My last Diary, “How Many Crack Babies Have You Adopted,” generated a startling number of comments. For being essentially a Newbie at this I was most pleased and grateful for everyone who commented, regardless of if they agreed with me.
As a man, I personally do not face either the physical or emotional ramifications of abortion that women do, or at least no where near what they must endure. In fact, a major aspect of the debate that nauseates me are the number of men who treat this issue as if they personally are the victims, yet completely lose sight of the fact they lack a uterus. As my wife is fond of saying; “if you’re not going to protect my bakery, leave my cookies alone!”
And yet the reality is that this heated issue will draw violent charges from both sides, regardless of how much or little they are personally connected with the actual act. But to reiterate from my last diary, my concern is not with the passionate belief of the debaters, but those who have no voice, the children.
On one side of the argument are the Pro-Lifers, who adamantly believe they represent the voices of the unborn. Few would dispute that terminating an emerging life is nothing less than a solemn, heart-wrenching act. It is an act that requires us to compassionately consider not only the emotional, physical, and economic implications, but also the moral ones as well. I’m sure that even the most avid Pro-Choicer would take pause when faced with such a monumental decision.
But morality doesn’t being at the moment of conception, or end at instant of birth. I contend that the moral equation spans generations and it is incumbent on us, individually and as a society, to be the voices for children who are defenseless against a world fate brought them into; to advocate for them where they are unable to do so.
Although the fate of the unborn is a moral responsibility we cannot ignore, the simple fact is that the unborn have yet to develop a comprehension of their own mortality; a characteristic that arguably sets humans apart from every other specifics in the animal kingdom. If we insist, as Pro-Lifers would argue, that every unborn life is sacred and therefore must be born, the result will be millions of additional children thrust upon society, many of them living lives at extreme risk due to the fate of their circumstance.
Although it is not likely possible to know the outcomes of all their lives, what we do know statistically paints a grim picture for many of them. So here’s the dilemma. To fully protect the unborn, through forced pregnancies, we must also accept that potentially vast numbers of children will endure lives of extreme poverty, violence, and even death (not to mention making women virtual slaves to their reproductive systems).
Consider a true story that concerns a young boy of five. He rejected the demand of older children, 10 & 11, to steal his candy. The older boys “reward” this child with a conscience by throwing him off a building to his death.
Now there is obviously no way to know if this boy's tragic, brief life might have never occurred if his mother had terminated the pregnancy, and clearly many such atrocities occur to children who were eagerly brought into this world by loving parents.
But my feeling is that the moment one takes the position that all pregnancies must result in births, they assume, like it or not, a clear moral responsibility for the fate of those children. To pretend otherwise is an act of monumental hypocrisy. It’s like saying; “Look at me. Watch me bask in my moral goodness by protecting the lives of innocent, unborn fetuses. But just don’t expect me to give a damn about what happens to them after they’re functioning children fully aware of their own mortality, and able to feel the full brunt of the pain and suffering caused by the fate I forced them to be born into.”
I believe it is incumbent upon us as compassionate human beings to adopt the highest moral position. For me that means putting the lives of living, breathing and often suffering, children ahead of early stage fetuses who are blissfully ignorant of the potential horrors that may await them.
Abortion is clearly a moral issue. I don't dispute that. But given the frequent pain and suffering that children born into dangerous circumstances face, or circumstances inadequate to effectively care for them, I would argue there are times it is in fact the greatest expression of responsibility, caring and kindness. In other words, the moral choice.