Abortion, The Princess Bride, and the Hijacking of Language

Mike Huckabee, in his speech at the Family Research Council's Washington Briefing (videos linked in prior posts), spoke about his pro-life views and the "holocaust" of abortion on demand. Those who have been fighting the pro-life battle to end (or at least severely limit) abortion didn't blink an eye at the use of that term, but left-wing bloggers immediately jumped in with frothing indignation, and the ADL called for an apology and a promise to stop using that particular phrasing. I even saw one blogger claim that the word "holocaust" should always be capitalized and can only be used as a proper noun to refer to the Nazi extermination efforts against Jews during WWII. Not as a matter of political correctness, but as a matter of grammatical correctness.

I can't see why one group should get to claim exclusivity of a word, even one so charged as holocaust. It is reasonable to hold all the proper outrage and sympathy for what happened in the capital H holocaust, and still be able to use that small-H version of the word to refer to other atrocities. The fact that there are other holocausts does not any way diminish or detract from the big Holocaust.

Reagan & The Pope

Besides, it's not as if Huckabee stands alone, or that this is some novel linguistic or propagandist trickery. Ronald Reagan, in 1983 during his Presidency, wrote a famous essay about abortion. It was entitled Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation. Well worth the read, still a quarter-century later. In this essay, Reagan refers the reader to a quote from Professor William Brennan:

The cultural environment for a human holocaust is present whenever any society can be misled into defining individuals as less than human and therefore devoid of value and respect.

Reagan also quotes approvingly from a book by John Powell entitled Abortion: The Silent Holocaust. (Not incidentally, Reagan also draws parallels between abortion and slavery, which enraged other interest groups.) While it's true that the President does not, in this essay or anywhere else I've been able to find, directly call abortion a holocaust, I do believe that these 2 references are intentional on his part. If he had any squeamishness about the term, he could have easily found a quote other than Brennan's.

Another noted leader of the era, Pope John Paul II, also saw some commonalities, remarked upon in his book Memory and Identity. This, too, set off a firestorm of criticism, prompting then-Cardinal (now Pope himself) Ratzinger to issue a clarification. JP2 rightly called abortion a "legal extermination" of persons deemed less than human.

It is well worth mentioning, even though it is obvious, that there are key differences between the abortion holocaust and the Jewish Holocaust by the Nazi regime. It is especially abhorrent to seek the absolute extermination of an entire group of people. As a Christian, it is doubly painful that the targeted group were fellow God-disciples.

There's enough pain to go around, though. Calling abortion a holocaust is not an attempt to draw perfect parallels to the Holocaust, or to ride on its outrage-coattails. It is a term to refer to grand-scale killing atrocity, particularly one that is based on dehumanization of the victims. It should not be surprising that pro-lifers feel this way about abortion.

The word holocaust
It's a strange word to use in either case, in my opinion, given its etymology. The word is Greek, and literally means "burned whole". As the link points out, the term was originally a Bible word denoting burnt offerings, but its usage expanded in the mid-1800s to refer to a massacre of a large number of persons. The wiki entry goes into greater detail. Interestingly, what we now call The Holocaust was originally called Shoah, or catastrophe. Theologically, shoah makes much more sense than holocaust, which suggests a sacrifice to God. In that sense, it doesn't make sense to use it for abortion, either.

It's a well-traveled word. You can even find cultural references to the word, such as in the move The Princess Bride, when Westley laments, "Oh, what I wouldn't give for a holocaust cloak." Or a heavy-metal band from Scotland. Or comic-book villain.

Back to Abortion

So what are we to make of the special indignation that greats the use of this word to describe abortion? It strikes me that while some like the ADL are purists in their opposition, others are merely reflecting their politics, objecting as a wedge-point because they do not agree with the pro-life position. One otherwise sober blogger suggests that it aligns the speaker with the forces of intolerance (upon creating the hyperlink here, I note that the author reworded his post to remove the reference to intolerance – I commend him).

I do agree that the term is used to get the audience's attention, and get you to thinking, but it is done not crassly or unsympathetically or certainly not intolerantly. It is an honest accounting of how a pro-lifer feels about the tragedy of abortion.