Abortion Discussion: Seek to Understand

It is difficult to debate contemporary issues because we often only hear our own side of the argument. We can be so certain of ourselves, so we need only convince others of the correctness of our own view. I can quote numbers and provide anecdotes concerning abortion all day long, but I make no progress without an open mind on the other end. However, I too need to hear and respond to the other side’s legitimate concerns. How is common ground reached if we don’t hear each other–or is the argument the point for many?

Some see their opposition as irredeemable, and they savor every opportunity to paint themselves as morally superior. It doesn’t matter what the other person says or does; some folks think they already know all they need to know. This attitude is pointless, but we can all fall into this trap. It is why progress is so often impeded or seems impossible. It is why so many avoid the discussion as well. We improve the human condition by moving others to a better place–through our words or our actions–or by allowing ourselves to be moved by others or by God. Avoiding the debate, doubling down on your own views without listening to the other side, or simply not caring at all, means no change occurs, no progress is made.

If your cause matters to you, how do you further it? How do you validate it? You must educate and inform yourself. Are you certain your view is correct? You must let others challenge your views–if only to sharpen your own arguments; otherwise, your views will drift away from reality. Support your own beliefs, not necessarily by engaging in debate, but through some meaningful action nonetheless.

To this end, I want to understand why so many are adamantly in favor of abortion. Are they trying to address real problems? Almost certainly. We likely even share common concerns. Are they right to criticize some of our (the pro-life side) words and tactics? Yes, in some cases (although that does not change the morality of the issue). Can we learn something from the opposing points of view? Always. Can we move others in any way if we don’t take the time to understand their views and seek common ground first? Probably not.

Lord, grant that I may seek rather to 
comfort than to be comforted;
to understand, than to be understood;
to love, than to be loved.
For it is by self-forgetting that one finds.
It is by forgiving that one is forgiven.
It is by dying that one awakens to Eternal Life. (from the Prayer of Saint Francis)

Most Americans are in the middle on the issue. At some point, they are squeamish about abortions; they want to restrict them in some way, but not totally. Those people can be persuaded. Still, there are others who want virtually no restrictions. Why do they push the boundaries so far? Is it purely for political reasons? In the pantheon of political issues, abortion has remained a top issue for both Left and Right for fifty years; both use it to stir up people and garner votes. Yet, many are not swayed by politics and truly believe abortion is the right thing. Why?

New York proudly allows abortions up to nine months. Governor Cuomo thought it an event to celebrate when it was passed a in 2019. Why is this an accomplishment?

Virginia governor Ralph Northam was asked about a similar law in his state: what would happen if the abortion did not succeed and a nine-month old baby was actually born? Governor Northam, a doctor himself says he knows exactly what would happen in such a situation:

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/abe-greenwald/ralph-northam-infant-would-be-kept-comfortable/. 

I can tell you exactly what would happen, the infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.

So, the mother and doctor would let the baby die if that were the desire instead. Who is going to know? More importantly, who is going to pay attention to this further devolution down the rabbit hole? Certainly not the Democratic party which uttered nary a complaint.

There are many politicians today running a campaign clearly in support of none or virtually no limitations, and many who will support them. Do they know what they are supporting?

The Pro Choice Side

I found one person on the other side who is willing to articulate his views, someone who doesn’t grow weary of defending his own position or of attacking mine. He is absolutely certain abortion should is a good thing, and, in fact, sees his position as morally superior to mine. I am a part of the anti-abortion crowd, the Pro-I-Don’t Care crowd, one who has a parochial view of life in general, in his estimation. I gave him space below to make his most convincing argument. His views are unique in some ways; they also overlap with other commonly held beliefs.

First, he repeatedly tells me life begins at birth. Aborting a child is not murder because a fetus is not yet a person. The fetus is only a potential life:

It takes birth to change a fetus into a child

When the baby is responsible for its own life, only then is it an independent being, one who has to suckle for itself to continue living. If it doesn’t suck, or doesn’t breathe on its own, it is “choosing to die.” Life begins at birth!” Anything else is religious bullshit.

Yes, birth to death. I did not set those parameters. The phrase “birth to death” is older than history itself. Not from “conception to death,” or from “first heart beat to death,” but from “birth!” How old are you? Your age started from the day you were born. That is the convention all around this globe, in every human culture, and when talking about all living beings. Nothing is measured from conception, or first heart beat, or any other event except birth. That is when life starts.

A child that is born into a bad situation will be condemned to a horrible life. Abortion could alleviate all that potential suffering, he says:

You are willing to risk having the fetus turn into a child that will have a horrible life because all you care about is a birth, and not what happens to either the woman or the child after the birth? I don’t call that Pro-Life, I call it it Pro-I-Don’t-Care.

Furthermore, he points out that the woman suffers if she is not in the right situation or not ready for motherhood. Abortion can limit her suffering.

The women who have their lives ruined are the ones forced to carry a baby to term when they don’t want to become mothers, or are not ready to become mothers, or are incapable of being mothers. That takes nine months out of their lives, just because of an accident, and sets a child up for being taken away by social services that can go very wrong, or becoming single mothers who resent their children. Children need a loving home.

He says we cannot place limits on consensual sexual activity, so we need to use the technology now available to fix the messy situations that will inevitably result.

Pregnancy is an accident of nature. Women do not get pregnant every time they have sex. Some people want to, good for them. But sex is not only for procreation. It is important to mental health, and to loving relationships. Accidents happen. Fixing the body of a car is the natural next step. Fixing the result of a sexual accident is no different.

I don’t agree with any of these points, but his argument holds together so far. If a fetus is not actual life, abortion is not murder. I consider it a big stretch to deny a fetus is alive, but if he cannot see that perspective, his argument remains consistent. His goal of limiting suffering is humane and appears well intentioned (although totally wrong). I agree procreation is not the only purpose of sex, and we all know accidents happen.

He continues, focusing on the impact to women. Abortion legislation only impacts women in a meaningful way, he says. Others don’t have a real stake, he says.

“Roe v Wade does not affect anyone but a pregnant woman who is questioning whether she can give a good life to a baby. Only she knows what is going on in her life, and it is her responsibility to make the best choice possible for everyone for everyone concerned!”

The child, the potential child, is not impacted? The father is never impacted? The woman’s family is never impacted? Society is not impacted? All this might be true if we lived apart from each other, if we were still hunter gatherers and responsible only for ourselves. There is a massive impact and a devaluation of life in all its stages.

He says: “the woman makes the best choice for everyone involved”. The woman who through lack of foresight embroiled herself in a situation she can’t handle on her own or cannot accept it is going to make the best decision for all concerned? The woman who (per his words) doesn’t want, is not ready for, or is incapable of being a mother is going to make the best choice for all concerned? Really? He tells us the woman is overwhelmed and we must empathize and respect her independence, yet she should also be trusted to make such a fateful decision. On her own (only she knows what is going in her life, he says) she should be trusted to decide what is best for all. He goes on in this vein:

To start, there is no child yet! It is a potential child, and has no say in any discussion. If there is a father in the picture, and if the father is committed to loving the child once it is born, to helping raise the child, support the child until it becomes an adult, to be non-violent to that child and its mother, to be in a committed relationship, ONLY THEN does the father have a say IF THERE IS NO MEDICAL ISSUE. At any time the life of the mother becomes endangered, right up to the time of birth, that then becomes a discussion between the woman and her non-biased-in-any-way baby doctor, and or mid-wife if there is one. BUT, when such a sperm donor is in the picture, how many women will still want an abortion. One in a million? Probably less than that! Stability goes a long way to accepting responsibility to remain pregnant.

Whether there is a life or not and when it begins is the essential part of the entire argument, and his whole argument disintegrates if we can show that life begins before birth. More on this below. But first, my friend quotes numbers. Remember, facts are stubborn things. They don’t care about your feelings abortion as birth control

The data shows that, (a) about 35% of all American women of child-bearing age will have had at least one abortion by age 45 (b) approximately half of all abortions are repeat abortions, (c) repeat abortions are on the rise, and (d) only a tiny fraction of abortions are done for the so-called “hard cases” such as rape, incest, life-of-the-mother, or fetal anomalies.

Much focus is often placed on the rare, exceptional “hard cases”. Even when folks grant these there should be exceptions (I do not), the staunch pro-choice advocates will not compromise on the other situations. They know “hard cases” are minimal. They want no limits whatsoever, not for rape, incest, or all other cases. My friend says that in good family situations (when the sperm donor is in the picture), abortions are rare. That is incorrect. Abortions are not rare at all. FACT: More than 1 in 3 American women will have an abortion at some point in their lives. Don’t tell me about the one in a million exception. That number is meaningless.

He knows and we all know many of women are forced into the “choice” by parents or by the fathers who do not want the baby. If it were truly the woman’s choice, many of these women would have the child. In these instances, this is not the woman’s “choice”.

I will agree the dad should be in the picture and committed to his child. When the father is not, the woman is indeed placed into a difficult situation and may have an abortion against her own conscience or her own will. Again, in this instance, the decision and the responsibility is not totally the woman’s.

This is a societal issue as well. In the halcyon days past, the dark ages in my critic’s estimation, the father was forced to live up to his responsibility and the child would have a home. It’s not the best situation either, but it is better than simply giving up on the life of a child. The parents or the responsible people in the parents lives should work things out. This situation can improve over time as well. Life is not static. We all know there are other options (adoption, family support, etc.) as well. Even if not ideal, again they are better than denying the child its most basic right: Life. But he persists along this line:

Meanwhile, Anti-Abortionists (you are not Pro-Life so you can stop using that term around me, it is a lie!) have all these ideas that they have a say in every woman’s life. You do not! You do not even have a say in your daughter’s life if she is unlucky enough to have you as a father. If your daughter becomes pregnant because of rape or incest, are you really going to force her to have the baby? If you would, you are one sick father! Or if you throw her out of the house for getting pregnant as a teen? You are just as sick as the last example. A loving father cares about his own child first, not any potential person. I will say this over and over till you believe me, only the pregnant woman knows her circumstances. Carrying the fetus to term is her choice, and her choice alone. CHOICE! That does not mean she will choose to have an abortion. But if she does, no one else has any say.

Yes sir. I hear you. A loving father as well as a loving mother care about their own child before themselves. We must have some common ground or there is no point in continuing the discussion.

However, the unborn children, the potential children as my critic defines those lives, are loved by many mothers and fathers before birth. For many, hopefully most, parents, the love doesn’t begin when the child is born. It is present while the child is in the womb. We name the child before birth. We have a place in the home ready before birth. We celebrate with baby showers. We give thanks for this blessing. We visit the doctor regularly and eliminate our bad habits to better ensure the baby’s health at birth, and so on.

For nine months before my children’s births, I engaged in these practices. I went to Lamaze classes. I drove my wife to doctor appointments. I drove her to the grocery store and pushed the shopping cart when she was too tired. I was with my wife in the birthing room–before, during, and after. Why did I make all these sacrifices if I didn’t see the fetus as a child already? What would the point be? My wife had three miscarriages as well. We grieved together, but if there was no actual life lost why should we have cared? Our situation is not unique, however. Millions of others share these exact same experiences. Still, my critic would have you think women make these choices in a vacuum. He confers upon women, and women alone, the unique responsibility to decide the life or death of a child without input from any of the rest of us. He called me out for religious BS. I call this out as BS as well.

My critic would have you believe that there is no need for love or care before birth. After birth, he says, it is vital and your responsibility begins. We agree, at least, the love and care should be present after birth. However, if you are indifferent before birth, it is not so easy to turn the spigot back on once the baby arrives. Nevertheless, humans are adaptable and it is still possible for your feelings to grow (or diminish) as your child ages, but I find it incomprehensible he is fine with such indifference before that potential life is manifested.

Women have other ambitions and other talents, he continues. If not ready for a baby, they should have the option to forgo having a baby until a better time, better for the mother and the child and all involved.

Women have lives too, and motherhood is secondary as birthers of children! Until a woman is ready to become a mother, mentally, spiritually, and financially, there is no reason to force them to become mothers!

This is a common theme. I wrote a post quoting famous women (Alyssa Milano, Nicky Minaj, Billy Jean King, Busy Phillips, Joan Collins, and others) discussing their own abortions. They provide a variety of reasons, most of them severely lacking in my opinion. As long as it is available, people will find a reason to justify abortion, just as people find reasons to justify anything they want badly enough. https://seek-the-truth.com/2021/10/07/never-again/. I do not want these women advising my daughter.

Furthermore, most women (59.7%) who have abortions already have a child. Shouldn’t most of these women be ready mentally, spiritually, and financially? abortion as birth control; abortion demographics

FACT: One of the most surprising facts about abortion is that almost 60% of women obtaining an abortion have already given birth to one or more children!  Only 40.3% abort their first child.

My friend makes his most impassioned appeal regarding the impact for women in general. We are turning around the ship of women’s rights around with the repeal of Roe v Wade. This is the beginning of the end. Women will once again be enslaved into meaningless lives if some of their lot are forced to have babies against their will:

“Women had to fight to become persons, to be able to take their place in the world of men — economy, politics, careers, etc. . . . Women have always been persons, But men held them down and refused to let them participate in real life. . . Men used them, they beat them, they raped them, and they treated them like cows! Do you really want to go back to that life? Because taking away RvW IS THE FIRST STEP IN THAT JOURNEY! . . . I am a man. I do not want women to be cows. I want women to be persons. I want women to be partners in life. I know there are a lot of men who do not want this. They want women to be subservient, to be mothers, and child-raisers and sex objects. They do not want women to be people. . . HAVING CHOICE MAKES YOU A PERSON! Please, do not be a party to giving this away. Do not make the women who fought for personhood into failures. You may think RvW is about having babies, IT IS NOT. It is about MEN TAKING BACK POWER! And any woman who fights to repeal RvW is a traitor to her gender.“

She IS the only one affected, but you are unable to conceive of such a thing. The people around her may think, even believe, it affects them, or you. That is your ego talking. Your arrogance blinds you to the truth.

Yes, my ego forced me to attend a dozen Lamaze classes and to sit through a two-hour baby shower with lots of pink gifts and older women I did not know. My ego demanded I change hundreds, if not thousands, of poopy diapers for years on end. None of this matters to my critic. My wife and I can provide our daughter alternatives, support, advice and all the rest we can muster, but if our teenage daughter is still bound and determined to go forward with this “choice”, if that is what my friend and critic believes is best for her, then our experience, wisdom, and future commitment mean nothing to him. In fact, he says we are terrible parents. Having the legal “choice” to terminate the life of an unborn child, does not make my daughter a person as he says above. She is a person without this one option, my friend.

Abortion will also be less safe and more will die because of this repeal, he also says. This is a common argument from the pro-choice side.

Meanwhile, no matter what you think, believe, or say, making abortion illegal will NOT STOP ABORTIONS FROM HAPPENING! Do you really want to go back to the time when having an abortion in a safe clean hospital was forbidden? Do you want your daughter to be so scared of telling you she is pregnant that she will risk getting an abortion in some motel room by someone who is taking her money but not protecting her life. Is a potential life so important to you you would risk losing your own daughter, or have her so mangled inside she will never be a whole woman again? Abortions have been happening for centuries, probably since the first man said a woman HAD TO carry a baby to term. They are not going to stop because you say so, or some politician makes it illegal. They will happen! And more women will die because of you and people like you. This is what you try to call Pro-Life? I do not believe you!

No. I don’t want to return to botched abortions. But the statistics show that deaths from abortion were not that common before 1973. In fact, they had been decreasing steadily before that time.

https://www.al.com/news/2019/05/how-many-women-died-in-abortions-before-roe-v-wade.html

By 1959, a leading researcher wrote: “Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physicians. In 1957, there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind. In New York City in 1921, there were 144 abortion deaths, in 1951 there were only 15.

The National Center for Health Statistics listed 235 deaths from abortion in 1965. Total mortality from illegal abortions was undoubtedly larger than that figure, but in all likelihood it was under 1,000.”

Let’s turn this around. How many lives are lost or destroyed today because of the current practices? Those who support abortion often think it is a sterile, routine medical procedure, one that is done thousands of times every day, just like getting your appendix removed. Perhaps they may even acknowledge it’s not quite so, but still they say it is necessary and we just can’t do without it. If people could see the ugly side of abortion, they would not be so quick to support it. Have you ever heard of Abby Johnson, Kermit Gosnell, or David Daleiden?  If not, it may be because their stories have been suppressed. You should know their stories. They can change your heart.  

• Unplanned is Abby Johnson’s story; Abby was a Planned Parenthood director who had a conversion, and is now staunchly pro-life.  Abby herself had two abortions; these are depicted in the movie. They are anything but sterile; the medical care she received was minimal and not what I expected at all. I compare the care Abby received with the care my wife received during the birth of our children; the two are as far apart as could be. Here is a free copy of the movie. Watch it tonight if you can. Watch it tomorrow if too busy today. Just watch it, please: https://archive.org/details/Unplanned
• Kermit Gosnell’s abortion horror clinic continued for more than 20 years; the state of Pennsylvania ignored violation after violation because they didn’t want his story to come out (although it eventually did). Two women had to die from neglect and incompetence before Dr. Gosnell was finally exposed and jailed. The conditions at his practice were appalling. The number of violations of the law were too numerous to count. The number of people who knew the truth and looked the other way was equally appalling. The book was one of the most impactful I have ever read. Many I am sure would rather not know and continue to live in ignorance. There is a movie as well, Gosnell, The trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer. It is aptly named.  Here is a summary from a liberal, former pro-choice journalist: https://www.liveaction.org/news/kirsten-powers-reflects-on-her-blockbuster-gosnell-column-and-the-complicity-of-the-pro-abortion-media/  https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/04/10/philadelphia-abortion-clinic-horror-column/2072577/
• David Daleiden went undercover and filmed Planned Parenthood doctors blithely discussing the sale of aborted baby parts.  I thought people would finally wake up after this revelation.  The evil was so obvious and so clear.  I was horrified by these videos, but now they are hard to find because of a concerted effort to censor them. https://rumble.com/vfj7eh-judge-orders-undercover-planned-parenthood-recordings-permanently-sealed-tu.html. The State of California, Attorney General Kamala Harris in particular, went to court to stop him from releasing his story.  They attacked Daleiden instead of Planned Parenthood: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/david-daleiden-kamala-harris-contempt-first-amendment.  He was forced to pay Planned Parenthood for damages to their reputation.  Planned Parenthood broke the law, but they were victims you see.  https://rumble.com/vk2b93-horrific-undercover-video-of-center-for-medical-progress-w-abortionist-and-.html; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOVte9k_DMs;

Humanity

My opponent talks about the humanity of his view and says my own is obviously lacking:

Anything that does not speak to feelings of humanity, caring about all people, all living beings, does that to me. It breaks my heart to hear you say some of the things you say you believe. I find them inhumane at times.

Abortion is not humane at all. In the movie Unplanned, Abby’s boss says abortions are “our fries and sodas”, meaning all other services offered only break even while abortions bring in the real money.   Many criticize corporations for putting the bottom line ahead of other values, but these same folks will give a pass to Planned Parenthood because they believe it supports a good cause.  Planned Parenthood is a non-profit, but it deserves its place at the big corporation table. It is fundamentally supporting evil as well.  To this end, I asked my critic why he considers abortion humane. 

Humane is caring about the mother. You do not care about the mother. Humane is caring about the kind of life the forced birth of a child will have. You do not care if the child is born into poverty, or if it goes into the adoption system and gets sent from foster home to foster home while awaiting adoption. The foster care system has more horror stories than come from abortions, and they are horror stories that are happening to real live breathing children! But you do not care about that either. Your caring STOPS the minute the child is born! Yes, you are RESPONSIBLE for that child if you forced it to be born. Anything that happens to that child, bad and good, IS ON YOU. But you disappear back into your own life, not caring if the child has a good or happy life. You call this being humane? I think you need you rethink your own humanity!

He tells me I am missing a big piece of life’s puzzle:

What you are really looking for is places to attack me. Be honest with yourself. Nothing you say will make me change my beliefs, because they come from inside me, not from other people telling me what to believe. 

The thing is, sir, you are not debating the issue of when life starts. You are trying to be the authority who can bully everyone else into accepting your stance when you cannot even prove what you mean by life, let alone when it starts.

No, I AM debating when life begins. I am attempting to persuade not bully you and others.

Life Begins at Conception

Watch the ultrasound video below and tell me again when life begins. Abortion clinics do not want women to see an ultrasound because they will realize what they are doing. Watch and you will know life begins much sooner than birth. Tell me also this picture of a fetus is not already a human life that must be cared for and loved as much as any other outside the womb.

Forty-weeks-in-the-womb

We all suffer whether born into a horrible life or not. Senator Tim Scott’s response to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen reminds us of this. You can have a bad childhood and still have a good life.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/tim-scott-delivers-stunning-rebuke-janet-yellen-black-abortion-comments-im-thankful-here?

Secretary Yellen, made an economic defense of abortion: your life will be better if you abort the child because it takes time, energy, patience, persistence, and most importantly (from Yellen’s view) money. You don’t need all that trouble. Enjoy your life while you can. It is an appeal to selfishness. It says self-sacrifice is a fool’s errand.

Senator Scott’s response was concise and excellent: who are you Ms. Yellen to make such decisions for me and my family? Are you the “expert” who can fix our lives? Yellen delivers her message with a smile while reducing a child to a dollar and cents argument. How compassionate is that?

Who among us can justly decide another should have no more opportunities in life given a current set of bad circumstances? My friend, how can you so callously dismiss the life of a fetus? You say care about every living human being, but you do not appear to care about a fetus because a fetus does not meet your definition of a life, a definition that you, a person who can think for himself, have defined. God love you, but you don’t have all the answers no matter how much you think and how smart you are.

You claim to be humane because you want to eliminate suffering. But you would alleviate the mother’s suffering only to transfer that pain and suffering to others. What good is that? Often, the mother suffers from this decision as well. What a mess is made by trying to fix things in this way.

In addition, there is a purpose to suffering, believe it or not. Elimination of all suffering should not be our goal. Suffering highlights the need for change in our lives. A woman suffers through nine months of pregnancy and child birth, yet much joy and good comes from this suffering (ask other parents if you don’t believe me). A hangover is a reminder not to drink so much the next time; this suffering stimulates healing. Anything worth accomplishing in this world involves difficulty, if not actual pain. My son is a long-distance runner; to be successful involves enduring a fair amount of self-inflicted pain. He is sore and tired after running 13 miles at 6 AM, yet we recognize the pain he endures and inflicts upon himself as a good thing. Graduation, promotion, finishing a project, winning a championship, or just scoring a touchdown, are not easy, but we once we accomplish them we often say it was worth the pain and sacrifice.

We once had societal limits, not codified limits, on sexual activity. Certain behavior was stigmatized. It worked better back then. The halcyon days of yore were not so halcyon maybe, but they were better than the free-form indulgence in sexual activity that brings about so many other problems today.

You tell me I don’t care about the child after birth. Nothing I said–in our conversation or in any of my posts–confirms that point of view. You have an image, a straw man, you have created of me. I got up in the middle of the night countless times to comfort my kids; I changed all those diapers; I drove kids to all manner of practices and school events; I helped with homework until midnight on too many occasions, yet, according to you, I don’t care about a child after it is born. I helped my children’s friends and my neighbors kids too. I tutored them and I drove them too; I volunteered at school, and on and on. What the hell do you know about me and my views after the child is born? What do I have to do to get some affirmation: support the political policies you believe help kids? Demand that the government, not parents and society itself, fix the problem?

On the other hand, do you care about a child before it is born? Do you give a damn about what you call a potential life? I can’t see that you care at all. How about fixing the “accident” by letting someone else raise the child? Many parents are unable to conceive or to have children. They would gladly raise a child not wanted by another. Do you care that a child might add joy to their lives? Respecting the mother’s right to end a life is important to you, but do even know the joy that a child brings? Are you a parent? Do you understand what it is to raise a child? Do you know what self-sacrifice it is? The mother sacrifices more before the child is born surely, but a father sacrifices as well, a real father in any case.

There is a father, mother, sperm donor, and egg donor. Sometimes the sperm donor and egg donor are nothing more than that, but hopefully they are the parents too. A father and a mother raise a child, give everything for the life of a child, would die for a child if necessary. Do you understand any of this? There is suffering at one end of the spectrum with children, but joy is at the other end. Who are we, any of us who were given life ourselves, to determine only suffering is inevitable and that potential suffering (not actual suffering my friend) is worthy of ending a life or a potential life?

What about self-sacrifice? Many women have given up career for family, and as Robert Frost said, that has made all the difference. Our society cannot function well if both women and men abandon their familial roles. That is the problem of today and has been a problem for most of my lifetime. In your world, having the option to “forgo a baby” means the baby must sacrifice its life so that the mother and father have better, more prosperous, more fulfilling lives. What society can survive on such values? This is what evil looks like face-to-face. I pray you will see it someday.

I agree Western Culture has placed great value on the lives of women. Western culture has given women more freedom and rights than ever before. I agree women in many past societies were not always treated well or lost many opportunities. I recognize there are societies still today that do not treat women well. America is not one of those societies. Furthermore, all women have gained was not gained because of the right of abortion. Those gains came before abortion ever became a so-called “right” (it is nothing of the sort). I can’t possibly see how abortion is the key to women’s rights. Remember too, women still have many choices before they get pregnant. You are concerned about the women’s lost opportunities but what about the lost opportunities of aborted children? What benefits might they have provided our culture?

Ancient cultures, including the chosen people, the Jews, sacrificed their children to Molech. This practice was prohibited in the Old Testament. Abraham was directed not to sacrifice his child, but a ram instead. Ancient cultures needed to be taught this lesson in a rather simplistic manner. Ours should know better. Ours should learn from our traditions. Nevertheless, our technologically advanced and ever-so-progressive culture has descended into the pagan practices of thousands of years ago. This is what happens when all our traditional norms are destroyed. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/4372130/jewish/The-Tragic-History-of-Molech-Child-Sacrifice.htm

God is Missing

You are obviously a religious person. I AM NOT! I will not presume to tell you not to believe in God. But don’t start quoting religion at me because it has ABSOLUTELY NO STANDING in my life! I think for myself. No one including you can tell me how to think. 

Our differences with regard to belief in God explain why we are so apart in our views on everything else. Not believing in God, means we define our own standards in life or we seek another, a political ideology perhaps, to define the standard. My critic is not one who wants to substitute anyone’s ideology, not God’s, a political party’s, or any other for his own. I can understand this independence, but if you don’t submit to a higher authority then it is not surprising you arrive at such callous positions on abortion. We must realize there is a better standard than we can define for ourselves. With God as our standard bearer, we have a more consistent view of the value of life. Life matters from the beginning, and the beginning is conception.

My critic says he indulges my view of God, but then he mocks that view; he implies I cannot possibly think for myself because of religion’s parochial view of life. No. He is wrong. God, God’s rules, His love, His mercy, His justice and discipline, and the people He has placed in my life provide the rudder which keeps limited beings like me from falling into peril.

I ask him: how do we, in this short period of time we are on earth, come to know all there is to know, and to know it well? Simply put, we learn from others. Many of our views come what we have learned, learned from books, from history, from school, from our parents, from the internet. Have you ever been to London or Singapore or Tokyo? Are you certain they all exist? Unless you have visited all three, how can you be sure they exist? You are sure they exist because you have been told by others. Think and evaluate what you learn from others. They learned it the hard away. Cast aside their knowledge only if you have carefully, very carefully, considered it and are certain it is no longer needed. The casual dismissal of past knowledge, what Chesterton called “the Democracy of the Dead”, is another of the major problems facing our culture today.

Submit to a higher authority, submit to an immutable standard, not one that you can define and change to suit your own caprices. Let others hold you accountable. Have others you rely on; have others check your excesses; do not be so certain your version of the truth is the best and allow yourself to be dissuaded from it (but demand real proof also).  You can be wrong and often have been. Me too. We all share that trait. 

For more on the discussion between my critic and me see the comments in this post: abortion-is-protection-for-a-woman-or-a-holocaust

For more on life issues: https://seek-the-truth.com/category/life/

Praise be Jesus Christ now and forever.