What I Believe About Abortion

By Michael The Libertarian

This is one of those subjects where, once one offers an opinion, they can rest assured they will be alienating half of the country.

Did you notice what I typed, there? “Alienate”. We don't discuss issues in this country, anymore. We chose a side (sometimes strictly based upon party affiliation) and dig in our heels.

Because of this sociopolitical climate, when giving an answer on this topic (and a few others), one must lead up to it and make sure they say all the P.C. things … “hit all the right spots” before they actually give their answer.

For that reason, I want to be very clear and state, at the very outset: I believe (as does the Catholic church, by the way) the health of a mother must be a paramount consideration. If the mother's life is truly in danger and abortion is the only alternative, then I support her “right” to an abortion.

When rape and incest are brought into the discussion, I have a different opinion from the church.

I don't want to get religious, but I must.

I could not honestly claim to be Catholic, anymore. I have an admiration for the old Catholic church (before Vatican II), but I certainly am not one. The God in which I believe is not the God of the Old Testament. The God to whom I pray is kind and benevolent. “He” does not sit around, just waiting for reasons to send people to Hell.

I believe it is cruel to a pregnant rape or incest victim to “force” them to give birth to a child conceived without their consent. We would be demanding that woman be forced to “fake” maternal responsibility and behavior with a child that only serves to remind her about a horrific incident and therefore, continue the vicious cycle of trauma.

I might add: I don't think if these feelings of trauma are in play, it would turn out all that well for the child, either. To demand parenting skills from someone who is dealing with a hideously traumatic experience, to me, is the epitome of stupidity.

You'll please notice, earlier on, I typed the word: “right” in quotation marks. There's a reason for that. If you read the Roe v. Wade decision (or have a lawyer explain it to you), you'll find the decision was based on a woman's right to privacy; not her right to an abortion.

So, with all the ground work laid, I am ready to begin.

I think abortion is wrong. It has nothing to do with religion. In fact, when I was militantly non-religious, I still believed abortion to be wrong, based upon a gargantuan respect for human life.

After typing that last sentence, I can anticipate the counter-argument: “It's not human life. It's a ...”

Let me be preemptive: if you use the terms: “blastocyst” or “mass of cells”, I will view your opinion with a very jaundiced eye. If you use the term: “parasite” (or anything similar to it), I'll dismiss your opinion, out-of-hand. I will compromise and say that we should be able to agree on “potential human life”. If we can't agree upon that, please stop reading, now.

So, if we continue with “potential human life” (PHL), I would have to ask: at what point does it become a life? Logically speaking, I don't see how two humans, engaging in the act that causes procreation, could create anything but human life. So, my question stands.

To my mind, even if I compromise, I believe the fetus must be considered human life once there's a heart beat, which happens at eighteen days. No? I disagree, but I will “allow” you that … grudgingly.

At eight weeks, “all structures are present in a rudimentary form”. Also, pain response in specific areas of the fetus are present. This is the most compromise I am willing to accept, absolutely. Period.

At fourteen weeks, the baby can feel pain in almost all parts of its body save the top of its head and the very lower back. This is an important point, especially when one considers the typical abortion.

A metal tube with a loop is inserted into the womb. The loop is positioned over the head and around the neck of the baby and then, the abortionist pulls on one end of the string that forms the loop. The head of the baby is snapped off. Then, the abortionist “vacuums out” the womb.

That is a typical procedure. Sorry I didn't sugar coat it by couching it in all the diluted descriptive words popular for use by pro-abortionists.

At twenty-one weeks, the baby has a marginal chance of living outside the womb. I was married to a woman who was born at twenty-four weeks. It happens.

So, what do I believe about abortion?

Well, I believe that life begins at conception, but I'll go with my compromise.

I would like it if we can't eradicate abortion, we could limit it to eight weeks. Remember: at eight weeks, there's a heart beat, pain response and a total foundation of all systems.

“But, Michael, eight weeks is only two months! That's not enough time for a woman to make a decision.” Really? It's not? We have inexpensive pregnancy tests that can give a very accurate answer within days of conception.

“But, Michael, abortions aren't cheap!” Well, that's true, depending upon how you measure it against a human life. Planned Parenthood performs very inexpensive abortions and, in some places where it's not prohibited by law (although the jury's out on that) provides some free abortions to women who have no financial means to pay.

“You're stepping all over womens' rights!” I refer you back to the Roe v. Wade decision. There's no “right” to an abortion.

There are two more things that are tangentially related to the abortion issue. One is rather lengthy. The other is exceedingly brief.

When discussing abortion, what never gets mentioned in the discussion is the other parent. The way laws are, now, a married woman can abort a child without even telling her husband about the pregnancy. The only clear reason I can see for that is if the pregnancy wasn't caused by the husband but by an adulterous relationship. Advantage: women.

Fathers' wishes, opinions, and desires are dismissed out-of-hand as being “irrelevant”. Here comes the “It's my body and my choice” argument. Fair enough, but that's a quagmire, also.

“My body. My choice” implies a demand for autonomy on the part of women. That's interesting, but hardly how things work, in practice.

A woman can reach her hands into the pockets of a man that never wanted to have a child with the aid of the government. Men who don't want to be fathers can have it forced upon them by the courts and by the mistaken idea that doing so is about “womens' rights” or equality.

Conversely, if a man wants to parent that child, he has no standing. The woman can just walk into a clinic and deny a man his “right” to be a parent.

Women have all the advantages in this situation and none of the responsibility. “My body. My choice. A man's fault!” It's an intellectually dishonest position.

It has always bothered me that of the three (Four? Five?) beings in an abortion procedure room, the one most in need of protection has no voice.

Lastly, the brief part: I am 100% in favor of any and all birth control (other than the use of abortion as a method for birth control). I am very much pro choice before conception.

That's where I stand, friends.

- Michael

I can be found on Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube (Older content)