Party Chairman Appears on Alan Colmes' Radio Program

Friday, February 2, 2007

Jonathan Hill
America First Party Chairman

On February 1, AFP National Chairman Jonathan Hill appeared on the Fox Radio Network’s Alan Colmes Show, which is heard on XM satellite radio and stations coast-to-coast. The topic of the program was ostensibly how abortion leads to nuclear war. Listen to the program here...

Chairman Hill makes the following statement in reference to his appearance:

I would like to thank Alan for having me on the program, and giving a brief opportunity to mention some of the issues that the America First Party stands for.

I had hoped that by opening the program in a conciliatory manner, and emphasizing the need to avoid useless polemics, that there would have been a greater likelihood of having a careful and detailed discussion on the program’s advertised theme - - the connection between abortion and nuclear war. Although there were some brief periods when this was discussed, much of Alan’s intense questioning of me focussed on a narrow hypothetical case of a woman who would die if her baby were not aborted. My repeated response was that only indirect, not direct attacks, on the fetus can be permitted in some cases, and that an effort must be made to save both mother and child. We are not permitted to value one human life more than another.

It was apparent that Alan was either not well informed about abortion in America, or that he was in a state of denial. He went so far as to deny that abortion was prevalent, and insisted that women, even though they freely choose abortion, do not really want abortion.

My position on the connection between nuclear war and abortion is well-founded, even if it was not well received. Abortion has a corrupting effect on society, and has damaged the character of the country. This is true of any widespread behavior or attitude that is disrespectful of the basic dignity and rights of other individuals. Because of its nature and prevalence, abortion is probably the worst form of antisocial behavior which afflicts the nation.

By corrupting our respect for the dignity and worth of other individuals, an effect of abortion is that there is now less that restrains our nation from avoiding unnecessary warfare with other nations. As long as many Americans consider innocent people to be disposable, then there logically will be diminished concern for civilian and military casualties inflicted by the U.S. on other nations in avoidable warfare.

There can be little doubt that many decent people have doubts about when life begins. But once a person knows that life might begin at conception, he is obligated to withhold his support for abortion. This is what decency requires.

An analogy clarifies this point. A hunter sees a movement, but is unable to identify the cause of the movement - whether it is human or game. Is he obligated to hold his fire? The answer is clearly yes! In fact most will readily agree that decency clearly requires this. But if people can so easily agree on this, why do so many fail to apply this principle to abortion?

It is the same principle in both cases - when unsure if an action would unnecessarily risk the destruction of innocent human life, withholding support for the action is imperative. This is basic decency, and it is a principle that we should never compromise.

There is much evidence that life begins early on. A heartbeat is present at about 21 days. Also, immediately after fertilization, all the DNA information is present which completely identifies the unique genetic identity of a person. These facts should be enough to give us pause. Can any person advocate abortion while knowing these facts about human development, and still retain his decency? Perhaps in the case of insanity only.

Alan and one of his callers brought up the issue that many people who agree with me on abortion, also support the Iraq war. My response was that abortion affects people in subtle ways. Even persons who vocally oppose abortion can be little different from persons who advocate abortion, if they fail through negligence to use the good means available to oppose abortion. Thomas Aquinas said it well: If a person through negligence fails to stop murder, then he is guilty of murder. If persons who consider themselves pro-life are complacent in resisting abortion, then they also lack respect for the basic dignity and rights of individuals.

As our nation continues to flail about in unnecessary conflict, and now perhaps soon in Iran with the risk of igniting a regional Middle East conflict, it is more than ever necessary that we as a nation reflect on the values that we hold.

The draft of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, entitled "Doctrine for Joint Operations," proposes to revise our nuclear policy to permit preemptive use of nuclear weapons. This suggests that the threshold for nuclear conflict is being lowered. If this change is approved, it will be a reflection of our nation’s values.

Finally, Alan mentioned that the brain trust at Fox Radio was not able to verify that Mother Teresa of Calcutta ever said ‘'abortion leads to nuclear war'. Well, the AFP brain trust was able to verify that she did substantially say that, and is frequently quoted as having said it, although the form was, ‘The fruit of abortion is nuclear war’.

I thank Alan again for the opportunity to be his guest, wish him well, and hope that he will reconsider his position.