I am writing a reply to the article published on September 23, 2024, at 11:30 AM, in the Catholic Herald by Eden McCourt entitled ‘London March for Life Showed How Both Sides Can Get It Wrong and Fail the Unborn.’ This is somewhat of an open letter to her, the Catholic Herald, and those who agree with her position. I want to preface the whole conversation by saying that I agree with the Pro-Life cause and much of what she had to say on that topic. However, she took a swipe at me and several other men who were standing up for Life at the Pro-Life March and has used her platform to ‘bash’ them, so my commentary is a reply to that unwarranted attack.
The point of contention is how to respond to violent, angry feminazis who were abusing and attempting to disrupt the Pro-Life event. Several Christians and I decided to counter-protest. This seems to have raised the ire of the ever holier than thou – Eden McCourt, to the result that she has lumped us in with baby-killing apologists for the good of the Pro-Life movement.
My point in this reply is to demonstrate the weakness and naivety of some Christians when it comes to evangelisation of the culture – and seeking political reformation in a Christian direction rooted in a cartoonish understanding of the faith.
Eden’s comments concerning each point of discussion will be in bold with quotation marks; my response will immediately follow to allow for a continuity of thought.
“At Parliament Square, we are usually faced with a small mob of angry pro-abortion protestors who, in previous years, have spat, thrown eggs, and cursed at us.”
Eden correctly characterises the group that meets the Pro-Life marchers as an intolerant rabble of zealots who seek to sacrifice the unborn upon the altar of self-worship and, as she bears witness herself, are not behind the door of using violence and intimidation to achieve their aims. That is important because it sets the scene. Now, men with a backbone and some testosterone are not inclined to be intimidated by such people – don’t you think, Eden? Men with a backbone might want to show that they ARE NOT intimidated by these tactics, and how better to demonstrate that than by some bravado? Yes, bravado! Men tend to show that in group confrontations; think of football matches or any number of political protests when groups confront one another. The rabble that faced us (because we are in the same camp as Eden) was an abusive, violent, obnoxious mob – who assaulted one brother for simply going to talk to them – as you seem to imply we should have.
“However, this year there was a barrier between both sides which prohibited them from doing this. Some of them managed to cross over the barrier and stood red-faced in front of the stage where an ex-abortionist, an abortion survivor and other speakers gave testimony” Despite being asked to move, they wouldn’t. It is ironic that the intolerance of these “pro-choice” lobbyists emboldens them to disregard our choice to attend and hold this event.”
Indeed! These pro-baby-killing supporters are the group that Eden has lumped a whole selection of men and women – who attended the PRO-LIFE march – to support the PRO-LIFE cause in with. I did not see this obstruction myself, yet various reports I have heard suggest that a number of people were frustrated at the Police’s unwillingness to remove them from the front of the stage (think two-tier policing, as they would often remove our lot from their counter-protest if we crossed the barriers aforementioned); and that it seemed to cause some measure of distraction for the speakers (more on that in a second). So, my question to all is why these people should not be opposed. Why must our only response be a Ned Flanders characterisation of meekness? Why do so many in the body of Christ who assume leadership want to effeminize the Church? I want to suggest that the noisy, boisterous, irreverent Pro-Life counter-protesters were legitimately good and necessary! More than that, if the Church wants to have men participate in its life, it has to find a place for them and not simply try to turn them into limp-wristed soy boys because, as you can see from looking at your pews, they will go elsewhere.
“It is easy to lose hope about the current abortion crisis in the UK. With a push for full decriminalisation and a recent vote to implement buffer zones outside clinics across the UK, it can feel like we are moving backwards with no end in sight to this grave human rights injustice.”
I can only speak for myself, Eden, and not presume to speak for others, but I am full of hope. I see Roe V Wade overturned, I see more and more people joining the Pro-Life cause, and I see the push for more liberalisation; precisely a response from the elites, who are beginning to feel a shift in the culture. The evidence and the arguments are all on our side, and as more and more people turn against the lies of the abortion industry and will seek to join the cause, you must realise they will not all be Ned Flanders and his wife, Maude style Christians. If the Pro-Life movement wants to grow beyond the ‘nice and polite Catholic circles’ that you seem to inhabit, Eden, it will have to find a place for more and more people who are not ‘dinner party people.’ If the Pro-Life movement – wants to succeed in its aims, it will have to accept people who are not like you, Eden. In other words, people like me, working-class people, people who don’t think – that another silent prayer and gooey love – fixes every problem.
Eden wrote later in the article:
“At the end of the march, when we arrived in Parliament Square, a group of “Christian” men went over to the barrier opposite and started screaming back at the pro-abortion protestors. They were shouting, “Christ is King,” “Jesus Christ,” and “Where is your boyfriend?”
This is what sparked this reply. Why has she put the word “Christian” in quotation marks? Is she trying to suggest that we are not Christians or that shouting “Christ is King” or “Jesus Christ” is somehow unchristian? Do you disagree, Eden, that Christ is indeed King? Do you have a problem with the name “Jesus Christ”? How would you rather have us say these things – in quiet, introspective prayer, perhaps? Possibly cowering in a corner whilst being spat on? These chants were a bold statement of identity. Yes, the mocking “Where are your boyfriends?” with many other irreverent chants, were meant as ridicule, but it also highlighted the sheer absence of men amongst the counter-protestors. Let me remind you, Eden, as a Christian, that our Lord once said that if these people don’t cry out, then ‘the rocks themselves will cry out. There is nothing wrong with crying out “Christ is King” or crying out the name of “Jesus Christ,” and there is certainly nothing wrong with doing it as part of a political protest. There is nothing wrong with mocking opponents at a protest; we are mocking a movement and culture, not any individual. And those who support the killing of babies are indeed worthy of mockery as a group! Scriptures condemning the scoffing of holy and true and noble things, of wise things, the abortion industry, and its supporters do not fall into any of those categories. If it is a sin, GOD – not you, Eden, will be our judge. I venture to say it is a venial one.
“I was horrified. They reflected all the hatred and anger that the pro-abortionists have typically shown us, and they severely damaged the reputation of the march due to their pride, carelessness, and lack of Christian charity.”
Firstly, Eden, no one was angry; we were all quite entertained, much like men at any competitive endeavour are entertained – it was high-spirited, high jinks. I noted no anger amongst anyone around me; we also shouted, ‘GOD loves you – love your babies’; we displayed a justified determination to show that we were not intimidated, could not be bullied, or be cowed by those attempting to do so. Are you not familiar with masculine energy Eden? Men – men with a backbone and some testosterone something the Church desperately needs and something – that you – if left unchallenged, will suffocate on arrival. This may shock you – and your sensibilities, and possibly your sense of entitlement – but you do not define what good Christian behaviour is, nor do you get to define the behaviour of others. You claim that the reputation of the March was ‘severely damaged.’ What evidence do you have of this outlandish claim? With whom was it damaged; the police, the security company (paid to be there), the feminazis (who hate us regardless), and other pro-lifers (who will turn up next year regardless)? I challenge you to back up your claim. I think you have no evidence for that statement; I think you have made a completely unsubstantiated claim, and I believe you have said it for the most base of political reasons. You have, in short, invented the ‘severe damage to the reputation of the March.’ I want you to show me evidence for that statement or acknowledge that you spoke wrongfully. I think the reputation of the Pro-Life March was not damaged at all and will be just fine. More people – not fewer people – will join next year because it is a great day out for those of us who are pro-life. Perhaps it was damaged to your eyes alone, but shock, horror, you are not the centre of the world, and public opinion does not revolve around you and your ‘polite dinner party’ collective.
Eden, I dare say you do not know the first thing about Christian charity. Christian love does not stand by and allow the apologists for child murder to go unchallenged. Christian love does not allow a rabble, who, as you have noted, are filled with hate, use violence, and attempt to disrupt the event, to go unchallenged. I think you suffer from the same poor understanding of love that many of our co-religionists do; that we must be a ‘sickly sweet, gooey lover,’ filled with a cartoonish holy serenity when faced with injustice. Shocker, Eden, you are flat-out wrong; true Christian charity can and is expressed in masculine ways. Our counter-demonstration of the feminazis was legitimate; it was for a just cause, it was not hateful; and it was a clear show – that we would not be politically or otherwise intimidated. Sometimes, Christian charity is men standing up for the broader body of Christ; that, too, is charity.
Eden, we could now go through a round of ‘no, it’s you who is not embodying Christian charity,’ and then you say it back, and so on and so forth. However, I am not going to do that. If your accusation is justified, back it up in scripture. Otherwise, take it back, as you have maligned your own brothers and sisters in the faith (your article is inaccurate – there were women amongst us); you have attacked people fighting for the same cause as you, and you have done so with the most baseless commentary. Why did your article need some catchy angle to get past the editors?
“I went over and informed them that despite their well-intentioned efforts, this was not the way to go about things. This approach will never change hearts and minds. And we will never win this battle with pride and contempt.”
I spoke to several people who came to us that day – at least three, and I am not sure if you were one of them, but at least two went so far as to ‘lie’ about us causing such a racket that we were louder than the speaker projection from the stage. I checked with multiple people on the field from various places later, and indeed, no one could hear us – apart from those very close to us and, of course, the target of the counter-protest, the Feminazis. Who are you, Eden, to determine what is the right way to go about things? I think you were just uncomfortable with ‘confrontation’ because you think being a Christian is like trying to be a real-life Ned Flanders (or, in your case, Maude).
No, this was a political protest within a democracy, in which opposing groups chanted at one another; that is a completely legitimate way to go about things. How naïve of you to think that our actions were meant to change their minds; it was a political set piece in a democracy. The point of our actions has been stated above: we were countering their protest, showing that they would not win and that we would continue to support the pro-life cause. The bit you are missing is that we were doing it as young working-class men, not middle-class ladies! You do not own the Pro-Life movement, the March, or any aspect whatsoever of the Christian faith. They are not yours to define; if you wish to define them, you must give arguments, not assertions, as you have done in your article. Since no one was showing pride or contempt – but rather zeal for the unborn and the cause of justice, your statements here are equally invalid.
“We are called to reflect on all the infinite love God has for each and every one of us. We are called to share the Truth, with love – not hatred. We are called to stand up for what is right, without compromise but with compassion.”
Once again, your mischaracterisation of those who do not ‘suit’ your ‘sensibilities’ is just bad journalism. This spirituality of a ‘gooey sickly-sweet Christian’ is repugnant to most men and is precisely why you cannot find many men within the Catholic Churches where women far outnumber men – especially young men; because of people like yourself, Eden. You are part of the problem as to why men do not find a place to be men of GOD in the Church. You are offended by masculine energy because it is too confrontational. Well, surprise! That is part of the makeup of being a man. Showing GOD’s love is not always about being soft, tender, and limp-wristed; sometimes, showing GOD’s love is about confrontation. I am starting to think you are not familiar with the Scriptures. Tell me, what do you think of these stories?
Acts 13: 1 – 12
Acts 5: 1 – 11
John 2: 14 – 17
Mathew 3: 7; 23: 33
You see, Eden, your understanding of what it means to show GOD’s love is more attuned to a serene wall picture of our Lord you might see in a Church rather than the depiction of it in Scripture unless, of course, you would now like to impugn the Christian integrity of the Apostles and our Lord Himself. I encourage you, sister in Christ, that before you try to speak on the faith, like some learned authority, you might read up on it first.
“We can and will end abortion, but only when good men and women realise the power their actions and inactions have. If we are all able to do something, no matter how small, to support the pro-life cause, we will slowly but surely work our way to an abortion-free future and save millions of lives whilst we’re at it.”
This comment followed on from the last, so I assume that the brethren attacked by Eden are not included in the category of ‘good men.’ Sister, no men at all will join the Pro-Life movement except weak, effeminate men if you are left to guard the gates of who can be a part of this movement. Do you think this movement is yours or that these men will suddenly give up the cause – because you do not like the energy they are bringing? All that will happen is that infighting will start within the movement. Your article has already started that cycle, and you have lost your credibility with me and other men – for sure, based on how you have sought to call into question my Christian identity. Please, Eden, either justify your outlandish statements or take them back.
