Fundamentally, why I'm pro-life
As slavery was the huge moral/political issue for some 200 years in the USA, abortion has become such in our time.
I'm solidly pro-life. It is my top issue in voting and it is a moral position about which I'm passionate. There ARE areas were I "give" a bit (in case of rape, if continuing clearly threatens the physical life of the mother) but I'm pretty solidly pro-life. I "inherited" this, I suspect, from my parents great respect for life that they instilled in me, their great emphasis on protecting the weak, and from my Catholic upbringing. My parents - one a diehard "bleeding heart" liberal, the other a ditto head conservative - both are strongly pro life (although obviously my mom votes contrary to her convictions on this point). As a teen, I volunteered at an "abortion alternative" center (an amazing experience that had a profound impact on me) and I still contribute generously to some of these organizations.
My primary reasons are two:
1. Human rights. My sister (who has a Ph.D. in biology and does biological research as her vocation) has stressed to me that biologically, it is absurd to argue that the pre-born baby is not a human. She stresses that nothing happens to the DNA as the last bit of the toes exits the birth canal: in terms of species, what is AFTER the exit of the last toe is no different that what was before the crown of the baby's head began appearing outside that canal. While precise definitions of what is and is not "life" and is and is not "human" are not as precise as we'd all like, however we BIOLOGICALLY define such, birth has nothing to do with it. I believe that all humans are endowed with inalienable HUMAN rights simply as a function of they being HUMAN - and chief among these is life (the ONLY right that ultimately matters..... take that away and no other "right" matters at all, applies at all). Now, we can have discussions of self defense, just war, even capitol punishment (and I have related opinions there) but these are all extreme cases usually related to some guilt or physical threat presented by the one permitted to be murdered, and there seems to be consensus that HUMANS are being murdered in these cases. I think we purposely evade this by insisting that the unborn baby is not 100% a "PERSON" ( an argument taken hook, line and sinker from the pro-slavery position where Blacks were 2/3's a person) or when we people talk about the baby as a parasite or fully dependent - all that simply evades the issue that here is a HUMAN - the same species as we. IF we can deprive a whole class, an entire category of living HUMANS - regardless of their guilt or bad behavior or physical threat - deprive them without any due process - deprive them of the most important, most fundamental, most necessary of all HUMAN rights - life - then the most gross injustice has been made and all other innocent humans are treated and weakened.
2. Defending the Weak. The Bible says we are to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, we are to defend those who cannot defend themselves, we are to be caretakers of the weak. Men - in particular - have often identified themselves strongly with this defender and providing role..... women - in particular - have seen motherhood as one of providing and defending role. We can see some of this even among animals. I reject the premise that those with political power may THEREFORE, as a FUNCTION of that power, trample on the rights, the humanity, the life of those less powerful or less independent simply as a function of their superior power to do so. One does not have some "right" to choose to murder simply because one has the political power to do it with impunity, to get away with it because other powerful ones will allow it. Remember what the powerful did in the perservation 0f slavery, in their "pro choice" political point that gave NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER to the one impacted: the Black man/woman. We must not fall to the morality that whatever those with sufficient power do to others is "moral" simply because they have the power to do it - and get away with it. Power does not equal moral. Indeed, it is a sad consequence of sin that the weak, the less-powerful are often trampled on by the more-powerful - and thus NEED our protection, our voice, our intervention. I realize this point makes a few women very uncomfortable.... since nearly the beginning of time, THEY were often the victims of this.... THEY were the weak, the helpless, the powerless and thus the victims of horrible things. Fortunately, very very recently, they have gained some power as the powerful (that's us white, middle class, property owning MEN) granted such. But IMO, because of that history, they ABOVE ALL, should be the MOST pro-life, the MOST sensitive to standing up for those with less power against those with more, they should be the LEAST 'pro-choice' (the powerful choose.... the powerless suffer). And indeed, I think women ARE a bit less "pro-choice" than men (although it's pretty close). We need laws, etc. to protect the weak from the strong, to permit civilization (so that it's not the animal "survival of the fittest", the prevailing of the more powerful over the less so).
Now, I realize...... there are enormous human, personal issues here. I do NOT minimize that. I realize discovering one is now the mother of a baby can be unplanned, unwelcomed - and a genuine crisis. And while most sex is consensual (and thus all know a baby can result, and by that consent, accept full responsibility), it's not always. And I realize that motherhood (before and after birth) has ENORMOUS implications - physically, socially, emotionally; indeed in every way possible - and that can be very difficult. Parenthood (mother and father) are perhaps the biggest and most difficult roles humans ever have. I don't gloss over that. I realize, too, that pregnancy and giving birth can be physically dangerous and are enormous physical efforts (and that - technically, that baby is a "parasite" - a LOT of parents will say that parasite continues for at least 20 years! Maybe a lot longer, lol, not to minimize the reality here). I'm not at all unmoved by those realities. And as I mentioned, I'm at least open to discussions when the baby is a real threat to the physical life of the other and perhaps also in cases of rape and incest (because there was no consent). But, the simple reality is: sex tends to eventually result in a baby - and all (over the age of 8 at least ) know that, all that is part of the responsibility to which we must rise. AND (most importantly), it means that we - as family and as society - need to "be there" for mothers (and fathers) struggling. IMO, we have far, far too much sense of abandoning parents. We need to "be there" as family, friends, community - emotionally, medically and physically (this is what motivated me so strongly in my years working with abortion alternative centers).
While I do not believe governments' role is religious or even primarily moralistic, it IS in part about protecting the weak, the defenseless, the voiceless (especially those who can't vote - meaning looking for human rather than civil or political rights). Just as I strongly rebuke all those years when the government of the USA lacked the guts, the civility to end slavery, so - for identical reasons - I rebuke the USA government today for lacking the guts and civility to end abortion-on-demand. This is the # 1 voting issue for me; I cannot and will not vote for any who is not clearly pro-life when they are in positions to impact that. And while I think it may take 200 years again (but hopefully not bloody war!), someday we will look upon this ugliness in the same way as we now look back upon slavery (or racism or sexism).
I DECRY the silence of the church, the silence of the majority on this....and wonder, where is the CRY that we had about slavery or even civil rights?
I DECRY that this has been allowed to be turned simply into a LEGAL issue of SUPERIOR POWER (a rationale taken from the pro-slavery movement). And worse, that it's WORKED.
LEGALLY, it's difficult. While laws and government polity certainly impacts behaviors, it cannot control it - especially where there is a great many who reject the moral basis of it. And somehow, the Law needs to deal with issues of WHEN this is human (some states have said at 6 weeks with the heart beating, others at 8 weeks.... some hold it's implantation which would allow for IUD's and the increasingly popular "morning after" - some foreign countries put it at 12 weeks, the first trimester). In SOME ways, I'd welcome any of this - at least it's an acknowledgement that humanity is not a civil right granted as the last cell exists the birth canal, BUT each has it's own subjective arbitraryness.
What excites me is - perhaps the DISCUSSION is back on the table (after a 40 year absence). NOW - will we frame that in terms of love, morality, caring, humanity, defending the weak? OR simply who has more power over another - to the extent of being able to KILL the innocent, the defenseless, the non-threatening? Will be frame this in terms of adult responsibility or being freed from such?
- Josiah
.
They don't understand about fetal development because they have so much hate for the thing inside them that is inconveniencing their life.