I recently had a friend who sent me into shock when she announced she was pro-choice and that her pro-choice views were strengthened after going through her own pregnancy. I still adore her has a friend, but I honestly do not understand this viewpoint. In the rare case where the mother’s life is at risk, perhaps I can see a reason. In cases of incest and rape, that is a discussion for another time.
For those who are “pro-choice”, I have questions and concerns that perhaps you can shed some light on.
One common phrase I often hear from the pro-choice crowd is that: “It is my body.” Yes, it is your body, but the baby inside you is not your body. Why is the right to end the life of your baby yours? Why is your baby’s life of no value inside the womb? We were all once at this same stage of life, and no one can get to the point they are at now without going through the stage inside the womb. Why is that stage less valuable than the stage of life a woman is when she is pregnant? What grants our society the right to say one stage trumps another? Why does the mother’s choice trump the rights of her child inside the womb and the choices that child will make for years outside of the womb? Why are the mother’s rights more valuable at the time of her pregnancy than at the time she was inside her mother’s womb?
I have heard from the pro-choice crowd that because a baby uses the mother’s body to remain alive, it is the mother’s choice to end that life. The claim and comparison is that once the child is outside the womb, a parent is not obligated to donate their organs if the life of the child were to require it, and therefore should not be required inside the womb as well. Before modern technology, the child could not survive without the mother’s nourishing milk. Therefore under this premise, the pro-choice crowd should be in favor of infanticide until the child is no longer in need of the mother’s nourishment to sustain life whether naturally or artificially through formula. Each stage of life has its own recipe to guarantee the health of the individual. Why does one stage of the recipe for life sustainment trump another?
The pro-choice crowd states that the emotional and physical challenges a woman experiences during pregnancy warrant the mother’s choice to end the life of the baby inside them. I ask that the pro-choice crowd consider the emotional challenges women face after an abortion. Also consider the physical pain sustained by your child as your child is being ripped apart inside of you. Have you ever watched an abortion? Have you ever seen the obvious screams from the child during a late stage abortion?
Why is the life of your child in the womb not a moral issue? Should we have morals and values that govern society?
Why do our needs trump the needs of others, especially the innocent? Should we not take personal responsibility to help those who cannot help themselves? Should we leave all those in society who are dependent on others to fend for themselves because it is an inconvenience to us? Under the premise that our needs trump the needs of others, especially our baby inside the womb, this should grant all of us the opportunity to take whatever we need whenever we need it no matter the damage that is done to others.
What is the purpose of sex? Should the effects of sex be given the same respect towards the consequences it can have on human life just as the misuse of a gun, or texting while driving, or drinking alcohol and driving? Why as a society have we shied away from respecting and teaching about the consequences of misusing the sexual act due to the effect it can have on human life? Does the pleasure afforded by the misuse of the sexual act trump the effect it has on human life?
Why does the lack of personal responsibility for our choices trump the life of a child inside the womb?
Why should the risks (if not life threatening to the mother) and the pain (emotionally and physically) brought on by pregnancy justify ending the life of the child in the womb? Why are both lives not equally important? Is life supposed to be fair and free of unexpected challenges? Is sacrifice and hardship not worth the beauty brought on by the life of a child? Don’t all choices come with consequences and why should we be free from the consequences of our choices no matter the difficulty?
Why do you call the child a fetus and not a child? Does the fetus become something else after birth? Again, is the stage of life in the womb somehow a step one can skip? Why is this stage not considered life to cherish and protect? Why is not all life considered equally important?
I direct these questions not to the abortions that are a result of incest, rape, or due to the risk of the life of the mother but to the millions of abortions that go on outside of this limited circle.
Please know that just because I don’t address abortions due to incest, rape, or the life of the mother does not mean I don’t have very strong feelings toward how these circumstances should be handled.
