The Sanctity of Life: The Moral Argument For God’s Existence & Objective Morality

Today I’ll be introducing the first part of my series defending the sanctity of life, beginning with the moral argument for God’s existence & objective morality.

This post starts the “sanctity of life series”, and it could potentially be one of the most important posts I make in my life, and something I want to approach diligently, with humility, with respect, and with care. In the series, I’m going to be talking about the sanctity of life- which means I’m going to be responsible for covering an array of topics that relate to this: abortion, suicide, euthanasia, contraception, the death penalty, the nature of the immortality of the soul, and more. I’m going to give into many of these areas and give Church teaching on them and biblical support for the sanctity of life in each area, as well as through reason to try to better apply it to the situations we are facing today as a society and world. If every human life matters- which they do, if every human being must cooperate with God in bringing new life into this world- which they must, and if every soul God desires to be saved- which He does, than it must be our common goal as human beings to protect the sanctity of life, from conception until natural death- in the womb or outside of it, and any attempt to undermine these things is an abomination to humanity and God who gives us life, then they too must be ended. No matter one's race or ethnicity, religion or spiritual philosophy, ideology or political affiliation, gender or sexuality, and age or ability, all have the precious gift of life from God, and they must be treated with dignity. This does not mean we cannot and should not punish wrongdoers- as we must for the common good and order of our society that must not be merely “tolerant”, but rather: Christ-like, and it does mean every human- from the worst sinner to the greatest saint, is equal of an opportunity to come to Christ to merit eternal salvation through His grace. Now, before we get into the pressing issues that undermine the sanctity of life, let us understand why the moral argument for God’s existence is objective, true, and the backbone of our theology as Catholics for the reason that life is truly precious and sacred. 

I believe one example of a solid argument for God’s existence is the existence of objective moral truths and evils. In the Bible, we see evidence of this through verses such as Romans 2:14-15 which reads: “Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.” Though different cultures may have different standards for what is right and wrong, and different civilizations may perceive things to be one way, while another thinks differently: there is no doubt that objective moral truths exist. Examples of this might be the objective immorality and inherent wrongness of hurting an innocent animal like a puppy, attacking an elderly person, raping an innocent little girl, or murdering someone for no apparent reason. More broadly and catastrophically: it is objectively true that incredibly evil actions in even greater fashions have been done like genociding an innocent population like as done in Nazi Germany or Holodomor or Armenia. Activities like cannibalism are objectively wrong. These are things that are true no matter what, even if populations and cultures seek to justify them, or others may seek to tolerate the wrongdoings of others. But if everything had developed from chance and random processes, and there is no objective standard justifying objective morality- and that morality can only be explained by standards brought to standing by populations over time or collectively- that is still only subjective, meaning it is their perception of what is right, and that others could disagree. The disagreement of issues of morality does not delegitimize the reality of objective moral truths- only that objective morality cannot be found in and explained by humans in themselves. 

Trent Horn, Catholic apologist and speaker for the organization Catholic Answers, writes: “Objective moral truths exist. These objective moral truths have either a natural or a supernatural origin. Natural origins are insufficient to explain objective moral truths. Therefore, objective moral truths have a supernatural origin in God. This argument is not meant to prove that people cannot act in a moral way if they don't believe in God. After all, there are many moral non-believers, and some of them even surpass Christians in their moral behavior. Instead, the moral argument claims that the reason both theists and atheists can have an objective standard of right and wrong is that God exists as the standard itself. Without God, there could be no such thing as objective moral truths. Moral truths exist, and if God does not exist, where do moral truths come from? There must be something else that constitutes moral goodness and is the source of our moral duties. The theist believes that only God can be that which is identical to the Good as well as the source of our duties, because God is, by his very nature, a perfectly loving person and the ultimate paradigm of God.” 

Some progressives that disagree with my faith will condemn some conservatives as “racist” for standing up for the interests of white people and rejecting their diversity schemes and globalist open borders policies, but can they explain to me how racism is objectively evil? Is racism wrong- a genuine hatred for someone for their skin tone or background- absolutely, but couldn’t theoretically one say: “that’s a matter of opinion, not fact or objective.” After all, our society, according to most progressives and undeniable cases in history, has failed to affirm the dignity of each human regardless of their race, and failed to protect them equally under the law, and create a society that flourishes with opportunity for all to succeed, so couldn’t use theoretically go in the opposite direction on that issue philosophically? It could, but regardless: racism is objectively evil, so the societal attitude towards it or an individual's subjective opinion on it doesn’t matter and doesn’t negate the fundamental moral truth of it. This fundamental truth can only be objectively explained by the fact that a Higher Power- a Creator, gave human life to every being from his or her conception, and irrespective of one’s biology- their race, their hair color, their eye color, their skin tone, their physical attributes, and their knowledge and abilities, they are equally human and deserving of respect and care, and can be judged based upon their actions and should be rather than their immutable characteristics, and they deserve the chance at having an intimate relationship with the Lord who created them, values them regardless of their secondary factors, and whom society should value and care for because of their inherent humanity. Progressives who believe in racial equality and oppose racism- as Catholics do as well- must provide an objective backbone for opposing so, even if the physical harm arguments proving objective morality and immorality sufficed- which they don’t, or else they have lost not merely the moral high-ground, trust in their worldview of anti racism, but more importantly: are allowing the denigration of all human persons for a variety of potential motives due to their neglect of these objective moral truths that shape concern and appreciation for the sanctity of life, which would be a grave, grave evil, and not a sign of progress, but rather: a sign of wickedness, and a timeless immoral worldview. Instead, we should embrace the sanctity of life explained sufficiently only by the Catholic faith- which is true- and from there: we must seek an orderly and virtuous society that cares for every human life, which as we know according to biological science, reason and observation, and yes: Catholicism, begins at conception. 

Video:

My Essay Arguing For The Existence of God: https://open.substack.com/pub/grantfriedland/p/arguing-for-the-existence-of-god?r=1gja5z&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post