Liberalism's Control of Life

Liberalism rejects the notion that God gives life and resents the notion that God controls death.  So liberals would seize that power and make matters of both life and death into questions of human choice.  We now understand why abortion and euthanasia have to be such major themes on the Left’s political landscape, in spite of the fact that polls repeatedly show that America is far from sanguine over the expanded practice of abortion.  In other words, the Left does not endorse abortion to win elections; it endorses abortion because that is its very purpose.  It is part of its religious principle, if you like.

We can also find the exception that proves the rule.  The Bible does give society one measure of control over life:  It authorizes capital punishment for certain crimes.  If human control over life and death, generically understood, were the underlying principle in the Left’s position on abortion and euthanasia, then wouldn’t liberalism fight for capital punishment as a logical extension of their principle?  Either society should have control over life and death or it should not.  But instead the liberal position opposes the death penalty at every turn, even, if the criminal himself desires to be executed.  This moral repugnance for imposing capital punishment is best explained by our hypothesis.  The biblical model says that we should welcome new life and revere elderly life, but the lives of murderers should be taken.  Liberalism turns this policy on its head: New life and elderly life, if unwanted, inconvenient, or medically challenged, should be taken while murderers should be spared.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin, "America's Real War," p.61