I am surprised how many modernist Catholics claim to be both “pro-life” and “pro-evolution.” They hardly realize the contradiction involved here. Perhaps they believe both stances are “pro-science,” but they would only be half correct. Of course, you don’t need Catholicism (only common sense) to know it’s wrong to kill a baby in the uterus. Neonatology and advances in genetics have made this reality even more undeniable. But again, how can so many Catholics believe they are marrying faith and reason in accepting Darwinian evolution?  Such Catholics must be stuck in the minds of the liberal hierarchy of the past 50 years because countless scientists (both Christian and atheistic) have disproved evolution.  Even the Jewish computer science expert at Yale, David Hillel Gelernter, wrote a devastating piece against the alleged mathematics of Darwinian evolution in Spring of 2019. So, why are Catholics so behind the curve on this? Just like Bible scholarship, they think they’re keeping up with Protestants by sticking around the 1970s on scholarship.  Funny thing is that evangelicals have left Catholics by coming up to speed on the inerrancy of Scripture and rejecting evolution.

Science, math and even Divine Revelation aside, I want to discuss the philosophical contradiction of someone who claims to be both “pro-life” and “pro-evolution.” Recently, I made a video in my car as I left a Planned Parenthood.   In the video, I described a sidewalk-counseling encounter I had with a young man who’s wife was in the abortion center.  He had two young children in his car.  When I asked to speak to him, he asked me to step away from the car to where his kids would not hear us.  When I asked him if he knew what was going to happen to his third baby, he looked me right in the eyes and smugly said “Yeah, it’s probably already smooshed.”  I think he did this for shock value, so I kept my cool.  When I asked him what the unique job of a father was, he correctly answered “to protect.”  I asked him how he was protecting his family, and he told me he was “protecting the environment” by killing his child.  (These were his own words, not an injection of my own pro-life vocabulary into the situation.)  Perhaps he was trying to shock me.  Perhaps he wanted me to meet him halfway on his own good intentions in murdering his child.

But in the above-linked video, I forgot to mention one of the most striking things from that encounter.  That 30 year old man actually defended Hitler and the Third Reich.  That young man (who was admitting this was the second of his children for whom he was paying for an abortion) told me outside that Planned Parenthood just two weeks ago that Hitler did the world a favor by getting rid of the weakest of society, and so was Planned Parenthood.  I was shocked, not because I had never heard this analogy between Nazis and Planned Parenthood (I had used it many times myself) but that this argument for abortion came from a pro-abortion man paying Planned Parenthood to execute his own child.

Leaving the slaugtherhouse that day, I wished all the “pro-life and pro-evolution” Catholics could have heard his reasoning.  He was correct:  If we all came from monkeys, and if natural-selection is the best way to promote survival of the fittest, then there is no problem with the strongest members of a species cannibalizing the weakest members of a species.

Yes, if evolution is true, then abortion is the best way to promote a societal “survival of the fittest.”