You can see that he’s already got all his parts at this point. He spent his time in the ultrasound room running in place, stretching, rolling around, and basically dancing around non-stop.
Many of the recent state laws that have come up in the abortion debate have centered on banning abortions after the 20-22 week range. Advocates for abortion rights have lost their minds over the very idea that someone would want to restrict a woman’s right to terminate her 22-week old fetus–how dare anyone, any MAN, tell a woman what she can do with her body!
Look again at my 20 week old son. Really look at him.
There is another body involved. Another living human being.
My son is not a lump of undifferentiated cells. If you saw him move (and according to my wife, it seems like he never stops moving), you would not say that he’s not alive.
If you support abortion rights, do you really look at that picture and not see a human child? Do you really believe that if his mother wants to kill him, that’s nobody’s business but hers?
The burden of proof is not on the pro-life camp here. This argument isn’t based on some out of context quote from the book of Leviticus. This isn’t about controlling people, or men telling women what to do with their bodies. The argument is based on the fact that my son is a living human baby, and should not be killed. Abortion defenders argue that, if we feel like it, we should have the right to ask a doctor to reach in with a knife and suction tube and, living, cut him to pieces.
Look at my son again and tell me if you would be okay with that. I’m completely serious. Look at my son right now, and picture that procedure. I’ll wait. Now tell yourself that’s perfectly fine, if that’s what you think.
If you can’t do that, you might need to spend some time considering your position.
My son’s humanity does not depend on his level of brain activity or whether or not he happens to be inside a uterus at the moment. He’s a human being by the fact of his very DNA and the fact that he is alive and growing.
The pro-life argument is very simple. All it comes down to is that it’s not okay to kill a baby. The opposition screams a thousand insults; I am called a misogynist, a fundamentalist, a theocrat, a hypocrite. I am called hateful, judgmental; I may lose friends over this.
And still, all I have said and all I am saying is that it’s not okay to kill a baby.
That’s really the extent of the pro-life argument.
I truly believe that the reason the pro-abortion side gets so blindingly fanatical, so irrational in these arguments is because on some level, they know that killing a child is unjustifiable. I believe that much of the rage and hatred against pro-life arguments and pro-life supporters find their unconscious source in a need to justify to oneself that one is still a good person despite arguing for the right to kill children.
If this were not the case, you would hear different arguments in favor of abortion. But very few argue that abortion is okay. The argument is almost always some form of, “it’s a woman’s right to choose,” with the implied follow-up, “(regardless of whether it’s right or wrong.)” President Clinton pontificated that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. But if it should be rare… why?
Why assent that it should be rare? If it’s morally acceptable, who cares how widespread it is?
But if you think it ought to be rare because you know it’s killing a child, that’s an issue that overrides some of our individual liberties. Freedom and government noninterference doesn’t go as far as allowing murder.
If you agree that abortion ought to be rare, think about that. Meditate on why you think so.
Look one last time at my son. The pro-abortion argument says that the right to end his life is a matter of equal rights for women.
All I’m saying is that it’s not okay to kill a baby.