogy: Suppose there was an excellent school with a first-class academic program. Part of the philosophy of the school, however was that abortion was OK. This was an assertion, now, not a moot subject. In fact, they taught an elective course which said that specifically. Would you send your child to that school?

Let’s take the analogy of a magazine that always has in its center spread one of the four Gospels. The rest of the magazine was devoted to essays on sexual mores with the underlying philosophy being that abortion on demand was OK. Would you recommend this magazine to your college-age son or daughter?

In both analogies, something good can certainly be said. The school was a good school; the magazine published one of the four Gospels. However, by association with the other elements, surely there is some inconsistency, some compromise one would be making in affirming either the school or the magazine.

There is no inconsistency in the various aspects of the Church. Somehow, things go together. There is nothing in the Gospel which contradicts another part of the Gospel. Planned Parenthood says it is at least two things: educational services and abortionist. It says you may not like the one, but you might find the other wholly good and worthwhile. I see a contradiction in that, an inconsistency, a compromise.

The argument exists that because Planned Parenthood has money for its other operations, it’s more at liberty to perform abortions. Like the family budget, you can do more with more.

Boycotts are certainly different from simple protests. If I write to my congressman, that’s one thing. If I don’t vote for my congressman the next time out, that’s another. I would not give money to Planned Parenthood for any reason, because I find their philosophy reprehensible. They think it’s OK to kill unborn babies, and even help do it. I’m now faced with giving money to Planned Parenthood indirectly, whether I want to or not, because American firms are giving them the cash. However miniscule my contribution would be when I purchased a small item, somehow it still doesn’t sit well with me.

It’s not an easy ethical dilemma. United Way of Greater Lafayette gave some money to Planned Parenthood a while back for one of its non-abortion programs, saying the money didn’t come from direct contributions. Cut me some slack! United Way does many valuable and worthwhile things, but that kind of talk is doubletalk. It represents inconsistency and compromise.

I suppose some company somewhere is always going to be doing something I don’t like: polluting the environment, treating its employees unfairly, having some connection with organized crime or pornography or some other vice. I’m sure I buy all kinds of things which bring about unsettling circumstances.

It just seems there is no clear answer. Sometimes my conscience aches living in this world. What about yours? – T.R.

written by Thomas A. Russell
first published in the Lafayette Sunday Visitor in January, 1987