Abortion; it’s been in the news a lot here lately due to the court leaks and the supposed upcoming overturning of Roe v. Wade. It’s a highly controversial topic with strong opinions on both sides of the aisle, but really, it shouldn’t be. Now, it should be mentioned that I am a white, Christian, middle-class, straight man and have been told quite frequently that my opinion on the matter isn’t wanted, needed, or valued. And I have been told that I need to (in a direct quote) “Sit down and shut up!” and “No uterus, no opinion!”

However, it really shouldn’t be an issue to admit that abortion is a moral issue to many people and in the square of public debate, moral issues are and should be debated by all people, regardless of sex or any other difference. I am also a conservative Libertarian. So when it comes to personal rights or liberty, I am very stern in my thoughts about rights and the values put forth by many libertarian ideals. So with that in mind, I am going to be writing about abortion today.

There’s an app I have been really enjoying lately called Rumble Debate. It’s an app where they give you topics to discuss and then you can have a one-on-one debate with someone who disagrees about the selected topic. Then others can vote on who they believe won a completed debate. For a person like me (who loves a good debate) it’s a fantastically fun app. You might believe that it just descends into complete chaos 99% of the time, like nearly every other argument online, but I have mostly been pleasantly surprised at the civility of the debates I have had so far.

That being said, they recently opened a debate on whether or not you agree with the Supreme Court ruling on Roe and I have been very unimpressed with the arguments I have had from those who disagree with me and have found very few people who are willing to really have a true conversation with me about it. It’s rare that they even have answers to my points and questions. Most of the time, I have presented some of my points and they have just refused to address them. So let me share some of the thoughts about abortion I have gathered throughout the years and see what you think.

1. Abortion ends a human life:

It seems like this shouldn’t even be a point that needs to be made, but I am making it because so many don’t want to actually acknowledge this aspect. Let’s face the reality here, the entity within a woman has human DNA, is a male or female (though most of the time it’s in there), has human features (through the majority of the time it’s in there), and most certainly is alive. From nearly every standard we have, it is alive. So when an abortion happens, this ends a human life.

2. Lack of development is a terrible argument:

The issue with this idea that is often thrown around is that you can extend it to humans outside of the womb. I have often heard it said that because the entity is an embryo, fetus, zygote, etc; it is not ending a human life and is not murder or killing. This is a very weak argument because my son who is only two and a half is not fully developed. I should also mention that he is very expensive and often loud, so am I free to kill him?

He is not fully developed, so does that make it okay? I really hope you say no. Beyond that, the human brain technically doesn’t finish its development until around the age of 28 years, so many of you reading this aren’t fully developed either. Should your mommy or daddy have the right to kill you right now? I mean, technically you aren’t fully developed. You laugh, but it’s completely true.

3. Location is a bad argument:

I have heard said a lot that because the entity is within a woman’s body, she should have the right to get rid of (murder) said entity. However, my personal location does not rid me of my right to live. I recently took a trip to Virginia with the 4th graders of the school I work at. My right to be alive did not end when I passed into a new state.

It doesn’t end when I leave my house. It didn’t end when I took a trip to South Korea several years ago. This is a God-given right that doesn’t end when a person changes locations or is in a specific location. Neither should the human entity within a woman lose its God-given right to life just because of its location within a womb.

4. Dependency is a poor argument:

This is one of the most popular arguments that pro-choice advocates like to make. Because the entity is dependent on the woman for survival, ending that dependency is neither murder nor ending a human life because that life was dependent on another human for its survival. However, that’s a very poor argument because once again, we can extend it beyond the womb.

Let’s take my son again, just a year or so ago, my son was breastfeeding from my wife (which is one of the most amazing things God ever came up with), and I would argue that he was (and still is) completely dependent on her for his survival. Without her body (literally) he would have died. He had to have her to live.

But even without the milk side of things, many people require others for survival. I had friends who had severely mentally handicapped children who completely depend on others for their survival and will for the entirety of their lives. Can we kill these people? They depend on other human bodies to live. I hope you would say no.

5. Consciousness or awareness are flawed arguments:

I haven’t heard this argument made as much, but if you dig long enough with someone, this one might come up. Either way though, it’s a poor excuse for murder. You will hear the pro-choice side say that because the entity is not conscious, or is not aware, it is not murder to remove and kill said entity. It’s a terrible argument because there are many people who don’t have a consciousness or awareness.

Fully grown adults who are in a coma don’t have consciousness or awareness during that time. They still retain a right to life. You can’t just go through and stab people who are in a coma. That’s still murder. Beyond that, everyone sleeps and quite frankly, you are neither conscious nor aware while you are asleep. Should it be fine to stab you while you sleep? I thought not.

6. The Rape/Incest argument does work:

If a person is raped or there is an incestual pregnancy the pro-choice folks will often call the pro-life people monsters for suggesting that the woman be “forced” to carry the child to term, saying that it re-traumatizes the woman over and over again. I’m not going to say that it wouldn’t re-traumatize a woman to carry the child to term. However, saving her from further trauma is not a free license to end the life within her.

If we understand that the entity within a woman is a living human life, then ending her life is morally wrong regardless of the trauma its allowance to live brings others. It continues to have the right to live. The man who committed this evil upon a woman does not and should not give license to murder an innocent child. That child should not be punished for the evil their father committed.

That evil lasts, long after the actual act is done. That evil may even be lasting into the birth of a child that came from that original evil. It’s a terrible thing, but awful things happen in life. All we can do is love and support the woman through the pregnancy and birth of the child. All these pregnancies should be automatically put up for free adoption right after birth unless the woman wants the child.

Closing argument:

I understand why the pro-choice folks are passionate about this. I’m convinced most of them have the best intentions. They want women to be able to lead productive and happy lives and an unexpected child can certainly impact that. However, no one’s life or quality of life should supersede another’s life or quality of life. People have equal rights. All peoples have a right to live, including those entities within a womb.

D. Michl Lowe