On Abortion

I have written about abortion several times before (most recently here), but the potential overturning of RvW would seem to warrant a fresh word on the subject.  

Abortion is, simply put, heinous.  If the common methods of abortion were employed in the execution of capital criminals, human rights organizations would be up in arms.  Modernists have a particularly casual way of couching cold-blooded infanticide in confusing medical terminology and political slogans.

The act of abortion is absolutely horrifying, but uglier still may be what abortion reveals about the hearts of men.  The Internet has been a dark place in the wake of this leak as pro-abortion liberals have shown their true colors.  When abortion was being debated 50 years ago, our medical and technological capabilities were significantly different.  While this certainly does not excuse the horrors our nation has perpetrated upon the unborn, it does explain the common notion that a fetus is in some sense subhuman, a blob, a tumor, etc.  I mean, some school textbooks still taught that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.  Now that we have the ability to see every stage of fetal development clearly, it is apparent that only someone religiously denying the science could possibly maintain that human life begins when the fetus exits the birth canal.

But, then again, abortion is religious.  No, it is not a religion, but it is a sacrament of the religion of postmodern humanism.  Abortion is about autonomy, especially sexual autonomy.  Slaying one's own child in the womb is the ultimate denial of the Creator, a slap in the face to any entity who would dare lay claim to sovereignty over one's behavior, body, or being.  

If you need proof of this, look no further than the shape of the recent debate.  Attempts at scientific, logical, or philosophical argumentation are essentially non-existent, at least in online and political debates.  Rather, people everywhere mindlessly repeat the mantra that, even if one happens to believe personally that ripping unborn children limb from limb (and then trafficking their body parts at a premium) is unethical, our government has no right to tell a woman what to do with her body.  

That's it.  That's the argument. 

That argument is not worth refuting.  It can be refuted, and quite easily at that, but any attempts at such refutation will be a waste of breath because the use of this line of reasoning demonstrates that the debate is not concerned with biology, but with authority.  We are not as a society debating whether or not abortion objectively ends the life of a human being, but whether or not there is a standard (and, of course, someone who has created that standard) by which we must all abide.  Again, this compulsion towards autonomy often expresses itself sexually.  Abortion is not an end to itself, but a necessary requisite for our sexual irresponsibility.  We are so hell-bent on sexual self-determination that we will literally kill our young.  Absolutely no one will tell us what to do with our genitals!  

This can only be described as beastly.

Occasionally you will hear people talk of the victims of rape and incest or the health of the mother, but further discussion reveals that to be a façade.  Behind pro-choice reasoning is the fear of puritanical restraints on personal autonomy, especially sexual behavior.  Discussions of mandatory vaccines and health protocols quickly dispel any thought that their priority is personal liberty.  No, it is clear that what our culture (even those individuals who would never have an abortion) truly desires is sexual liberty.  Our philandering must be repercussion-free, even if it cannot be victim-free.   

Why is abortion such a crucial issue?  Why are discussions of the matter so heated?  The answer is simple.  Abortion is not merely a political issue, a matter for healthy discussion between Left and Right, but a symptom of a much deeper philosophical and moral divide.  One's position on abortion reveals much about how he views the origin and meaning of life, the character of the Creator, the standard of right and wrong, and several other fundamental questions of our existence.  For this reason, and because of the sheer horror of the act (to which, I fear, even pro-lifers have grown desensitized), abortion is not an issue upon which we can simply agree to disagree.

As a final aside, let me simply say that the only pro-choice logic worse than the fetal blob argument is the Republicans only care for children when they're in the womb argument.  Not only would that logic provide no basis for the morality of abortion, but it is also patently untrue.  The churches I have attended throughout my lifetime have all actively supported pro-life ministries that provide services (ultrasounds, parenting classes, etc.) and physical goods (diapers, clothes, formula, etc.) to families, unwed mothers, and children.  This is not to say, however, that we cannot do more, and we should certainly take this argument as a challenge.  As churches and individuals we need to support quality organizations that support children far beyond the womb.  I implore you to find a local, Christian pro-life organization in your area and partner with them.  If you live in the NE Ohio area, this is a great one.