Questioning JD Vance’s Value Systems
So, Mr. JD Vance wants to talk about real value systems? Hm. OK. But if I recall correctly, Vance’s running mate:
- Has been convicted of tax evasion and falsifying business records
- Had his private parts described in detail by a porn star with whom he committed adultery and paid hush money
- Has been convicted of rape
- Stole classified documents critical to United States security, documents for which foreign governments would pay
- Incited an insurrection in an attempt to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States
- Sent fake electors in an attempt to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States
So, why should anyone care about what Vance has to say about value systems?
The Catholic Church and Its Value System
Moreover, Vance is a Catholic. Shall we discuss the value system of the Catholic cardinals and bishops who moved child-raping priests from one parish to another where the priests could, and often did, rape again? And again.
A priest who rapes a child has a personal failing. But an institution that protects and enables such priests has an institutional failing and what I would call a less-than-ideal value system. But a value system which, evidently, Vance accepts.
Southern Baptists and Their History
And let’s not forget those other would-be keepers of public morality, Southern Baptists, which is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States. Here’s what Wikipedia has to say:
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) . . . is a Baptist Christian denomination based in the United States. It is the world’s largest Baptist organization and the largest Protestant and second-largest Christian body in the United States. . . . In 1845, the Southern Baptists separated from the Triennial Convention in order to support slavery, which the southern churches regarded as “an institution of heaven“. During the 19th and most of the 20th century, it played a central role in Southern racial attitudes, supporting racial segregation and the Lost Cause of the Confederacy while opposing interracial marriage.
Slavery is an “institution of heaven,” said the Southern Baptists. And not merely “said.” They fought the Civil War over it. And lost. It seems that heaven did not support their value system.
Obsession with Sexual Morality
And why is it that it’s so often about sex with these keepers of public morality? Masturbation and pre-marital sex? Bad. Contraception? Bad. Homosexuality? Bad. Sex outside marriage? Bad. Sex within marriage that includes oral and/or anal? Bad. God will torture you in hell for all eternity.
The Bible and Abortion
And let’s not forget abortion, which the Bible condemns. Only it doesn’t. Yes, Jeremiah 1:5 says, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born . . . “? I’ve seen that on billboards and on the Internet. But it’s obviously not about abortion; it’s about God’s foreknowledge, a fact that is clearer when the entire verse is read.
Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born, I sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet to the nations.
The point of the verse is not abortion; the point is a particular man who is to be a prophet. Using half of the verse is dishonest and out of context—ironic since Christian apologists use context as their go-to get-out-of-jail-card against any scriptural verse they don’t like. “You quoting it out of context,” they often say, sometimes not even bothering to say what they think the proper context is. After all, in what context is it moral to follow Deuteronomy’s command to kill a child who curses a parent?
The Catholic Church’s Position on Abortion
To its credit, the Catholic Church is a bit more honest about the Bible and abortion.
The texts of Sacred Scripture never address the question of deliberate abortion and so do not directly and specifically condemn it.–Paul Paul II, encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae, 25 March 1995.
Look it up.
A bit more honest but not entirely frank and open because that would mean admitting that the Catholic Church’s own canon law said for over a thousand years that abortion is NOT murder if done within about the first two or three months. Here are the details.
Without a human soul, a fetus is merely human tissue, not a genuine human being. When does the human soul unite with the fetus? Some months after conception, said the Catholic Church. For over eighteen hundred years.
For over eighteen hundred years, the Church made a distinction between fetus animatus (a fetus with a human soul) and fetus inanimatus (a fetus without a human soul). Taking the life of a fetus inanimatus was not seen as taking the life of a genuine human being. That was the teaching of popes, by various saints, and of other Church notables. That was the teaching written into the Church’s own canon law.
Canon law is the law of the Roman Catholic Church as opposed to the civil law of any particular country. In 1140, John Gratian, a monk, compiled “Decretum Gratiani,” the first comprehensive collection of the Church’s various canon laws. Until 1917, his book (with some additions) was the fundamental compendium of Church canon law. Gratian’s book made a distinction between the abortion of the fetus inanimatus and the fetus animatus. The abortion of the fetus inanimatus was not seen as taking the life of a genuine human being.
For example, about 1211 Pope Innocent III was asked if a monk who had helped his lover get an abortion was guilty of murder, guilty of killing a human being. The Pope said no, because the fetus in question was not yet “animated” with human life. The Pope wrote that the human soul does not enter the fetus until the time of quickening and that abortion before quickening was not murder. Similarly, Pope Gregory XIII (1572-85) said it was not murder to kill a fetus less than forty days old, since the fetus “was not human.” And St. Thomas Aquinas, wrote in the 1200s that abortion of a fetus that was not yet “animated” with human life was not murder. He said: “The intellective soul, i.e., true person, is created by God at the completion of man’s coming into being.” Aquinas held that the “infusion” of the fetus with a human soul occurred forty to eighty days after conception.
For over a millennium, the Roman Catholic Church’s own canon law distinguished between the fetus inanimatus (the unformed, inanimate fetus) and the fetus animatus (the formed, animate, human fetus). The distinction between fetus inanimatus and fetus animatus persisted in canon law until 1917. Today canon law only mentions “the fetus.”
Some readers may find this astonishing, even unbelievable. But there’s no need to take my word for it; look it up. For instance, in the 1992 World Book Encyclopedia article on abortion, you can read the following:
During the late Middle Ages, abortion before ‘quickening’ became a generally accepted practice in Europe. Quickening is the time when the mother first feels the fetus moving inside her. Before the 1800s there were few organized religious or legal obstacles to abortion prior to quickening. In the United States, abortion before quickening was not an offence under common law before the 1800s.
Until the late 1800’s the Roman Catholic Church had no established doctrine against abortion before animation. Catholic theologians defined animation as the point at which a fetus became human — between 40 and 80 days after conception. But in 1869, the church proclaimed that abortion is never justifiable.”
FAQs on JD Vance’s Comments on Childless Women
JD Vance, a prominent figure in American politics, has recently made comments that have sparked significant debate. Here are some frequently asked questions and their answers regarding his statements.
What Did JD Vance Say About Childless Women?
JD Vance has been criticized for suggesting that childless women have no real value in society. His comments implied that women who choose not to have children are somehow less valuable or less contributing members of society.
What Is the Context of His Comments?
Vance’s remarks were part of a broader discussion on family values and societal contributions. He argued that traditional family structures, including those with children, are essential to societal well-being and that individuals who do not conform to these norms may be seen as less valuable.
How Did People React to His Comments?
The public reaction to Vance’s comments was overwhelmingly negative. Many people felt that his statements were not only hurtful but also misguided, as they failed to recognize the diverse contributions that childless individuals make to society.
What Are Some Common Criticisms of Vance’s Remarks?
- Lack of Empathy:** Many critics argue that Vance’s comments demonstrate a lack of empathy for individuals who choose not to have children, often due to personal or financial reasons.
- Ignoring Diversity:** Critics point out that Vance’s views ignore the diversity of family structures and contributions in society, including those from single parents, adoptive parents, and caregivers.
- Disregarding Economic Contributions:** Some argue that childless individuals contribute significantly to the economy through their work and taxes, just like families with children.
- Perpetuating Stereotypes:** His comments are seen as perpetuating harmful stereotypes about women who choose not to have children, reinforcing outdated gender roles.
How Do Vance’s Comments Reflect Broader Societal Issues?
Vance’s remarks reflect broader societal issues related to gender roles, family structures, and societal contributions. They highlight ongoing debates about what constitutes value in society and who is considered a contributing member.
What Role Do Politicians Play in Shaping Public Opinion on Family Values?
Politicians like JD Vance play a significant role in shaping public opinion on family values through their statements and policies. Their words can influence how society views different family structures and contribute to broader cultural narratives.
How Can We Promote More Inclusive Discussions About Family Values?
To promote more inclusive discussions about family values, it is essential to recognize and celebrate the diversity of family structures. This includes acknowledging the contributions of childless individuals, single parents, adoptive parents, and caregivers.
What Can Be Done to Address Misconceptions About Childless Women?
To address misconceptions about childless women, it is crucial to engage in open and respectful dialogue. This involves listening to diverse perspectives, challenging stereotypes, and promoting education about the various ways individuals contribute to society.
How Can We Support Childless Women in the Face of Such Comments?
Supporting childless women involves recognizing their inherent value and contributions to society. This can be done by promoting policies that support all families regardless of structure, advocating for inclusive language, and fostering a culture that values diversity in family arrangements.
What Is the Impact of Such Comments on Mental Health and Well-being?
Comments like those made by JD Vance can have a significant impact on mental health and well-being, particularly for childless women who may already feel marginalized or judged. It is essential to create safe spaces where individuals feel valued and respected.
How Can We Encourage More Inclusive Policies in Politics?
To encourage more inclusive policies in politics, it is necessary to advocate for legislation that supports all families regardless of structure. This includes policies related to healthcare, education, and economic support that recognize the diverse contributions of all individuals.
What Role Does Media Play in Shaping Public Opinion on These Issues?
The media plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion on these issues by amplifying diverse voices and perspectives. Responsible reporting can help challenge harmful stereotypes and promote more inclusive discussions about family values.
How Can We Foster a Culture That Values Diversity in Family Arrangements?
Fostering a culture that values diversity in family arrangements involves education, advocacy, and community engagement. By promoting understanding and respect for different family structures, we can create a more inclusive society where all individuals feel valued.
What Are Some Examples of Inclusive Policies That Support All Families?
- Universal Healthcare:** Policies that provide universal healthcare can support all families regardless of structure by ensuring access to essential medical services.
- Educational Support:** Programs that offer educational support for all caregivers, including those who do not have children, can help recognize their contributions to society.
- Economic Incentives:** Economic incentives such as tax credits or benefits for caregivers can help acknowledge the value of all family arrangements.
How Can We Engage in Constructive Dialogue About These Issues?
Engaging in constructive dialogue about these issues involves active listening, empathy, and respect for diverse perspectives. By fostering open communication, we can work towards creating a more inclusive society where all individuals are valued.
What Is the Importance of Recognizing Contributions Beyond Traditional Family Structures?
Recognizing contributions beyond traditional family structures is essential for building a more inclusive society. It acknowledges that value is not solely defined by having children but by the diverse ways individuals contribute to society.
How Can We Address the Intersectionality of These Issues With Other Social Justice Movements?
Addressing the intersectionality of these issues with other social justice movements involves recognizing how different forms of oppression intersect. For example, addressing racism, sexism, and classism simultaneously can help create a more comprehensive understanding of societal contributions.
