Faith

Participants in the Women's March on Washington make their way down Independence Avenue Jan. 21. (CNS photo/Bob Roller)

Friday, January 27, 2017Faith

Submit a Letter to the Editor

Almost all of the people who marched say they value inclusion and diversity and condemn division. Nonetheless, they excluded women who are pro-life, and berated those who hold different opinions. There is a word for this: allodoxaphobia, the fear of other people's opinions.

Jaymie Stuart
Wolfe

I'm pretty comfortable with protests, marches, and even civil disobedience. To me, those things are among the hallmarks of a vibrant citizenry, one that is actively engaged in public policy and affairs. But last week's Women's March certainly wasn't a good example of that. In fact, the example the main event in Washington set, is one that shouldn't be followed by anyone. Ever. At all.

I understand and even share many of the concerns that have been voiced about newly inaugurated President Trump. For me, the coarse and crude language of sexual conquest that was revealed during the campaign was, and still is, troubling. But I'm glad I didn't join last weekend's march. Because, as it turned out, the march's message, and the vulgarity with which it was expressed, were utterly appalling.

A few observations:

The march purported to call for a "Revolution of Love," but then smashed windows, lit fires, looted businesses, and talked about "blowing up the White House." Several well-known speakers celebrated being "nasty women." Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not feeling the love in any of that. And I don't aspire to nastiness.

Civil unrest is not the same as civil disobedience. In civil disobedience only unjust laws are broken, and those who do so are willing to pay the consequences of their actions until the injustice becomes clear and laws are changed. The legacy of Dr. King, Mahatma Ghandi and Thoreau is not anarchy.

Almost all of the people who marched say they value inclusion and diversity and condemn division. Nonetheless, they excluded women who are pro-life, and berated those who hold different opinions. There is a word for this: allodoxaphobia, the fear of other people's opinions.

Freedom of speech means freedom for everyone. No one should fear holding or expressing his/her opinion about anything in a free society. Even the most reprehensible beliefs should be tolerated. If they are expressed in criminal acts, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Abortion does not equal feminism. The first feminists were unabashedly pro-life. Half of the fetuses still growing in their mothers' wombs are female. It does, however, fill a lot of "non-profit" bank accounts with millions and millions of dollars. There are many who believe that a woman's right to choose an abortion violates a child's right to life and a father's right to raise his own child.

Women are more than their body parts. They are human persons with full dignity and value. Then why did the Women's March promote wearing p***y hats and dressing up as female genitalia? Why would anyone reduce herself to less than what she is? A woman who does not want to be viewed as a sex object should not be dressing for sex-cess. Even more, if you are concerned about sexual predators, then why do you promote a culture in which women are routinely expected to "consent"? (Plus, haven't you been trying to convince everyone that a person's body has nothing to contribute to that person's "gender identity"?)

Lewd "locker room" talk a la Access Hollywood is degrading and misogynistic. Women should be shown respect. I completely agree. But then I have to ask why the Women's March was so full of lewd and degrading signs and language? And why didn't any of these people seem to have a problem with how other powerful men, like Jeffrey Epstein (and Bill Clinton) have treated women? Why would political party affiliation make a difference?

If you really want what you say you want, then lead by example. You say you want a society that is welcoming and open to all. Then stop screaming at people you disagree with and start looking for common ground. Stop stigmatizing the desire to marry or have children. Stop bashing religious conviction. Include people who aren't like you in the conversation. Diversity that is only skin deep isn't much diversity at all.

If you want to promote the dignity of women, then stop coming up with "cutely" lewd campaigns that show you can be just as crude as the men you complain about.

You want equality in the workplace? Then don't just say that working men and women are equal. Pay your female staff the same salaries you pay your male staff.

You say that you want to make the American economy and the American dream accessible to all. Then don't make abortion and euthanasia necessary for people to fully participate in society. Figure out how we might go about providing childcare and/or eldercare so that working women, who often bear the lion's share of caring for dependents, don't have to choose between family and work -- or be cornered into exterminating their descendants or ancestors.

If you believe in the democratic process, then be prepared to be on the losing side of some elections -- even important ones. All that means is that the people who lost when you won have the chance to govern too. Isn't that how it is supposed to work?

The challenge to lead by example applies equally and across the board to all of us. For those who may be preparing to March for Life, remember this: how you behave shows what you really stand for. I expect this weekend's crowd will leave me feeling proud.

- Jaymie Stuart Wolfe is a Catholic convert, wife, and mother of eight. Inspired by the spirituality of St. Francis de Sales, she is an author, speaker, and musician, and serves as a senior editor at Ave Maria Press. Find Jaymie on Facebook or follow her on Twitter @YouFeedThem.