Women’s rights advocates in favor of a pregnant woman’s right to choose whether to keep their “fetus” refer to it as pro choice. “Choose”- such a positive term that seems to throw a glimmering light over the subject, as if the right to abort a baby were some revolutionary expression of personal freedom. Who would be against freedom or human rights in this modern era of democracy? Maybe being pro-choice would be considered taboo in the middle ages, but this is the 21st Century. Our thinking has evolved beyond that medieval thinking.
Many argue the baby is a fetus, not yet a human being, making the extermination perfectly amoral. Others say aborting the baby under certain conditions is the humane thing to do.
How easy exercising your freedom to choose would be if it weren’t choosing between life and death. But a fetus is just another term for an unborn baby. It has a heartbeat. At a very early stage of pregnancy, (around 6 weeks or so) the “fetus'” heart begins to pump blood to its already forming eyes, ears, arms and legs. When the heart stops beating, doctors declare a person dead. Reviving the heart brings them back to life. Yet somehow, the beating heart of an unborn baby is not evidence of life for many.
However, not all pro-choice advocates deny an unborn baby is anything less. Some argue it is rather the quality of life the baby might have after birth which makes it acceptable to abort. After all, if the baby were disabled in any way, or the surroundings were not suitable to a certain standard, why should the baby live? Society often considers those with disabilities as outcasts, and no good-hearted person would want to subject a person to a life like that. No, it is much better to kill them. And if the child’s future was destined to be “bad” by your standard of a good life, there is no reason to give them a chance at life. It’s your choice, right?
But what about rape?
There are some who are not pro-choice, except under certain conditions, such as rape. For a young woman who was viciously attacked, violated in unspeakable ways, surely if she concieved, abortion would be justified. But the unjust killing of an unborn baby is never justifiable. It’s murder.
Then I considered the question: What if I was raped? My first thought was, “Abortion is wrong. Period.” But I seriously contemplated what and how I would feel if something like that happened to me. I thought about it as if it did happen, and as I did so, I realized how angry I would be. Angry at the man who did it; angry at the child for being half of him; I felt so much anger for something that hadn’t actually happened. I realized how much hate I would have for that baby, as well as how much I would want to get rid of it, and I was shocked.
After everything I had thought about abortion, after all the judgement I had poured out on the pro-choice campaign, to know that’s how I would feel was heart breaking.
Even so, my feelings, or anyone’s feelings, do not change the fact that murder is wrong. “You shall not murder,” (Exodus 20:13) is the sixth of the Ten Commandments. The evil another person does to you does not justify murder. Killing an unborn fetus is the murder of a baby. Murder, whether it’s out of “good intentions” and a “merciful” heart, or out of pure hatred, you can’t reason away the evil of it. No arguement could ever be convincing enough to condone it.
You see, abortion is not a matter of women’s rights or the freedom of choice. It’s not an issue that was morally wrong in the past, but changed as society modernized. It’s a matter of life and death for an unborn child who should have the same right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as it’s mother does. Circumstances do not change basic truths of right and wrong. And the killing of unborn babies is wrong.