The Right to Life

Florida is the fourth most populous state in the US. The most populous city in Florida is Jacksonville, with a 2007 number of 805,605. That's more than twice the size of the Reno/Sparks area from which I'm writing. It's bigger than Denver by a third, about 5% bigger than San Francisco, and some 15 times larger than my current home of Carson City. Most parts of the country have no concept of that many people living in one place. That's over eight times the full capacity of the LA Coliseum. It's twice as many people as were at the Million Man March.

But, you know, it's actually less than the number of abortions that take place in the US every year.

Perhaps the abortion debate in this country is heading in the right direction. From 2000 through 2003, the number was around the Jacksonville, FL, level. Back around 1990, it was more along the lines of San Antonio or Philadelphia. Put another way, in 2003, there was one abortion for every 500 people or so. In 1990, it was one for every 200. Still, counting that as a moral victory is like the construction foreman who said, "Only 4 people died on this job, and we had projected 6."

Abortion, for the record, has nothing to do with choice. I do not have the right to choose to rob a convenience store, beat up my neighbor, or run down a traffic cop. Why not? Because these choices interfere with other people's rights. As members of a free society, we are protected from one another's choices by the rule of law. The Fourteenth Amendment gives us equal protection under the law. Equal, that is, unless you are talking about the unborn.

The argument here is that a fetus, as a non-viable mass of tissue, does not have any rights. It would be like a tumor or a wart - an alien presence worthy of disposal. But wait. She's not another species or lower form of life. She's distinctly human, based on her genetic makeup, her developmental pattern, and her potential to become. She's also not part of mom, as she has a unique set of DNA. In the legal system, a fetus can sue for share in an estate. In the criminal justice system, a driver can be booked for two counts of vehicular manslaughter if he kills only a pregnant mother. Clearly the law allows for the fetus as a citizen worthy of rights. The difference seems to be whether or not the baby is wanted. I can't think of another area where we may choose to disregard someone's rights based on the feeling of another.

But she's not viable, the argument goes. Viable? That would indicate she can live on her own. True, a newly conceived fetus has no chance of survival outside the womb. But at what point does she become viable, under that argument? Is it when the chance of survival hits 50%? 25%? With technology improving all the time, that nebulous viability argument becomes a moving target. In other words, what was inviable ten years ago would be viable today. It's very dangerous to take a human individual and put her rights against someone's interpretation of medical science.

The argument that seems to have the most traction in our society is that abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life is in jeopardy. (As a Christian, I believe all life has value, that God has a plan for even children conceived in evil. But wait... some 70% of aborting women identify themselves as either Catholic or Protestant. Clearly, the idea that abortion is unbiblical does not take hold in the actions of everyone.) Before we get into that discussion though, how many abortions actually take place because of rape, incest, or the mother's health? In all reality, data on abortion is not 100% reliable, since many jurisdictions do not require accounting for each abortion performed. And of course, not every aborting mother will declare a reason. But there are some statistics. For example, a 2002 study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute found that 1% of women who had abortions did so because of rape or incest. The Institute also found that some 2.8% of abortions were due to some concern for the mother's health. Leaving out the possibility for rationalization or exaggeration of medical conern, that means that, at best, less than one in 25 abortions fall into the most compelling categories. The rest? Here are the top 5 reasons:
1. I'm not ready for a baby.
2. I can't afford a baby.
3. There are issues with the father.
4. My parents (or others) say I'm too young.
5. I don't want to disrupt my job/schooling.
These reasons account for approximately 21 out of 25 abortions. Imagine if those reasons were given for a standard homicide: "I killed my first-grader because she was interfering with my work." "I killed my sons because their father doesn't want to spend time with them." "I killed my preschooler because she was costing me too much money." And we shouldn't forget the words of Barack Obama in March, paraphrased for our purposes here: "I don't want my daughters to be punished with a baby."

Finally, it's not as if there's not an alternative to abortion. If a mother is not ready to be a mother, if she has financial concerns, if she is too young or too involved in other things; adoption is a great option. The US leads the world in the number of children adopted each year, with over 127,000 children going to adoptive homes. Clearly the demand for children to adopt has not slacked, although since Roe v. Wade in 1973, the number of children adopted out has declined. Today, there is a growing trend to adopt children from other countries, perhaps because of the decrease in available domestic adoptees. Of course, it's a great thing for orphan children from around the world to be adopted into the land of opportunity. It's very sad that this opportunity is not afforded to literally millions of unborn children.

The most telling statement that abortion is immoral comes from the very people who support "abortion rights" in this country. How often have we heard, "I could never have an abortion myself, but that's not a choice I can make for everyone"? If a person "could never" have an abortion, that is a clear indication she believes it is wrong. The fact she is unwilling to carry that conviction to others is simply a lack of moral courage.

One more time, the abortion debate cannot be about choice. A fetus is a human individual with rights and protection under the law. Today, the law both recognizes and fails to recognize a fetus, depending on the whim of the mother. We cannot hide behind the false idea of choice while an entire group's rights are violated. The convenience of another cannot be the justification for killing someone any longer. Our society is ripe with rights - built around the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But without life, no other rights are possible.