PRO LIFE
I don’t fit comfortably into any sociopolitical category. On some issues I would be considered a liberal. That is, I care about people more than I care about corporations. I care about the worker and the oppressed more than the bottom line. I care about a solid safety net for the necessities of life for all people including health care. I am opposed to the death penalty.I believe that justice should cover everyone equally and not be skewed towards the rich. I believe that sexual orientation is inborn and should not lead to any discrimination.
On the other hand, I am pro life. I know some good folks that are single issue voters. I am not. But I feel compelled to explain my stance on abortion. The best way I can think to do that is in the form of a question and answer format. So, here goes.
You are opposed to abortion. What gives you the right to impose your morality on others?
The imposition of morality on a society is called law. We will not allow people to choose what is legal on their own. That would be called chaos. Law is there to protect the weak from the strong. For instance, I see a man pull up in a Bentley. I love that car, So when the man gets out, I kill him and take his car. In a short while the police come to arrest me for murder. I try to explain that I don’t believe that murder is wrong and they should not impose their morality on me.
How dare you take away my right to choose?
Your right to choose is yours when you decide to have unprotected sex. I am pretty sure we all know that this is where babies come from. Once you have chosen to engage in that behavior, your choice is limited by the needs of another, weaker human being. In the example above, should I have the right to choose whether or not to kill the Bentley owner? The might argue that one can have sex without intending to create a child. That’s true. And are there not almost fail safe ways to prevent a pregnancy? And if there is an oops, does that give you the right to terminate an unborn life? If I told the police that I did not intend to kill the Bentley owner, would that mean that I should not be held responsible for his death?
What if there is no way I can take care of a child?
Then don’t have unprotected sex. And if you do get pregnant, the penalty for your mistake is that you must carry this child to term. You can give the child up for adoption. There are lots of couples that would love to adopt a newborn.
But adoptions are expensive and involve a lot of red tape.
Being pro life is more than just being against abortion. Real pro life people are concerned with the well being of the child in it’s 10th month as it’s 2nd month. Making adoption affordable and easier to do is a part of what I believe a just society should strive for. Also, we as a society should be ready to provide help, care and support once the child is born.
You are assuming that human life begins at conception. If I don’t agree, then why should I be denied an abortion?
When human life begins is a tricky question. But we must come to some agreement if we are to prevent the killing of an innocent human being. For me, there is only one reasonable answer. When all of the genetic material is present, then that collection of cells is human. Trying to find some arbitrary point in a pregnancy is pointless. And what about after the baby is born? Does your choice carry over to infanticide? The killing of abortion doctors is just as immoral as even late term abortions.
Shouldn’t this be just be a woman’s issue? Should men be able to legislate what I do with my body?
I don’t think it is just a woman’s issue. Men must also have a part in protecting the weak and helpless like the unborn. One half of the babies aborted are male. I feel bad for you if you did not intend to become pregnant. But carrying the child to term is the consequence of a decision you have already made.
Won’t women just resort to dangerous back alley abortions?
That is very possible and very sad. If we were to use that argument for other laws, it would lessen crime statistics, but would not make us safer. If you outlaw the sale of heroin, people will buy it from criminal enterprises that cause great harm and cost many lives. But this seems a weak argument for making it legal. It destroys lives either way.
Don’t you allow for any exceptions?
Yes I do. There are two circumstances that should be considered. The first is to ask if the woman had any chance to choose. If she has been raped, then she did not have that chance to choose. In that case, the woman’s right to choose should be upheld. Pregnancy from rape is rare. It would be seen mostly in cases of statutory rape of one who is not old enough to choose. It would be a terrible result of that rape. But if the woman did not choose to engage in the act, then she should have the right to terminate the pregnancy.
The other exception is when the life of the mother is in real and serious jeopardy as a result of the pregnancy. This is a tricky area. Every pregnancy is dangerous to the mother’s well being. This should only be an exception if a panel of doctors agrees that the woman would have a likely chance of losing her life if she carried the baby to term. This is an exception that could be abused as an excuse that exaggerates the mortal danger to the mother. This exception stems from the same reason for opposing abortion. It is a question of life and the mother’s life is just as precious as her unborn child.
My views on morality and life are based in scripture. I realize that we live in a pluralistic society and not everyone believes the truths of scripture. But our laws and the morals behind them are based on the truths of scripture. In order to avoid chaos, we must choose which choices will be limited.
“For it was You who formed my inward parts. You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
Psalm 139: 13,14
