It’s All in the Delivery

I’m not quite sure why the pro-choice/pro-abortion folks are so upset about this, other than that it rather glaringly points out the fundamental hypocrisy of their position.

An 18-year old girl goes in for an abortion a little over halfway through her pregnancy.  Except the doctor is late, and in the meantime, because of some of the drugs she’d been given to prepare her for the abortion, she actually goes into labor and delivers the baby.  Alive.  Enter the doctor, who cuts the umbilical cord, gathers the live baby along with the placenta and afterbirth, puts the live baby in a biohazard bag with all of this other stuff, and throws it in the trash.  
End of baby.  Fortunately, not end of story.  The doctor is in some hot water right now.  And any pro-life supporter would easily understand why.  What I can’t figure out is why the pro-abortion folks are queasy.  
If the baby had remained inside the girl, the doctor would have cut it up and sucked it out and the baby would be every bit as dead as it is today.  But it would have been lauded as another advancement of women’s rights and freedoms.  But the fact that the baby – same baby mind you, in either scenario – the fact that the baby had the audacity to be born, alive, suddenly makes what the doctor did murder.  Or unethical.  
So what’s the issue?  Clearly, it’s not the developmental stage of the child.  Again, if the child had remained inside the mother, the abortion wouldn’t have generated a second thought.  The body of the child was recovered a week later, and found that the lungs had air in them – the child had been born alive and able to draw breath.  Sort of puts into jeopardy the whole argument that a baby isn’t really a baby until they’re self-sufficient (post-birth).  This baby was apparently somewhat self-sufficient at only 23 weeks.  The act of birth does not change the nature of that baby – it simply changes the baby’s environment.  No more cells were added to that child to make them truly ‘human’ in the birth process.  The exact same child that was about to be murdered as nothing more than an accretion of cells had the doctor been on time, is the exact same child that everyone agrees was done poorly by once having been born.
The fact is this situation exposes the hypocrisy of the pro-choice argument that the baby is not really a baby, but rather a collection of cells, or even a pariah organism that is unfairly sapping the mother of strength and nutrients and therefore can be disposed of as a parasite (I’m not kidding – there are illustrious thinkers and doctors who have espoused this line).  The fact is, we all know that it’s a baby inside that woman.  And simply closing our eyes and pretending that it’s not really a baby so that we can kill it when it’s inconvenient does not make that baby any less a baby.    If we aren’t willing to countenance the cold-blooded execution of that baby like so much garbage when it’s outside the mothers’ womb, how reasonable is it to argue that killing the baby is ok so long as he or she is in the womb?  It isn’t.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s