[on abortion]

“will the mother die in childbirth” should never be your first questions when considering abortion, because it’s the last thing that can happen. It’s so rare that your first question might as well be “Should we allow mothers to watch TV?” because there is a far higher mortality rate. We ought to stay focused on the primary reasons of why people get abortions to think broadly on the topic. Those go more like “Should we justify murder so a woman can finish college or preserve the youthful look of her body?” or “If the father is a runaway deadbeat, can we declare the child a mass of meaningless cells?” That should come to our mind often when thinking about abortion, because then we’re actually being on topic.

“Especially in the rare and unfortunate case where a woman is raped, impregnated, and has a low chance of surviving the pregnancy—”

Uh, I think this particular instance has maybe happened twice in the history of man. Pregnancy from rape is rare (or unreported) and low survival chances are rare. But let’s call a spade a spade, you want to be pro life, but philosophically, you want to keep a foot in your culture so you don’t look like Pat Robertson. So you’ve concocted a near impossible scenario so when it comes up in conversation with the elites you can look cool and say, “I don’t think it’s my place to force a woman to—”

What if a farmer is raped, impregnated and has a low chance of survival, can he still own another man? The Civil Rights of an unborn human aren’t removed because of what happens between the male and female that made him. You might still choose to kill the unborn baby, but give it the dignity to say, “When your mother is raped and going to die, I believe in the death penalty for the unborn baby.” At least now we’re dealing with reality, and I don’t mind immoral positions so much so long as we just level with what we’re actually doing. Don’t degrade another person by claiming the high moral ground as you won’t stop them from sucking him down the sink. It’s like being against slavery, but you could never tell a farmer how to run his farm.

“I don’t think it is my place to force a woman to sacrifice her life for a child she wasn’t prepared to conceive.”

Actually it’s the opposite of what you’re saying. It’s the fact that she is prepared to conceive that you provide her the opportunity for an abortion. And being a parent of four, and knowing every parent around me, nobody is prepared to conceive! Once again, it’s troubling to me that our people should be more rebellious than ever. We should be able to stand up to culture and make a fist more than ever. We can wear a mohawk or our men can wear a dress at work, but we carve, and retreat over the simple, normal, pro life stance.

“Which life is more justified in ending, the hopeless damsel or the virgin youth?”

All life is equally justified, made meaningful in the Image of God. Be cautious when you add a “but ______” after that statement. But in my experience, if a mother had to sacrifice her life for one of her children to live, I don’t know of many mothers who wouldn’t make that sacrifice. The tubal pregnancies are different in that you have the mother and the baby possibly dying, when an abortion would make it safer for the mother and take the baby. So you have a likelihood of one death, instead of two and that’s a pro life position, but so rare so as to be a non sequitor in most debate situations. We argue rape and incest, but those are really just used to justify the right to kill a baby who supposedly nobody wants to help— which is yet another lie.

Remember, always remember for the rest of your life: The culture is almost always wrong. Always has been, always will be. The mass public evolution of morals creates some of the most monstrous positions people have ever held.