Pro Rege Papers

Axinar wrote a post about abortion in his blog. It started when I said that Andrea Yates’ killing of her five children was not an insane act, but a desperately wicked act. Then I said that, “there are many, many, mothers who kill their own children, and no one calls them insane. In fact, the government even helps them. It’s called abortion: the now legal murdering of a mother’s children by her willing consent.” That comment got Axinar going, and he published a lengthy response to me about abortion. Here is my answering comment (which ended up being as large as his post):

Are you saying that I quote the Bible a lot, or that I’m solid in my position, or that I present the evidence and (if I do say so myself) win the argument?

BTW, your link to the Marie Claire article is invalid. If you could get that working, I could understand your points more.

Some women have “post-partum depression” where they are fairly dehabilitated, but there are very few women who are unable to take care of their baby. So you are questioning the intelligence of those women that regretted having an abortion by saying that they didn’t remember the circumstances.

“Lifelong grinding poverty?” That’s an extreme generalization. There are many single mothers that survive easily. They can also marry. Besides, with today’s government welfare and private charity, very few people are “grindingly poor.”

“Health risks staggeringly greater than abortion?” Not with today’s technology and techniques.

“Bringing more humans into an already over-crowded world.” You’re talking about cities, Western Europe, China, and Japan. In every other part of the world there’s room for more people. There is such a surplus of food that the prices are so low that farmers have to rely on government subsidies.

If the mother does not want the child, (or if it was an “accidental” pregnancy) adoption is a wonderful way to give unwanted children a home with parents who can’t have any, or want more children.

Your answer “no” to those questions is purely opinion.

“Do we consider a miscarriage a death by natural causes?”

Yes, we do. Once the sperm and ovum unite, that is a human being. It is very small, but it is a human being. If it is human being and it miscarries, then that is a death by natural causes, rather than man-made causes in abortion.

“Do we name a miscarriage?”

Yes, we do. My mother miscarried two babies, Jonah and Jirah. Babies were traditionally named, even if they died. Many mothers still do today.

“Do we cremate or bury a miscarriage?”

In ceremony some people do. Of course it is optional, but it doesn’t really matter.

“Do the cells a woman passes in a miscarriage constitute a human being?”

Yes, they do. They contain all the genes for a human being. They comprise a human being, even though he/she is very small.

The cells cannot survive outside the mother’s womb, they need to be protected, just as a little child cannot be expected to balance his finances to provide food and shelter for himself. But the cells are still fully human.

“Legalized abortion SAVES lives - the lives of [single mothers, etc.]”

So you’re saying that if you have a child you’re destined to die early? That’s just false.

“…countless millions who either aren’t ready or have absolutely no business being parents in the first place”

In the first place, those who aren’t ready (or “who have no business” trying) to have a baby should not even have sex. In the second place, if the person has a baby but doesn’t want it, adoption is a perfectly valid option, as I explained before.