Abortion, moral relativism, and the banality of evil

From Life Site News. This is strongly-worded and profound.


The 20th century political philosopher Hannah Arendt coined the term “banality of evil” when she observed the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. Eichmann was the very epitome of modern, banal, “nice” evil – an unthinking bureaucrat who, even to the end, could not seem to grasp the enormity of the evil in which he had taken part as a cog in the machine, a mere functionary.

Observers of the Nuremburg trials often commented that many of Eichmann’s fellow Nazis were to all outward appearances perfectly ordinary, bland, modern, well-educated, even cultured men: bureaucrats whose mass murders were committed from a distance with the stroke of a pen, and with the most prosaic and dispassionate of justifications.

We look back on this kind of man with the comfortable assurance that we are observing an undisputed monstrous evil, and are able to see it clearly. That man, those men, clearly ought to have known, and their facades of civilization are not enough to cover their shame. It is not enough, we can say, confident that the world will agree, to like Beethoven and Bach, to read Schiller and enjoy sports and be attentive husbands and fathers. We must know the difference between good and evil, or we are lost, we become those men, those civilized monsters.

I have seen myself, many times, the existence of this new, passionless “nice evil.” I have met it nearly every time I discuss abortion with a member of the “personally opposed but…” culture. These are the “perfectly nice” people who believe that it is perfectly justifiable to murder an innocent infant or helpless old person, and for no other reason than the momentary inconvenience he creates for another. Is there not something even more monstrous about this banal and complacent evil? Is this not the smiling, reasonable face of our worst dystopian nightmares?

Pro-life apologists like to compare our current abortion culture with that of slavery, one of the greatest evils ever perpetrated under (nominally) Christian princes.

In the centuries during which it was practiced, and whole economies were based on it, millions of people lived and prospered on its arrears. Until William Wilberforce forced the British public to look the realities of slavery in the face, it seems probable that the majority of them would, as the saying goes, not wish to own a slave themselves, but would not want to impose their personal beliefs on others. Buy and sell human beings, kidnap and torture and murder them, if your morality says you can. It is none of my business to tell you what to do.

Were these millions “moral monsters”? We are so sure of these evils now, but the question haunts us: why did they not know? And how are we different from them? Should these ordinary people not have instinctively known these evils?

Should they not all have done what Wilberforce finally did? Should there not have been a mass movement of decent, ordinary people against the atrocity of slavery? Why did Wilberforce’s crusade meet with such determined opposition, and take so long to accomplish?

Pro-abortionists de-humanize their victims and then kill them, just so that they can have recreational sex without consequences. This is the “great good” that pro-abortion radicals are fighting for – drunken hook-up sex and self-centered shacking up. They put amusement and entertainment above innocent human lives. Because they are strong, and unborn babies are weak. Their ethic is survival of the fittest. Pro-abortion is pro-selfishness. And they want you to celebrate and subsidize their selfishness, or else.

5 thoughts on “Abortion, moral relativism, and the banality of evil”

  1. Wintery, I like the way you put this. Instead of blaming women or even feminists, you blame the casual attitude of culture toward sex as recreation.
    That is the enemy. Not men. Not women. The casual attitude towards sex fueled by pornography, the media, and radical feminists.

    Sex is looked upon as a right or a privilege.
    It is neither.
    With great power (of procreation) comes great responsibility.
    People who have casual sex are losers who don’t deserve the power they wield so carelessly.
    And it is losers like these who are turning cultures to the dark side.


      1. There are some frustrated men out there scapegoating women in general.

        Had to dig a bit to find out that you really weren’t one of them.
        But it was worth it.


        1. Well, I think men are not good at articulating injustices, we just bear with it, and everyone thinks we are fine. But we are not fine. There are specific policies that third-wave feminists have supported (female and male feminists) that have made it harder and riskier for men to do marriage and fathering. It’s a policy problem. Better policies would need to more moral, educated, committed and stable men who can do the things that society needs them to do. They have to be built from the ground up. E.g. – male teachers, war books in the schools, chivalrous literature, no more sex education, massive punishments for drinking alcohol, all-male schools, etc.


  2. “Strongly worded and profound” is a good description. Thank you for posting this excellent, sobering article.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s