The first thing to think about with abortion is whether or not the baby is in fact alive. I'm not exactly sure how to argue my stand on this except to say what are you if not alive and have your own heart beat? How is something (or someone) not alive when they have a regular heart beat and a developing body of their own. At the end of week three in a pregnancy there is an irregular heart beat in a baby and by the end of week six the heart beat has become rhythmic and regular. Yes, the baby is completely dependent on the mother for survival at this point, but how many others do YOU count on for survival? Yes, you could leave home and depend on others outside of your home to sustain your life, but you still depend on something or someone. The fact is that it's everyone depends on others to live. America depends on China to live for crying out loud!!!!! (Haha, that was a joke hahaha)
In my last post I said something to the effect of "abortion IS murder UNLESS in the case of self defense." Someone brought it to my attention that you can't fully support your opinion if you use the word "unless" when you're trying to back up your statement. I agree to some extent. I try to keep my views on abortion within the boundaries of black and white. None of this gray in-the-middle-crap. Usually, when you're making an argument, the word "unless" introduces this gray middle area and you can't really find a way out of it. In this situation though, that is not the case. It is perfectly fair to say abortion is murdering/killing an innocent child UNLESS the mothers life is in danger. This argument is fair because..
- If the mother's life is in danger the child is not innocent. The child is in the act of taking the mother's life away, therefore the mother should have the right to defend herself and her life and take the babies life away in self defense to her own life.
- If a pregnancy is ended because the mother's life is in danger it's just like ending the life of someone pointing a gun at your head when you pull the trigger before they get the chance. Yes, you killed someone, but if you hadn't have killed them they would have killed you. Would you get put in jail if you killed someone with this context? No. But would you be put in jail for killing someone who was completely innocent because you were having a bad day? Yes. So if these things are true with human beings, should they not also be true with human fetuses?
A final point I'd like to address is that of forced pregnancy. This is a tough one for me because while I see the mothers side of it I also see the child's. The mother had no choice in bringing the child into the world...but neither did the child. In carrying the child for nine months the mother obviously feels an extremely and unbelievably large amount of discomfort and emotionally is strained to her wits end. Every time that baby kicked, the mother would probably flash back to the situation that brought this child into the world and it would take an enormous mental toll on her. I see that. I understand that. I know it would be extremely hard. But even though it's hard...the fact still remains that it's not the babies fault. The baby didn't just say "okay, I want to come into the world now so I'm going to magically appear in this woman's womb." The only person to blame is the one who impregnated the woman--and once again that's not the child. While I can understand why one would think this is a legitimate reason for an abortion I have a tremendous amount of respect for those who carry the baby full term and put it up for adoption and or whatever is deemed best in spite of her contrary feelings.
Again, I hope I haven't offended anyone, and I hope this was a little more informative and a little clearer than my last post. Peace out chubs! :)
3 comments:
Nat:
I love your passion and your thoughts on this important subject.
I takes great insight and determination to respect the rights of the un-born.
Right now society in general does not have great respect the rights of these individuals. That is sad.
Of course, the woman who carries the baby also has rights.
Figuring out how these rights, those of the mother and those of the un-born, inter-relate is a matter of great importance.
i am glad for a sensitive voice like yours, compassionate and concerned about both sides, being part of the debate.
Love you lots,
Dad
Nat,
I've thought a lot about abortion recently and I have to say it is one area that makes me really sad. As Dad says, it is a complicated issue and I can only imagine how it must feel for a woman to be pregnant and not want the baby. As you say, though, it seems to me that, at the end of the day, the right to life is paramount above any right the baby might be "taking" from the mother. In the end, I believe abortion for convenience is always wrong and abortion in the case of rape or life-threatening danger is a difficult subject. Certainly, though, we ought to remember that life is sacred, just as you point out.
FINALLY I AM READING THIS AFTER FINISHING MY THREE HARDEST MIDTERMS.
[breathing in and out]
ah - anyway, nat, you are spot on. I'm actually reading a novel right now about abortion et al and it's the saddest thing in the world. i wish that along with a realization that abortion is harmful, there were an increasing testimony of the importance of adoption as a beautiful alternative. there are so many people wanting to adopt! you shoudl check out therhouse.blogspot.com. it'll open your eyes to a totally different world that childless couples live in. So sad.
anyway, i love you.
Post a Comment