Abortion, Legalism, and the Truth (vanity)

[EverHopeful]

On January 22nd, 1973, forty years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized unrestricted abortion. On October 20th, 1999, as the U.S. Senate was giving consideration to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, Senator Rick Santorum, the chief sponsor of the bill, debated with Senator Barbara Boxer, a strong opponent of it, on the floor of the Senate. During their exchange, both Boxer and Santorum endorsed the legal personhood of a fully birthed newborn. Santorum then asked Boxer if she supported the legality of abortion of a fetus an instant prior to it being fully birthed. Boxer refused to directly answer his question, but her actions speak louder than words. Santorum's basic argument was that Boxer's support for the legality of unrestricted abortion and opposition to the legalization of infanticide was an example of legalism because an almost fully birthed fetus and a fully birthed newborn are identical to an arbitrarily precision. Ironically, Santorum's advocacy for the legalization of personhood beginning at fertilization is similarly legalistic. Imagine a sperm cell approaching a secondary oocyte. At what exact point will fertilization occur? Will it occur when an electron of a phospholipid of the sperm cell membrane is probably within a specific distance from an electron of a phospholipid of the oocyte cell membrane? Would intentionally destroying this entity be murder? If so, then would it still be if done half a Planck time earlier? If not, then what just punishment would be due? What prohibition would be just?

Imagine that a woman discovers that she is approximately two months pregnant. She had not planed to become pregnant. She goes to an abortion clinic, sits down in the waiting room, and for the thousandth time ponders the morality of abortion. She resolves to value Life, to seek out the Truth, and to follow the righteous Path (Jn 14:6), and to the extent that she is able to discern the Truth from untruth, she perceives that the entity inside of her is not a person. This perception rests on her belief that thought by the fetal cerebral cortex doesn't begin until the 5th month of pregnancy. She perceives that the righteous Path for her is to undergo an abortion, so when her name is called she stands up and chooses to undergo an abortion. Many accuse her of murder, but Jesus taught his disciples that this woman is completely innocent of murder because an intent to murder was not in her heart, and murder comes from the heart (Mt 15:19). Even if the entity inside of her had been a person, she would still be completely innocent of murder, and a judge with full knowledge of this would be dishonest if he convicted her of murder.

Now imagine that a second woman discovers that she is approximately two months pregnant. She had not planed to become pregnant. She goes to an abortion clinic, sits down in the waiting room, and for the thousandth time ponders the morality of abortion. She resolves to value Life, to seek out the Truth, and to follow the righteous Path, and although she tries to discern the Truth from untruth, she is unable to perceive if the entity inside of her is a person or not. She believes that a one day old zygote is not a person, and that a nine month old fetus is a person, but she is unable to more accurately discern when personhood begins. She perceives that the righteous Path for her would be to forgo an abortion if the entity inside of her is a person. She also perceives that the righteous Path for her would be to undergo an abortion if the entity inside of her is not a person because she lacks the resources necessary to raise a healthy child. Sitting in that chair inside that abortion clinic, she prays to God for the Truth, for guidance along the righteous Path, and for salvation so that she may have eternal Life. When her name is called she stands up and looks at the nurse and then at the exit. She is still unable to discern if the entity inside of her is a person or not. She then chooses to undergo an abortion. Many accuse her of murder, including a beloved member of her immediate family, but Jesus taught his disciples that this woman is completely innocent of murder because an intent to murder was not in her heart. Even if the entity inside of her had been a person, she would still be completely innocent of murder, and a judge with full knowledge of this would be dishonest if he convicted her of murder. In fact, Jesus taught his disciples that it is her angry, judgmental, and careless accusers who risk judgement (Mt 5:22, Mt 7:1, Mt 12:36). Nevertheless, she is afflicted with insecurity because she is unable to perceive her own innocence, so for much of the remainder of her earthly life she suffers in secret.

Now imagine that a third woman discovers that she is approximately two months pregnant. She had not planed to become pregnant. She goes to an abortion clinic, sits down in the waiting room, and for the thousandth time ponders the morality of abortion. She knows that she should value Life, seek out the Truth, and follow the righteous Path, and to the extent that she is able to discern the Truth from untruth, she perceives that the entity inside of her is a person. This perception rests on her belief that we risk damnation if we don't care for those among us who are the most weak, vulnerable, poor, incapacitated, unwanted, helpless, unloved, and devalued (Mt 25:31-46). She perceives that the righteous Path for her is to forgo an abortion. Nevertheless, when her name is called she stands up and chooses to undergo an abortion to keep her pregnancy a secret because of her pride. Even though many absolve her of murder, she can't stop accusing herself, and she perceives that she is guilty of murder in her heart even if the entity inside of her had not been a person, yet she refuses to confess, not even in secret, because of her pride. A stranger gently warns her of the wages of sin, taking care to not judge her because he knows that he doesn't know what was in her heart. He shares the canonical gospels with her, and testifies to her about his sins and rebirth, yet she still refuses to confess, not even in secret, because of her pride. A judge with full knowledge of this would be dishonest if he acquitted her of murder in her heart. Jesus taught his disciples that this woman's spirit is in mortal danger because she succumb to a temptation, and by doing so accepted a powerful deception into her heart as if it was the Truth. She placed her faith in a self-contradiction by believing that there might exist circumstances in which she would profit by committing a sin. The only redress for her affliction is through faith in the Truth, because the Truth is the one and only Path to everlasting Life.

[BCW]

We all all given choice. Added to that, we are also responsible for our actions, whether we are prepared for the results or not. At the end of it, there is adoption. Choosing life will always better the situation if one chooses to be responsible, either making the choice to do whatever is necessary professionally or finding adoptive parents to raise this child. More families in the US have the means to raise adoptive children - the majority will not because of choice, believing that one’s children must come from their own blood. I disagree.

Very interesting vanity post — alot of choices to be faced - and the responsibility and resulting consequences that come about. Consequences, like adoption, are a good thing.

Proud parent of 2 adoptive children - different mothers - different circumstances - but are safe now!