Over at the Acton Institute PowerBlog, Hunter Baker and I have been discussing some of the recent religious efforts to influence the course of the debate over the federal debt crisis, including the "What Would Jesus Cut?" campaign and the related issue of "A Call for Intergenerational Justice: A Christian Proposal on the American Debt Crisis."
In a post today, I make an argument that might be of particular interest to Mere Comments readers. In the context of the concept of intergenerational justice, I inquire how we can even begin to talk about the duties and responsibilities to the next generation without defining the basic rights of that generation, fundamental of which is the right to life.
I ask: "How can a call for intergenerational justice in particular, or social justice more broadly, have any plausibility without addressing the fundamental social problem of abortion?"
“I don’t think that abortion is the moral equivalent issue to slavery that Wilberforce dealt with. I think that poverty is the new slavery. Poverty and global inequality are the fundamental moral issues of our time. That’s my judgment.” Jim Wallis
The idea of “Intergenerational Justice” scares me to death! Aside from the obvious blindness of ignoring abortion, I think Mr. Wallis’ statement above begins to reveal to us the goal of “Intergenerational justice.” If “poverty and global inequality are the fundamental moral issues of our time,” how long will it be before the “I.J.” people begin calling for the sacrifice of those older generations who are bleeding our younger generations dry, are impoverishing us by using up needed resources, are simply not contributing to the overall quality of life in the world.
How long before we begin to see calls for “Intergenerational Warfare?” How long before euthanasia raises its ugly head to join along with abortion? Oh, that’s already happening, isn’t it?