A female pro-lifer; we exist. So almost a year and a half ago I published ‘My Stance on Abortion’ and put simply, it’s changed. Every time I scroll through my feed I see a title representing something I don’t agree with and even though I’m usually against taking down a post, I felt as though I just couldn’t keep it there any longer. Back then, a younger, more naïve me thought everyone could and should only be pro-choice by default, that supporting pro-life was socially unacceptable, a sort of unwritten sin if you will. But now that I’m much more aware of the other side of the argument, I simply cannot support a pro-choice movement, and I think it’s time for everyone to consider that pro-life does exist, not just for scrutiny and old, male Catholics but because it’s a legitimate idea. I’m not against abortion because of religious values, but because it’s morally unacceptable – I don’t need a bible to tell me murder is wrong. I wish to take away the stigma from being pro-life as a young female in this modern, overly feminist society.
‘It’s not ‘your body’… it’s in your body’
Fundamentally, I believe abortion is murder, that life itself begins at conception, the point at which the egg and sperm join to form a being with a genetic code different to its mother and father. This does of course mean that it’s not ‘your body’, that it’s in your body. I have no problem with anyone doing anything they like to their own body, but when that verges on dictating the future of another being, I simply can’t take such a laissez-faire approach. With the abortion limit being 24 weeks in the UK, I must ask: what’s the difference between killing a 23 week 6 days old foetus and killing a 24 week old one? In the space of 24 hours, physically it barely changes, yet it suddenly gains full human rights… To me, that makes no sense. At what point does the foetus become a life, and what happens in just a few hours to make it so? Of course I can’t ignore the view of life beginning at birth; you could say it’s an independent being and so can survive on its own, but of course there are inconsistencies. With this justification, babies in incubators are not living, that turning off their life support is just as acceptable as swallowing a pill to terminate a pregnancy, but I’ve never once heard a pro-choicer agree with this argument. I am in full belief that a foetus is conceived with the same rights as its mother and father and that killing it is just as morally wrong as killing a new born.
One great inconsistency which I feel like I will never understand is the difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. When a woman miscarries, the parents mourn for the baby, claiming it had died, yet after an abortion they claim it was just a bunch of cells and the pregnancy was terminated. Here the desire to have a baby dictates its value. I won’t disagree when you say ‘it was just a bunch of cells’, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be living. We too are just that. What makes a bunch of cells a life? I say it always is. You use these mitigated terms if you don’t want it, to detach yourself, dehumanise it or merely justify it. It’s these double standards which make the pro-choice argument so very weak.
Let’s look at a few scenarios:
‘My child is handicapped’
Many may believe aborting is the best option for the unborn baby, with the justification of them having a decreased quality of life, however this is full of assumption. It assumes that disabled people cannot lead plentiful, joyous lives, which I am certain is not the case. Quality of life itself is subjective and relative – as long as they are enjoying life, then it is worth living. Who are you to decide if they will enjoy it? It also assumes that handicapped people have less value than someone who isn’t, also known as discrimination of the disabled. Once again I see no moral difference between killing a healthy foetus and killing an unhealthy one.
‘I’m only 16 and I’m pregnant’ or ‘I just don’t want it’
Put simply, if you’re old enough to have consensual sex then you’re old enough to know about contraception. Killing a baby because of their own ignorance is the peak of moral turpitude. The most important person in question is the baby – the parents can give the child up for adoption and continue on with their lives as if it didn’t exist but it is simply wrong to rob a child of its life because of 9 months of selfishness. Whenever I say I’m pro life, I’m often confronted with the question ‘But what if you got pregnant now?’… I wouldn’t abort. By making your argument personal, you will not change my mind. Of course having a child at a young age could pose major health risks, but I’ll get onto that later.
‘What makes a bunch of cells a life? I say it always is’
‘I was raped’
Why should a child of rape pay for the crimes of its father? In what way is that child inferior and so more worthy of being killed than a child of loving parents? I understand the mother may feel mentally traumatised and each case should then be taken individually, but knowing she needs to protect her child may help her keep her sanity and remind her of her strength. Reluctantly, if we look at in from a more heartless and cruel way, that child could be used as evidence in a court of law.
‘I will die’
This is the only case when I agree with abortion, not because the mother’s life is more valuable, but because by killing one, we are saving another instead of letting two die.
I’d also like to take a look at the roles the parents play in the act of abortion. If you know me well, you’ll know I absolutely detest double standards – if we look at everyone and their actions with blind eyes to who they are, then that is true equality. When the father says to the mother to abort, he is deemed controlling and overbearing. When the mother aborts regardless of the father’s wishes, she is deemed a ‘strong, independent woman’ (a phrase a severely despise) with the justification ‘it’s my body’. As I mentioned previously, it’s the foetus’ body. She is infringing of the body rights of her child, which I think is rather ironic… That child is just as much the woman’s as it is the man’s, yet the reactions to abortions are polar opposites. Here, pro-choicers are increasing double standards and inequality.
Finally we move on to adoption – the lifeline for infertile parents and children alike. If you’re not going to raise the child, why abort when you can give it to a family who want one more than anything else? Many say because they had become attached to their baby… How can you abort it, knowing in a few months you’ll be too attached to it? Not only are you robbing your child of the chance to live its life, but you’re also robbing wannabe parents of the opportunity to live without their dream.
So yes, I’m pro-life. I stand against the crowd, but with much justification. This is something on which I evidently hold such strong opinions, but that does not prevent me from respecting contrasting views. I am open to any discussions on what was revealed in this post, from when life begins to the morality of abortion itself to any of the mentioned scenarios. I just hope for greater thought and consideration for the pro-life abortion case.