Understanding Does Not Equal Agreement

Recently, I’ve read that pro-choice people no longer want to use the term “pro-choice” to describe themselves. I imagine it’s hard to explain a term that basically says, “As a woman, you have the right to allow your unborn baby to live, or, you can choose to kill it.  It’s your legal right, your body.”

I’m  sure there are those reading this post that think my first paragraph is judgmental, critical and intolerant.  You must remember, by saying I’m judgmental is itself, judging me.  If you tell me I’m intolerant, isn’t that intolerance?

If you think I’m imposing my moral values on you by stating that abortion kills children and I say it’s wrong to do that, don’t you do the same when you force your moral rules on pro-life people by applauding Roe v. Wade, that gives women the “legal” right to choose, and then tell me I’m intolerant for disagreeing.

I understand that the laws of the USA allow abortion at all stages of the baby’s development, but understanding does not equal agreement.  Think on that horrifying scenario.  How does where we are have any bearing on who we are as a human being?  How does a journey of eight inches down a birth canal make us human, more human, or viable, and give someone the “right” to end our life.

Are we defined by self-awareness and our intelligence levels?  Do others have the “right” to decide if we are less valuable, perhaps burdensome, and therefore, exploit us or kill us if they disagree with those limits?  Babies, toddlers, the aged, disabled and infirmed are examples fitting that possible equation. The forty years since the legalization of abortion, has desensitized our western culture and moral values.   What was once considered evil is now called good, and what was once held as high moral standards is now thought of as evil, judgmental and intolerant.

It’s the frog in pot idea.  The temperature is gradually turned up on the frog, and before he realizes he needs to get out of the pot, he’s comfortable with the water temperature and he’s boiled.

Abortion is only the beginning of people making laws about who should live and who should die.  Anyone considered not useful or a burden on society will soon suffer the same death sentence as the aborted unborn.  There are those promoting post-birth abortions.  No longer partial-birth.  Deliver a child and kill it.

When will killing a six month or year-old child be O.K. because the “mother” decides she could no longer be burdened with the child.  I can see your face and hear your gasps of, “that will never happen!”  Yes it will. Fifty to one hundred years ago, people were jailed for aborting babies.  It was murder. It was unthinkable.  But now, we tell ourselves women have the right to choose. That started just forty years ago.  Evil is good.  Good is evil.

Why don’t women choose to end the life of the toddler they carry in their arms instead of the baby they carry inside their body?  One is outside her body, the other inside.  What’s the difference?

Think about it, if you can . . . . .

Donna