Before I start this, let me say; I am not looking for a debate on this post. This is merely a personal reflection of a very strong conviction God has been placing on my heart for a long time. Something I cannot ignore anymore.
In every political circle there is a varying degree of strength of beliefs. For most of my life I have compromised on my pro-life beliefs. After reading a post by abortion survivor Rebecca Kiessling and realizing that I have had constant guilt about compromising in this area I have made a decision. I cannot compromise anymore.
You see Rebecca was conceived through rape. She would have been aborted but laws in Michigan prevented that. She is not afraid to confront both pro-choice and pro-life activists. She has some very good points.
Oftentimes we compromise and say, “Well I am pro-life, EXCEPT in cases of rape. I mean we can’t morally make the mother carry the rapists child.”
Don’t we as pro-life advocates believe that life starts in the womb? Most of us believe life begins at the point of conception, when the sperm meets the egg. So that means that every conceived child is a life we should be trying to save. Why should it matter who the child’s father was? or how they were conceived? If you were to view two images of children in the womb at the same age, you couldn’t tell which was conceived through rape and which was not. The children conceived through rape are not any different, they are still innocent children.
Rebecca makes another very good point. The Supreme Court does not allow the death penalty for rapists, yet we are willing to allow the death penalty for the innocent children conceived through rape?
When we compromise on one point we undermine our arguments and beliefs that a child in the womb is an innocent human being worth protecting. We cannot say, “This child was conceived unintentionally during consensual sex so they should live. However this child was conceived through non-consensual sex so the mother should decide whether or not it lives.” Those two children are the same, they are living human beings. It is a difficult moral issue, which is why it has taken me so long to discern what I should do.
For those of you that may be wondering. Even before I came to this decision my husband and I had discussed this situation. What would we do if I were raped and conceived a child? Neither of us could choose abortion. We would keep the child. My husband had said he would raise him or her and love them as his own. We wouldn’t make the child pay for the crimes of their father.
The medical technology used in abortions can be used for good in my opinion. In the rare instance that there is absolutely no way to save the child but the mother can be saved, then we must choose to save at least one life instead of losing both. I have encountered some pro-life advocates who believe that the mother should die with the child, even if she could be saved through the use of medical technology (aka abortion). I recently read a story about a mother who had severe preeclampsia. This condition can be very deadly for both the mother and child. The only cure is delivery of the child. There was no doubt that she was going to lose her child, one twin had already died and the second was fading fast. But if they removed her children she had a chance of living. Yes this was an abortion, but it is one of the cases where the medical technology was used for good. The difficulty is discerning when these situations are there and when they are not.
If you haven’t already I strongly urge you to read Rebecca’s post, ‘THE PAIN-INCAPABLE UNBORN CHILDREN???’
- Why I am Pro-Life (controlledchaoschristiancourage.wordpress.com)
- Fetal pain bills: Should we “save the one”? (liveactionnews.org)
- My coming-out story (liveactionnews.org)
- My Child, My Choice. Having a baby changed my stance on abortion. Babble.com. | Babble (babble.com)