Pro Life Politics
Let us now consider what is called the pro life position on abortion.
What the pro life supporters get upset about is not so much denying life, for many that is ok. What upsets them is killing, and not killing of animals only the killing of people. The phrasing they choose in calling a fetus a baby means to them that abortion is the taking of a human life. This is a grey area since we evolve as we grow from the original joining of the egg and the sperm to a full adult. It is a grey area of discussion in that one has to decide at what point the fertilized egg becomes human. This is the debate. That said, we must add that some also react to the fact that even a fetus experiences pain, and very early looks quite human.
So we need to turn to nature to give us a clue regarding human survival and what promotes it.
Nature tells us, and common sense as well, that you preserve life but that the life of the mother and her ability to care for a child, or another child, is of preeminent concern. Nature chooses the mother, it chooses the mother who gives life over the offspring in cases where survival is difficult or harsh.
The answer to the abortion question is investment in love and care and a better environment for the mother. Focusing on this while respecting the mother’s right to choose is very pro life according to nature.
Why make it the mother’s choice? Well, consider that a woman is pregnant and she has to consider the risks involved to her own life in giving birth at a particular time. Who would feel it kind or right for even the father to say “Gee honey there is only a ten percent chance you can die, let’s go ahead with this pregnancy. Oh, and might I had that I will make that decision for you…”
The insanity of the so called “pro-life” movement is thus with these arguments fully revealed as not pro-life, against nature, and cruel and disrespectful of the mother.
End of discussion, full stop.
David “Mitch” Sotelo