Anti-abortion

It seems as if one of the issues of singular importance in politics these days for conservatives in particular is the subject of abortion. One side shouts, "A woman has the right to make her own medical choices!" This side is called "pro-choice." That's nice. This side is in favor of people being allowed to make their own choices. You don't get that right; they do. The other side shouts, "It's not a choice; it's a baby!" They are in favor of taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves, the absolutely weakest -- the unborn child. Try as they might to get themselves tagged as "pro-life." this side is constantly called, "anti-abortion." Now that's not so nice. They're not for something; they're against something. It's not that they favor a position so much as they oppose another. So the two sides are forever framed as favoring the rights of others to make their choices or opposing those rights.

As polarizing as this issue is, I have decided to put my foot in the water and see what bites me. You see, I am not anti-abortion. (Ducking ... seeing if any shots ring out from the right.) It is not abortion that I oppose; it is murder. (Kind of ironic, then, that I'm ducking, isn't it?) I am against taking the life of another human being. That cannot be termed "anti-abortion" because it is too small a term.

Now it gets interesting. You see, killing another person may or may not be murder. All killing of persons is classified as "homicide", but not necessarily murder. It is not "murder" when you shoot the guy that is attacking you with a knife. That's called "self-defense" -- justifiable homicide. Killing the enemy in battle isn't classified as "murder". If you are chopping a tree and the axehead comes off and hits your neighbor, killing him, it is not classified as murder; it is classified as "manslaughter." Simply killing another human being does not automatically get classified as murder. For something to be considered murder, it requires two components. First, it has to be the death of a human being. Second, it has to include malice. The question becomes "Does abortion include malice?" If we are to continue to call it murder, we have to consider the question.

Years ago J.P. Moreland suggested that Christians would be silenced in their protests against abortion if science could come up with a way to terminate a pregnancy without terminating the life of the baby. I agree with him. You see, it isn't abortion that they are protesting -- it's terminating the life of that child. (This is why considering it a "medical choice" is pure nonsense.) So if the child were to be able to survive beyond the womb and not be killed, Christians would shut up. I mentioned that to a friend of mine, and he made an interesting observation. "Do you think that women who are currently having abortions, if they had the option to terminate the pregnancy without terminating the baby, would choose that option?" Frankly, I was stunned by the proposition. Then, as I thought it through, I began to wonder. Would they?

I suspect that most of those who are currently willing to abort their babies would not be interested in having that baby survive. Why do I think that? Well, it currently is an option. We call it "adoption." So few, however, select that option. Instead, that baby is terminated. Why ? I'm not sure. Perhaps it has something to do with not wanting to think about it. Maybe it's something about guilt -- something that should have been their child being raised by someone else. There are lots of possibilities. But it is my suspicion that most of those who terminate their pregnancies also intend to terminate the life of that child. They would refuse the option of letting it live ... as they currently do. That qualifies as "malice." And that qualifies as murder.

I am not in favor of removing choice. I am in favor of allowing people to make their choices. In some cases, however, people demonstrate that they cannot be trusted to make their own choices. When their poor choices affect (or, especially, terminate) the lives of others, it's time to step in. We don't allow people the option of murder. We make laws against it. We remove their choice. If they still make that choice, it carries consequences. I am in favor of protecting the weakest people, and the unborn fall in that category. I am against murdering them. It seems to me that abortion today falls in that category. But don't classify me as "anti-abortion" because that completely misses the point.