Abortion

Imagine you have a button in your home that, when pressed, gives you an immediate rush of pleasure but comes with the possibility that it will deploy drones to capture one of your neighbors. The drones will carry your neighbor to your address and connect her inextricably to the interior of your home to the extent that if you remove her, she will die. The only way to prevent her from dying is to keep her there for nine months. During that time, she will make a mess, damage your home, and rely on you to care for her. It is even possible that her mere presence there unintentionally increases the possibility that you will die. After nine months, she can leave, no worse for wear.

As the person responsible for her imprisonment there, do you have a right to forcibly remove her, knowing she will die?

Would you put serious thought into pressing that button? Could you wait to push it until you are ready and willing to experience that particular scenario?

We all agree that murder is wrong. We all agree that unwanted pregnancy is a crisis facing our country. And we are all indoctrinated into something: some into abortion advocacy, others into abortion abolition, and others into abortion apathy.

Most people who hold a belief choose to ignore arguments against their position. We take shelter in an echo chamber, surrounding ourselves with people who think like us and say what we want to hear. We banish people who have thoughts that contradict our own. In a way, it makes sense that we do this. It’s relatable. Everyone wants to think that they understand the world because it helps us to feel secure and comfortable. But sometimes, our commitment to the comfort afforded by our understanding leaves us more committed to our perspective than to truth. Objectively facing and processing ideas that contradict our worldview means purposefully doubting ourselves long enough to ask, "What if I’m wrong?” and that can be an extremely uncomfortable exercise.

But even more debilitating is the thought of being rejected by the others in our echo chamber. We have a community there. Right? We’ve filled it with people who think exactly like us, and it's a place where we belong. So what happens if we realize that we’re wrong? Will we still be welcome there? What we all know is that the answer to that question is no. If we decide we’re wrong about something as polarizing as abortion, the people we once called our friends will hate us. And so, we subconsciously decide that the truth doesn’t matter and that it may be better to believe a lie than to risk the rejection of our peers and the discomfort of a shattered worldview. But we’d like to suggest that the truth is better than a lie. And therefore, each person must ask herself, “Which side has the truth?” Both sides think they are correct. Both sides see themselves as heroes, but one side is actually the villain. And so it would behoove the wrong side to realize they are wrong, acknowledge that they are wrong, and change.

Abolitionists and pro-choicers agree that unwanted pregnancy is a huge problem. It’s a crisis. Where we differ is in how we solve this problem. The pro-choice argument casts doubt over the humanity of the baby by dehumanizing it. If a baby is wanted, they call it a baby; if not, they refer to it as a clump of cells. Dehumanizing the baby in this way certainly makes things a lot simpler. An “unwanted pregnancy” consisting merely of a pesky "clump" seems incredibly easy to solve.

Conversely, the abolitionist argument begins by reminding us what we agree on. Everyone on both sides agrees that killing innocent humans is wrong. Killing is wrong regardless of how tiny, weak, unwanted, or dependent that human is on another human. The abolitionist seeks to teach people to acknowledge the truth of the baby's humanity that she is a living human at fertilization. Since recognizing the baby's humanity alone does not necessarily make her any more “wanted,” what do we do with the pressing problem of unwanted pregnancy? The answer is more straightforward than you might imagine: As a society, we teach and encourage women to want their babies.

Yes, Want. Your. Baby.

And if you can’t bring yourself to want your baby, know that there is someone out there who does. Murder is the intentional killing of an innocent human and, therefore, not a reasonable solution to unwanted pregnancy. Only a sociopath kills someone thinking “If I won’t have her, then no one will.”

Now, when it comes to the so-called “exceptions,” we must remember that every “exception” is an innocent human killed. We ought never to justify intentional baby killing. Punish the rapist. Protect the child. If the mother’s life is at risk, the doctor must acknowledge they have two patients and try to save both. Sometimes, a baby will have to be delivered prematurely to save the mother’s life, and sometimes, that baby will die, but you never intentionally kill an innocent human. Medicine proceeds by solving problems, and in time, even ectopic babies can be saved by safely relocating them to the womb. As we work toward solving the problem of ectopic pregnancy, we ought to cherish and TRY to help every single one.

The pro-abortion argument is on the wrong side of history. It advocates that people engage in sexual activity with utter disregard for the lives of their children. The abortion-minded person who engages in sex is no different than a drunk driver putting others at risk on the road. Our society does not have to tolerate such reckless behavior.

Abortion is murder, but God forgives repentant murderers who believe in Jesus Christ. We beg you to process the possibility that you are the villain in this story. That history will condemn you. That God will condemn you. Or recognize the truth that nothing justifies the killing of the innocent.

Abolish human abortion.