I am not sure if you have ever heard this argument or declaration about views on life issues. It is common among politicians who want to remain “faithful” to their Christian roots, but also run for a left-wing party and care more about winning than unborn children. They will say something like “I personally am pro-life, but, I can’t tell someone else what to do.” The sneaky thing about this argument is that is partly true. You, personally, don’t have the actually authority to tell people to do a lot of things. You, personally, have views about what is ethical that are not shared with others. Some issues are pretty foggy when it comes to application of legislation. Gambling, for example, is a tough issue. I personally don’t like it, I think it is usually accompanied by a lot of vice, whether that be superstition, materialism, or gluttony, but do I have a solid argument for why we should close the casinos? Not really. So, I understand why people are hesitant to put their foot down so firmly with this issue.
That being said, can we afford to be “pro-life, but”?
Just before we continue. There is not a shred of evidence that anything other than a human being is created at the moment of conception. Universally, embryologists work under the “ethical” guideline that they may not continue testing embryos in a laboratory after 14 days gestation. What is the reason for this? Well, after 14 days, the embryos are, and I quote, “Genetically indistinguishable from a human being.” I have combed through about 10 medical text books used currently in major universities, and the most “pro-choice” science I could find about the beginnings of human life was something like, “at fertilization the beginnings of the human existence begin,” or something vague like that. The point is, there is no way in reality to deny that what is alive is human. We can debate personhood, meaning, whether these young humans have rights, but we cannot deny that they are humans, unless we deny science. And if we deny personhood to these vulnerable people, we will be in good company, like with slave traders. It is a curious thing that the Catholic Church sticks more closely to “science” than the progressive politics of the day. If you need further proof that a child is alive in a womb after conception, then just ask your parents when they conceived you. They are not going to say “We were pregnant with a potential person that magically gained rights when it was born.” Some will say “20 weeks is when it is a person for me”. Really, so I guess 19 weeks and 6 days is fine for an abortion then, because that extra day is like magic fairy dust that makes Pinocchio a real boy.
I am not suggesting by any means that an unexpected pregnancy isn’t hard, it is terrifying, especially when you aren’t in a good place to start a family. But there is no such thing as “getting pregnant by accident.” Even if you use contraception, there is a 10% failure rate in practical usage. The whole “99%” effective thing is more or less a myth. It is 99% effective during times that the woman isn’t ovulating, because even natural sex is 99% unlikely to result in a pregnancy then as well. This is why when you know someone who has been sexually active for a long time on birth control, there is a very good chance they have taken an abortifacient pill or had an abortion. Most women who have abortions are using contraception. If it was that effective, it wouldn’t happen.
I am also not suggesting that men should be let off the hook, they shouldn’t. Men who don’t stick around and raise their children and provide are scum. They are simply cowards, I have no time for them, they should be sent to the North West Territories to a work camp… Sorry, I am fired up. Since the dawn of time there has been a wonderful social structure set in place to make sure women wouldn’t be alone in raising a family. It was called marriage, but the feminists and creeps wanted the freedom to use Tinder (I hate even typing that word), so they ruined it. Good work.
Back to the idea of being “pro-life, but”.
It is clear that there is a person in the womb.
Sorry, another digression. Some people are going to think that because the child is dependent on the mother, or “vessel” in a world without gender, that she has the right to do with it as she wishes. This is interesting, by that I mean sad. This argument is like saying, “This person will die if you don’t take care of them, so you can get rid of them.” Think that through. They are helpless without you, so you can victimize them for your own reasons. I do agree that parents have authority over their children, so they have every right to give the child away after birth. Also, think for a second. Are any of the arguments about why a woman “needs” an abortion due to anything that has to do with pregnancy? Finishing school, a career, not ready, to young, not married. None of these have to do with pregnancy, they have to do with raising a child. Fine, don’t raise the child, give it to the millions of people who will. Ever notice how it is rare to find someone who was adopted these days, unless they are a Chinese girl? It is because they were aborted. When Saint Mother Teresa was asked by the Clintons to speak at the 1994 Prayer Breakfast, big mistake on their part, she went on a Pro-Life diatribe. You can watch it on YouTube, it is pretty cringe worthy, as this little old lady saint is chastising the president and his wife. Classic. At one point during Hilary Clinton and Mother Teresa’s conversation, Clinton asked Mother, “Why do you think there hasn’t been a woman president yet?” Without skipping a beat, my personal hero said to Madame Clinton, “She has probably been aborted.” Which is true, because of the much higher rates of little girls lost from abortion.
Okay, “pro-life, but,” I promise.
A life will be lost during an abortion, an innocent life to boot. Would you ever use the same logic as this but with drinking and driving? “Well I am against drinking and driving, but I can’t tell someone else what to do.” At which point you take their keys away and pour out their drink. Now, of course no one would say that, because drinking and driving is dangerous. But, in reality, people drink and drive all the time. Sure, there are some deaths here and there, very tragic deaths, but it is not even close to 100% of drunk driving incidents that end up in fatal crashes. I haven’t looked it up, but just from seeing how people act in my town, I would imagine it is less than 5% of actual incidents of drinking and driving that cause harm. Is it the fact that the person may cause harm to themselves that we loath drinking and driving? Sure, partly, but is mainly because they could inflict pain on an unwilling participant. Sounds sort of like an abortion to me. Except… a little less than 100% of abortions end up in death. That’s right, some kids survive, look them up on YouTube… They are all curiously Pro-life, and almost all women… Huh… Women’s rights I guess. What do I know though? I am just a straight white man.
Finally, abortion harms the mother, and women in general. Take a minute and research the effects of abortion on the mental health of women, it isn’t pretty. Usually it is hardest for them when they have children later on when they are married. They basically realize that they are announcing to the world on social media that they are having a child, at about the same time in gestation they had their abortion. They aren’t stupid enough to be scientists, so they realize they are having a baby, and that they lost one previously. From what I can tell, this is very hard and sometimes ruins the lives of these women. It breaks my heart, these poor women who were lied to for so long about “clumps of tissue” and “choice”. I have seen women grow from this experience, however, but not without religious conversion. Sometimes you can’t forgive yourself when the wound is so deeply self-inflicted and you need to consult a source who can.
I would never judge a woman who has had an abortion, she is a child of God. Christ died and rose for her and her child, just as much as he did for any Saint. I will continue to pray for her soul, and that one day she can tell her child in heaven how much she loves her.