The abortion of value
THE EDITOR, Madam:
With no desire to hop on to any abortion seesaw here, I read an article in one of your recent publications and found it of interest, that maybe the reason for the continuing bellicose and clashing approach to abortion discussions is that there is no resolute value placed on the life of a foetus.
For many, the importance of a developing foetus is as dependent on their adjustable needs as the need to provide food for their children may be displaced by the need to buy the latest phone out there. The value of this unborn life to them is relative, if after becoming pregnant, a woman feels it may impede her career or other competing values – sorry, but life just have to take the back burner – for now.
PREGNANCY FROM RAPE
Even the emotional yoke that is often used to justify a terminated pregnancy from a rape is also a matter of playing with life. For as heavy as the burden that a rape victim would have to endure, the abortion defence is actually misdirected – it is the punishment of an innocent developing life for the sins of a loathsome father, and, even more absurd, is the rejection of her own inadvertent contribution to that life. Thus, this unborn receives the death penalty while the criminal of his creation may even be walking free. Again, if a rape victim decides to carry the pregnancy to term without any emotional webs, is it not reinforcing the truth that there is no independent value placed on the life of the unborn? It’s purely how we feel about it, the vibes toward it, as a woman could easily decide to abort because she no longer likes her boyfriend or husband.
Even the justification raised in defence of a mother’s life at risk is really a preferential choice without even being able to guarantee that both will die if the foetus is not aborted, since many predictable deaths and vegetables never actually materialised.
Probably it is this nonchalant regard for life that has created the fatal destructive outcome of unwanted children that often make the evening news.