|
Having missed the discussion at church today on the topic of abortion, I thought I would write a few of my random thoughts in a blog for the web page. In general, I am against abortion. Does that mean there should be an absolute ban on abortion? No, there should not. This is not a black and white issue, and there may be times when abortion is appropriate, but they are very few. I think that the reason this topic is so controversial is that the unborn children who are to be denied life are viewed by many people as innocent victims who are extremely vulnerable and need to be protected. I believe an unborn child is a child that is fully human and entitled to the full protection of the law. I think when most people use the word fetus (a perfectly valid medical word with a specific meaning) they are trying to dehumanize the child. The use of the fetus word is spin designed to perceive the child as a second class citizen over whom one can claim dominion or ownership, and therefore the right to do with as one wills. The term "prolife" is also spin, as it implies that if you are not prolife then you must be pro-death, and that's just nonsence. I think most people in America believe that they have a right to choose their own destiny in all matters. Many who relish the right to choose are not so quick to take responsibility for those choices. This is human nature. I also believe in choice, but I only have a right to make choices that affect me alone. I do not have a right to make choices for others without consulting them. In the case of an unborn child, the child's rights must be guarded by the courts. If we can have a presumption of innocents for suspected criminals, until proven guilty, why can't we have a presumption of life for unborn children until there is a proven reason why life should be denied? I think a pregnant woman has a fiduciary responsibility to lookout for the well fare of her unborn child, even if that child is unwanted. The father of the child also has this responsibility, but that's probably not going to happen in the case of a rapist. However, the sins of the father cannot be heaped upon the innocent child. So when might abortion be an acceptable choice? I believe that every person has a right to self defense, that is, to protect themselves from bodily harm and death. A woman may choose abortion if carrying the child will cause her great pain and suffering or death. Modern technology has allowed us to find out many things about the unborn that in the past were unknowable until birth. A woman may want to use this information to petition the courts to allow her to abort a pregnancy where the child is not viable or has a very poor quality of life prognosis. The courts make life and death decisions for criminals all the time. Making life and death decisions for unborn children is consistent with this duty. Life is a time line from conception to death. Inside the womb or outside, it doesn't matter, you are still on the time line. Every cell in an unborn child's body is as alive and functioning as every cell in your own body. The adult potential of the child is as great before birth as after. I have avoided till now any religious comments on the subject, mostly because they are not provable and subject to personal belief. I don't know if an unborn child has a soul any more than I know if I have one, but I believe that an unborn child is alive, and life is a gift from God. God would not give life without a soul attached.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comment form
Join PCM's Facebook groups. Search "PCM Youth" and "Presbyterian Church of the Master."
I want to preface my further comments by acknowledging that I am far from an expert on this issue, ethics, or faith/faithful approaches to this issue. What follows are as much my thinking out loud as anything else.
I am hesitant to list a specific set of circumstances in which I would find abortion acceptable. Health risk to the mother and rape are the two most often situations offered up, and more readily (not universally) accepted scenarios.
But, I really believe that there is such a spectrum of scenarios that it is impossible to list an discrete set of scenarios. I think that it is more appropriate to support case-by-case discernment.
Is the court the best arbitor of that process? I'm not sure. I think that family, faith mentors (pastors, priests, rabis, etc.) should all play a role in case-by-case discernment.
There is a strong sense in our society of the need to protect innocent, vulnerable unborn life. And, certainly, the fact that an unborn child is defenseless is a factor in considering all possibilities. But, I'm not comfortable with assuming that that life takes first precedence.
There are three lives physically involved, and many others peripherally involved. The three lives are the mother, the father, and the child. This three-way relationship is further complicated by the reality that only the mother can carry the child, the father cannot.
There are several things in our society's attitudes on child birth and child rearing that I think are broken, and that contribute further to the complication of this whole issue.
It is so natural to say "the mother got herself pregnant", or "the mother may choose abortion if...", or "the mother must carry to term unless...". Language that is very mother-centric. It's as if the mother and her body are the only consideration.
There is a father, too. And, as you point out, obviously, the unborn child (or we wouldn't be having this discussion).
Here are some things that I think are broken.
Once the father has gotten the mother pregnant, the father is almost completely forgotten. The father is often not held accountable (in the case of pregnancy out of marriage), whether because of youth, rape, incest, or whatever.
The mother (out of marriage) is given nearly sole responsibility for the child.
Conversely, often (except in the case of pregnancy within a caring marriage or similar relationship) is given little rights or consideration.
And, as noted, the father has no ability to volunteer to carry an unborn child to term and raise the child.
I believe that (and here it gets tricky) neither should the mother be allowed the sole decision making power (yes, it's her body, but like it nor not, she has become the care taker of a child that has been created by two people, not just her). But, neither should the father, or any other person have "dominion over the mother", and have the right to dictate.