Month: February 2017
It may have been a “Right to Life” march or it may have been a call for an end to the right of every woman to control the use of her body. There are two sides to every coin.
There are people who oppose abortion but favor the death penalty. Punishment of evil is the connecting idea. Killing fetuses is immoral. Killing evil-doers is righteous. I am inclined to tolerate both. The death penalty may actually be better than life in prison without the possibility of parole. A life lived out in a prison with unsavory companions under the watchful eye of guards who were probably available because they couldn’t find any other job is not really a life.
The Right to Life marchers want to guarantee the safe passage of new humans through months of development and an arduous journey out of the womb into the harsh reality of our world.
But there are no guarantees. God doesn’t make mistakes. But the process of creating a single, unique DNA book from the DNA books of two random cells is tricky and error prone. Mistakes are made. Things go wrong. Anomalies like blue eyes and sickle cell anemia result when the new human inherits the same recessive gene from both parents.
Approximately 25% of all pregnancies fail. Only 75% of human pregnancies result in the birth of a living human being. Many of the successful pregnancies produce new humans with defect. Sometimes the defects are severe.
Let’s agree with Jesus that life is about more than the food we eat and the clothes we wear. Sure the guy on the respirator is breathing and has a pulse but is he living?
The Right to Lifers focus on getting the new human out of the vagina and safely into the arms of a mother. This focus is necessary because they are not prepared to deal with many important issues. Mothers who are carrying babies have needs directly related to the health of the fetus and by extension to the health of the baby that is expected. The pair, mother and baby to be, need food, water and shelter. Health care is advisable although mothers got along without it for thousands of years. Our society and especially the Right to Life crowd is opposed to providing those necessities especially for women on welfare and unwed teenage moms. Providing for them might encourage bad behavior.
The Right to Lifers also want to avoid discussion of what comes after the first nine months. They do not want to worry about how to deal with infant organ failures that need to be addressed by immediate surgery. They want to make the parents responsible for everything after the actual birth. They don’t even want responsibility for the birth. They just want to make sure that nothing is done to prevent the birth.
Food, shelter, health care and education are necessities for a meaningful life. Making the parents solely responsible for those necessities is a societal failure. Leaving an infant in the care of a couple that isn’t capable of providing that care is an act of gross negligence. Some of those marching for the Right to Life are actively opposed to using tax dollars to provide benefits for indigent families. Many are doing their best to pare school budgets to a minimum. There does not seem to be enough interest in education to make sure that schools are staffed with capable teachers who are paid a fair wage.
The attitude of the Right to Life crowd seems to be: “Congratulations. You made it here safely. You are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Good luck.”
It is time to move beyond sound and fury. Commitment and action are needed. We have to put our money where our mouth is. If we demand that the child be born, we need to step up and take care of her or him as long as necessary.