I oppose abortion not on the grounds of some faith, belief or following of specific moral guidelines but instead as a plain, rational human being. I oppose it on the precedents we–the people–have set not just in this nation, but in history. I oppose it on the blatant logical contradictions in our justifications and on the vast, long lasting consequences that likely await it.
We claim to be a society of personal responsibility; one that not only holds individuals accountable for their actions, but that has over time created a rationale that rewards those who embrace this. Yet here we have perhaps our most shameful and glaring contradiction.
Those who break the law must deal with the repercussions. Those who offend the sensibilities of another are forced to deal with social exclusion or loss of status. Those who refuse to work or take advantage of numerous economic opportunities remain poor and unemployed. However, those who engage in procreation–perhaps the most human of all actions–are without responsibility. A woman, or a couple, if they so choose, can literally destroy her creation. In the same way that a criminal cannot simply refuse to be sentenced and ostracized, a pregnant woman cannot simply decide not to birth a child.
I oppose abortion not because of the Bible, but because I am literally sickened at this thought. That the most sacred cycle in this world–that of natural life and death–is simply disregarded due to inconvenience. Sacred, in that it is the creation of the only rational entity in existence; the most supreme living inhabitant of this world ought not have its nature disrupted on the grounds of undesired effects.
The left in this country preach to us of their passion for an equal society, one of opportunity and compassion. Yet despite all the rhetoric, they maintain support for such a shameful and precarious institution. Not only does abortion create the utmost inequality, a society where some are chosen for life and others for death, but it puts the imperfect and the flawed as the gatekeepers of this horrific roulette wheel.
When we proclaim a fetus worthy of a trip to the clinic we are not only predicting it as a certain failure but additionally denying it the opportunity to prove us wrong. In a society that supposedly values the underdog, we hypocritically cut short millions upon millions of chances to be proven wrong and inspired.
I oppose abortion not because I’m attempting to claim some moral high ground but because as a society we cannot afford this blood on our hands. If the few thousand years of human existence have proven anything it is that we are the most inept and misguided judges of potential. We are wrong with the regularity of a clock, and it’s time we start realizing it. Situations of the utmost finality ought be left up to something other than our innate selfishness or, at the very least, decided with a liberal dose of doubt’s benefit.
Somehow, in our twisted logic, we have decided that most government sanctioned killings of proven sadists, murderers and villains is cruel and unjust, while the censure of life from perhaps the only pure living-being is not only appropriate, but an inalienable right. Our courts strike down death penalty laws, sure–but they also struck down a ban on partial birth abortions. There is heartbreaking irony here: that our agents of justice refuse to support the public sanctioned execution of criminals, but protect the right to personally sanctioned execution in the doctor’s office as diligently as the First Amendment.
For all the idealism in this country–all the risks we take and all our leaps of faith–how can that of human potential not be one of them? We believe that proven liars will suddenly spew truth but not that the birth of a child will add a single positive to this world? We refuse to agree that power corrupts absolutely in our republic, that our offices will not be abused, but universally conclude that an unplanned or even undesired child will forever be a victim of their environment–one that is impossible to rise above.
We should be ashamed, not only for our condoning of this practice but also for our allowance of greed to influence our beliefs thereof. This nation wastes more than any other in this history of existence and has deeper pockets than any will ever know, but in the instance of raising the abandoned or unwanted, the well suspiciously runs dry. If ever there were a more worthy cause than investing in the consistently yielding fund of human potential, I have yet to hear it.
Our justification that the child is unlikely to contribute to our society is eugenics at its very worst. Supposedly, choice advocates resent the moral judgments from conservatives, but haven’t a problem with the self-proclaimed moral supremacy they exhibit with their decision to abort. Sure, the child of a criminal may in turn follow in the footsteps of their parents, but so too exists probability that the child of a wealthy or caring parents may swing to the wrong side of the law. In admitting that those unlikely to fall through the cracks sometimes do, we must also admit that those who likely will, occasionally do not.
I oppose abortion because surprises come too readily in this life for us to bet against them. I oppose abortion, not because of some vague religious text, or the political lineage of my family, but because I refuse to become jaded in the most sacred and vital aspect of human existence. If there is to be one principle that one steadfastly clings to, why not be it in creation?
There is little–correction: nothing–worthier of protection than the future of those whose own futures may be in doubt. If our wages must fund something, why not have them fund life rather than the clinical prevention of it? I oppose abortion because for once, in our lives of political decision, we are finally faced with a decision not between two evils, but instead between one good and one evil. I oppose abortion, because I refuse to settle for the latter.
Ed:LisaMPowered by Sidelines