Slogans: Culture War from a Distance

One of the quips I’ve read on bumper stickers and heard from the lips of pro-abortion apologists is that the solution to conscience issues is just not to have an abortion. “If you don’t like abortion, just don’t get one,” they say.

This, along with “no uterus, no opinion,” are some of the dumbest slogans of our time, but they represent the basis that many people use to continue to support abortion.

Slogans are powerful because they short-circuit the requirement for thought. “God said it; I believe it; that settles it,” keeps some Christians from recognizing that some of their conclusions did not rise up out of the pages of Scripture without passing through a human interpreter, who may have been more or less careful, and who may have not had all the information we have now about backgrounds, the text itself, and data from the created order.

But a slogan offers a simple summary of all the work that goes before, much like the spells of the witches and wizards in Harry Potter. When Harry yells, “Expelliarmus,” he is using a slogan of sorts that summarizes the sometimes-dangerous work of those that created the spell. He doesn’t have to think about why the spell works or how it came into existence, but merely that it has proved effective in the past in disarming an opponent. As such, spells can be used for good or bad purposes, but either way, they leave individual using them free from thinking about all that went into the discovery of the words and the want motion. There is a system and a history buried beneath the surface.

Slogans ignore the system from which they originated. They can be useful and wielded well. But, especially over time, they tend toward dead clichés that mask the underlying logic they once pointed toward.

The Pressure of the System

“If you don’t like an abortion, just don’t get one,” masks the inhumane pressure that can be placed on parents to kill their child. Though the medical professionals that recommend abortions may not see themselves as pushing for a child’s death or being coercive, the default position of the system can become advocacy for abortion in cases of convenience simply due to the repeated suggestion that a mother ends her child’s life in the womb.

 A BBC article from 2020 documents the continual pressure mothers to end their child’s lives because of Down’s Syndrome diagnoses.

One mother notes, “The support was only there if I chose to have an abortion, and that was what they presumed, but they weren't interested when I said I wanted to keep Jaxon.”

Another comments, “In all honesty we were offered 15 terminations, even though we made it really clear that it wasn't an option for us, but they really seemed to push and really seemed to want us to terminate.”

The medical professionals in these situations were not Kermit Gosnell, whose brutality should put him in our collective memory along with other butchers of humanity. However, because they operated beneath the umbrella of slogans, they were able to have a clear conscience as they created a system bent on the destruction of some innocent human lives.

Our internet experience is now saturated with popups and targeted advertising. We are inundated with suggestions to sign up for newsletters, allow push notifications to our web browser, or purchase an additional item that others bought with whatever widget you initially logged in to buy. The system exerts pressure toward its desired end.

Although the pressure of the system may not be coercive in the sense of having a direct threat of violence, there is a coercive effect to the sum of the pressure. As Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein argue in Nudge, repeated suggestions and defaulting to a particular (and desired by the system’s controllers) end will measurably increase the chance that someone chooses that outcome.

Nudging people toward saving toward retirement or posthumous organ donation is, arguably, a positive thing. Those decisions are also (unless one dies immediately after opting in to the organ release) reversible with little consequence if someone changes their mind. But the repeated offers of abortion to a mother who may be deeply fearful in light of a new diagnosis tends toward coercion. It is coercion toward an irreversible action with deep consequences.

The Underlying Logic

The slogan, “If you don’t like abortion, just don’t get one,” masks the pressure of a system that bends toward the termination of fetal life. It hides the pattern of suggestions that, while leaving open the option to preserve life, tend to push those most at risk for aborting toward that “simple” and final solution.

Such slogans also mask the recognition that what is happening in an abortion is not just the removal of a mole, but the ending the life of another human being. Most abortion advocates now recognize the humanity of the unborn child. The prevailing arguments for abortion tend to deny the personhood of the child or to justify the killing on individualistic, utilitarian grounds.

But most people no longer have to think about why killing a child would be good, because slogans have conveniently concealed the underlying logic. It is enough for some to know that abortion is an available option, that (in most cases) it is not being forcefully imposed, and that it provides a simply (not to say easy) and permanent solution to what may seem to be an insurmountable problem.

Recognizing the Power of Slogans

The power of slogans helps explain why we should not treat casual abortion supporters as if they are mass murderers. Most of them have given very little thought to the brutality of abortion, because slogans have prevented the need to think. As Milton Mayer shows in They Thought They Were Free, people can do some terrible things under the cover of busyness, and cognitive distance slogans provide.

As we recognize the way slogans work, we should also note that countering a slogan with another slogan in very unlikely to shift someone’s thinking. Persuasion will likely take place in person, or in a private setting. It will require being patient and listening to someone who thinks differently, then asking them to explain how they arrived at their conclusions—encourage them to delve into the underlying logic and expose it. It is then that real discussion can take place as the value of human life as imago Dei can be debated and some of the inhumane utilitarianism of abortion exposed. But it takes time to get beyond the slogan.

At the same time, we ought to recognize the power of slogans in our own lives. How many ideas have we absorbed from our culture without considering the underlying logic? Some may be good, but some may be wicked. As we teach our children and disciple new believers, are we stopping at providing slogans or are we delving into the reasons why we arrived at those final conclusions? Being willing to entertain hard questions and explore the underlying logic behind our theological and moral conclusions may be what is necessary to help those we disciple construct a faith that can endure.

Slogans are the fast food of rational thought. They will keep you going through a busy week, but eventually they will lead to destruction. We live in a world that has a taste for slogans, I propose that it’s worth becoming people that have a taste for real ideas, prepared with the care of a gourmet meal.