Pro-life strike (abortion boycott) mission: To purify our prayers and other pro-life efforts, and to make a concrete difference, we refuse to fund the abortion industry. We boycott corporate abortion funding, and hold back abortion taxes. We pray for life; we will not pay for death!
The fourth and most troubling level of injustice cited in the previous post comes down to this: when pro-life American Christians willingly sign their 1040 form, they become willing accomplices to tax-funded murder, and cannot blame anyone else.
As noted on the "Manifesto" page, and in at least two blog posts below [1][2], the Scriptural mandate to "render to Caesar..." (Mt.22:21) cannot credibly be used as an excuse to docilely cooperate in the tax-funded holocaust.
We sing patriotic songs about our liberty, and we honor the rule of law enshrined in our Constitution. We proudly wave the flag and we pity the poor oppressed in other parts of the world. We are Americans; we are free.
The very act of signing the 1040 is indeed an act of freedom, a voluntary decision. No one forcing the signature, no gun to the head. And therein lies the problem.
Do we truly believe all the talk about freedom? Our Constitution says that we the people are Caesar, and the bureaucrats must answer to us. Then why continue to act as if the opposite were the case, and defer to the usurpers? Is this not abdication?
Now, I realize that active tax resistance is highly problematic and may be inadvisable for many folks, especially for those with young dependent children. But surely there must be at least a small percentage of pro-life people who can do this. A small percentage of millions is a few thousand. That would make a huge impact.
Here is a first draft attempt to flesh out Pope Benedict's suggestion of fiscal subsidiarity. If Obama and congressional Democrats truly want to find common ground on the issue of tax-funded abortion, try this: citizen allocation of certain government expenditures.
From the standpoint of well-formed moral principles, appropriations for Title X abortion services, funding for Planned Parenthood and U.N. population control programs and the like might be easier to accept if they were funded solely by individuals who freely chose to do so. Here's how such a plan might work:
All controversial value-laden budget items would be removed from congressional consideration. Congress would only have the authority to include such items in a citizen allocation check list. The 1040 tax form would now include a new table with each of these allocation items listed. The taxpayer could optionally allocate a portion of his taxes toward one or more of these programs without increasing his total tax liability. Each program on the list would receive tax money only in the amount allocated by individual taxpayers.
So, for example, Planned Parenthood would only receive tax money from citizens who proactively chose to allocate to them. The pro-life and neutral citizens who chose not to support PP or other abortion programs would therefore be able to pay taxes in good conscience, knowing that their money was not paying for the slaughter.
I suppose that pro-life programs could go on this list as well, with the expectation that only pro-life taxpayers would be allocating to them. The idea is: let each citizen follow the dictates of his own conscience with regard to all such value-laden allocations.
Note that this only works if there is no other government money going to these controversial programs. If Congress were still allowed to allocate monies from the general fund, such citizen allocation would merely be feel-good symbolic gestures, and the proposal would be useless.
In contrast with the many shallow minds of our time, Pope Benedict XVI is a true intellectual and source of deep insights. His latest encyclical is a fine example.
There is too much in Caritas In Veritate to treat here, but one relatively minor statement leapt out at me, toward the end of paragraph 60:
... fiscal subsidiarity, allowing citizens to decide how to allocate a portion of the taxes they pay to the State.
The context of this statement is development aid for poor countries, but it has the potential for much broader application. Applying it to tax-funded abortion or any other value-laden tax, the implications are profound. I hope to develop this concept in greater detail as it might relate to the pro-life tax strike.
Our two Wisconsin senators have replied to the email sent a few days ago. Senator Feingold began his response with this astounding denial:
Federal funds are not permitted to be used for performing abortions.
Uhhh... OK, Senator, if you say so. We will immediately ignore all the reliable sources that report in detail on the many and diverse ways the U.S. government is funding the abortion industry both here and abroad. Trusting in your unblemished integrity, the purity of your nearly divine character, the power of your encyclopedic knowledge, on the strength of your word alone, we are now convinced that no U.S. taxes are being used to kill innocent babies. Yep. Sure thing, Senator. Thank you so much for clearing that up.
In other words - does he really expect this to fly?
As noted in the first post, this blog and website is founded upon a single idea: that pro-life folks ought not be paying for abortion via taxes.
Within this single, simple idea, a variety of strategies may exist - different methods implemented by a variety of folks in a variety of situations. Specific ideas on ways to flesh out the principle idea. The "Strategies" section on the manifesto page talks about some possible strategies, but that section is far from exhaustive.
Last week, a friend suggested a new idea, a new concrete thing to do. Maybe other folks would like to try it. So a new web page was opened for this very purpose. Click on the "ideas" tab on the menu line to see this page, and this first idea.
Maybe you have an idea. A concrete way to live out your opposition to the tax-funded slaughter of the innocents. Please tell us about it. Click on "Contact" for ways to contact us with your idea.
Among the plethora of pro-life campaigns, ProLifeStrike.org has a couple of unique features. Or unique omissions. For one thing, it doesn't ask for monetary support. For another, the implementation is not contingent upon any outside person or circumstance.
The focus of some pro-life campaigns is to secure legislative protection for the pre-born, or to raise their legal status by means of petitions, phone calls, letters and emails to a variety of government officials, in the hope that these officials will respond. Others focus upon the voting and election process, in the hope of moving party machinery and persuading voters. Others target the judicial angle, seeking to win in court, in the hope of persuading judges and juries. Still others seek to reach bishops and pastors in hope of getting them to teach and preach the message as they ought. And still other campaigns go public with billboards, radio and TV spots, and such, in the hope of persuading the "man in the street".
This is not to disparage any of these noble efforts, nor to minimize their importance. But you'll notice the pattern - in each case, success depends upon moving or persuading someone outside the organization. The locus of control is outside, depending mostly upon people who are not currently on board, so to speak. The pattern, in other words, is: send us money, so we can run this campaign to get these outside people to do the right thing and save the babies.
ProLifeStrike.org is not so. The locus of control is you. You who are reading this.
You don't need to persuade a legislator or judge. You don't need to send money. You don't need to make a phone call, sign a petition, or write a letter. You can do it yourself. You can decide right now, even before you leave this web page. Decide what? Do what?
It's simple, really. Just realize that your tax money is helping to fuel the slaughter. Then, just decide that you yourself mustn't add more fuel. Decide not to feed the dragon any more. Decide to hold back your tax money. It's just the right thing to do.
O, there is one thing you may want to do first: Pray.
The pagan Roman Empire had conquered the world and was ruling with an iron fist. Caesar was an arrogant autocrat who claimed divine authority. The Pharisees thought they had Jesus cornered with the question about paying the hateful Roman tax - a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" unanswerable conundrum. Jesus, recognizing their duplicity, told them to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." (Matt. 22:15-22)
This passage has been invoked ad nauseum as an excuse to jettison all scruples over supporting human government, no matter how wicked and murderous. But is this a valid exegesis of the text? Ought this Gospel silence our conscience on the matter of tax funded abortion? Does Jesus really want us to docilely underwrite the abortion industry with our taxes?
I write as an American, and write now to fellow Americans. Who, precisely, is our 'Caesar'? What human authority do we live under in the United States? Is this not a Republic, established in lawful order by certain founding documents? Our Declaration of Independence, by which our founding Fathers created a new nation, contains these familiar words (emphasis added)...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
This is the legally binding contract upon which our government is based. With no need to comment upon the Roman Empire or other governments past or present, the above clearly indicates that the government of the United States exists to secure basic human rights, the right to Life being primary. Moreover, the legitimate authority of this government derives "from the consent of the governed". This, my friends, is our 'Caesar'. This is the human authority to which we owe allegiance.
Notice also that government officials are themselves bound by the terms of this contract. To the extent that they abrogate those terms, they are breaking the law. When bureaucratic measures conflict with the proper ends, it becomes the vigilant citizens' right and duty to oppose them. That's what the contract demands.
Surely the tax funded slaughter of innocent humans is a breach of the contract. Can anyone honestly deny this?
Therefore, Americans must stop paying the abortion tax for two reasons: Out of fear of God and obedience to God's Law (render to God), and also out of a patriotic duty to our Republic (our 'Caesar'). We must indeed render to Caesar, and that means we must oppose tax despotism and insist upon a lawful form of governance, which secures basic human rights.
When confronting the idea of a pro-life tax strike, the initial reaction is usually to quote the Scriptural commands to "render to Caesar..." (Mt.22:21) and to pay "taxes to whom taxes are due" (Rom.13:7). Quite obviously, Christians are not to go about recklessly disregarding human authority, nor acting as if we were above civil law. But consider whether this means that human authority is absolute and whether our obedience must be unquestioning.
The previous post and the section in our manifesto entitled Obey the Law deal with this germane question, so I will not belabor the point. Let it suffice here to say that, if it comes to a choice between obeying God or obeying man, we must obey God. Let me just add a couple thoughts to that...
First off, one does not necessarily have to disobey man in order to obey God in the matter of tax-funded abortion. The conscientious individual or family may curtail tax liability without violating tax laws. Both the "Reduced income" and "Flee" strategies as discussed in the manifesto involve no breach of human law. The difficult choice is in this way avoided, the scruples become moot.
Ask yourself first whether the scruples are genuine. Be honest. Are you just fearful and timid about getting into trouble with the tax authorities? Or are you truly convinced that obeying tax laws is a vital part of your conscientious duty? If the latter, if you have genuine religious or moral reservations, then you ought to have scruples over obeying other basic commandments, too. How can a person be scrupulous over "render to Caesar..." and not be scrupulous over "Thou shalt not kill"? The "Reduced income" and "Flee" and other strategies allow you to keep both sets of scruples, to obey God without disobeying man.
The second point involves a closer look at what it really means to "render to Caesar", especially for American citizens. I will devote the next post to this consideration.
Tomorrow, June 22, is the liturgical feast day of Saints Thomas More and Bishop John Fisher. Both were beheaded in 1535 by order of King Henry VIII over the controversy of his divorce and of authority in the governance of the Church.
As noted on our "Links" page and elsewhere, ProLifeStrike.org is closely associated with The World St. Thomas More Society, which claims these two martyrs as patron saints. This patronage is significant, especially in the case of St. Thomas More.
More was a lawyer, and chancellor to King Henry. He was, so to speak, the King's right hand man as well as a close friend. As such, he was doubly committed to loyal obedience to Henry and to the authority of the Crown. More's natural disposition was to hold the King in high honor, and to obey him as a loyal subject. This spirit of obedience was reflected as well in his devotion to Christ's Kingship, and to divinely established authority in the Church.
Obedience to these various levels of proper authority is a single virtue; there ought never be a conflict. But when it came down to a painful decision, when More could no longer obey both King and God, his choice was clear. His last words were, "I die the King's good servant, but God's first."
The significance for us is this: We pro-lifers have a natural inclination to obey proper authority, and it rends our hearts to make the painful decision to disobey. As discussed in our "Manifesto", in the final analysis pro-life tax resistance is not unlawful. Abortion is always a crime, and to fund it is to breech God's Law. The decision to resist paying taxes that subsidize the criminal abortion industry is prompted, not by an outlaw attitude, but by a love of Law, and by an earnest effort to obey true Law.
St. Thomas, pray for us, that we may cultivate a strong love for true Law, and that we may courageously obey God's Law first.
I have to admit
it: the idea of a pro-life tax strike is not catching on like wildfire.
This is no surprise. 5 months ago, shortly after launchingProLifeStrike
.org, I offered
my opinion that it would be a small but committed few who
would dare to cross such a cultural and legal line. For most folks, it
just sounds too risky, too radical. There's much more company and much
more comfort in the middle of the road.
It has ever
been thus. The Lord of Hosts seems to be OK with this. In fact, He
seems to prefer a ragtag remnant, a small motley collection of
unqualified and poorly equipped fools. See Judges 7:2-7 for just one
example.
Yet I remain puzzled that the idea should be
thought so unusual. All we desire is to refrain from paying for the
abortion holocaust, to abstain from the slaughter of the innocents. We
desire to avoid murdering the helpless with our pocketbooks. This makes
us odd?
In his latest round of mass mailings to raise funds for the Susan B. Anthony List, Senator Rick Santorum opens his appeal letter with a stark, dramatic paragraph-in-a-sentence:
You paid for an abortion today.
To correct the good senator's misunderstanding, I sent the following hand-written reply:
Wed. June 10
Dear Senator Santorum,
You
are wrong; I did not pay for an abortion today. You did. Perhaps you
even cast your vote for the budgets and appropriations which created
such tax tyranny.
I no longer fund abortion, because I
no longer fund the U.S. government. I no longer pay your bloody taxes.
If you are really sincere about your opposition to tax-funded abortion,
you will do the same. If you agree that abortion is murder, then for
God's sake stop buying it!
Visit ProLifeStrike.org and join the tax strike.
Sincerely,
(signed)
Gerald J. DePyper
5492 E. Wilkinson Rd.
S. Range, WI 54874
As noted elsewhere, my "Dogpatch, Ergo Sum" blog was a sort of precursor to ProLifeStrike.org. It is an ideas blog; its descriptive text is "Random rantings on faith, culture, life... ". As opposed to a more pure journal type of web log, in which news and events are reported at regular, timely intervals, the articles in this blog are mostly about ideas, concepts, principles, truths.
As time passed and the blog grew, one idea came to dominate: that of a pro-life strike. So much so that in January 2009, after about two years of blogging, I launched ProLifeStrike.org. Now I'm attaching a blog, based upon that one idea: that pro-life folks ought not be paying for abortion, and therefore ought to seriously consider not paying their taxes.
Please feel free to add your thoughts and comments to any post herein, in the usual Blogger fashion.
As noted on the "Manifesto" page, and in at least two blog posts below [1] [2], the Scriptural mandate to "render to Caesar..." (Mt.22:21) cannot credibly be used as an excuse to docilely cooperate in the tax-funded holocaust.
