|
|
|
|
The Violation of Freedom
Editor's note. The following essay was written for the National Right to Life Pro-Life Essay Contest. Hayley Rebekah Hutchins, Hope, Rhode Island, won second place at the senior level--grades 10-12.
As the saying goes, "Your freedom ends where mine begins," and this is the crux of the pro-life supporter's response. What supporters of the pro-choice movement fail to take into account is that no individual should have the power to harm the rights of another. What about murder, slavery, rape? These things are against the law, but no one complains that the government is legislating an external morality because we all understand that freedom does not include the right to deliberately harm innocent people. Murderers and rapists violate the rights of their victims in the same way abortion deprives an unborn child of its own rights to life and liberty. If the government exits to protect rights, it is the government's responsibility to outlaw abortion. And yet, where society will not tolerate murder, where rape victims found the courage to speak out, and where slaves found advocacy to overthrow their second-class citizenship, the unborn are unacknowledged as a silent minority. The loss of their rights goes largely ignored. Just as Abraham Lincoln spoke boldly of slavery, "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves," we find a parallel in the argument over abortion, that we must preserve our own freedom by protecting the freedom of the unborn child. How many mothers must live with the guilt of their decision? How many geniuses and artists never lived to know a life outside the womb? How many people will turn a cold shoulder to justice and ignore the rights of the unborn child? We must answer the argument. We must be a voice. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com. |
The
abortion argument has slowly
been stripped down to the
essential question of not
whether abortion is right or
wrong, but who decides? All
other contentions, ethical or
practical, for or against
abortion can be swept under the
rug when it comes to legislating
morality. A pro-choice supporter
would postulate that the
government has no right to make
a law imposing pro-life morality
on others, and what do all valid
questions in the abortion debate
matter when the issue is boiled
down to political philosophy?
Their logic is this: some people
believe abortion is wrong,
others believe abortion is
right, and it would be a
restriction of freedom to demand
conformity on an issue that
should be a matter of personal
choice. Hence the label,
"pro-choice." What this appeal
to political philosophy fails to
take into account, however, is
the nature of freedom and
personal rights.