By Olivia Gans and Mary Spaulding Balch, J.D.
Editor's note. This
is the third in a series of columns devoted to showing pro-lifers how to
counter the most common arguments made on behalf of abortion.
The
underlying premise to the many arguments that fall within this category
- - that "a woman has a right to control her own body" - - is
that it would be unfair to the mother to "force" her to carry
her unborn child to term. Therefore, it should be her decision alone to
decide whether her unborn child lives or dies.
The argument unfolds in roughly this fashion. It would be "unjust"
to require the mother to carry her baby to term because it would require
her to quit school, abandon her career, suffer for the rest of her life
never knowing where her child was if she placed the child for adoption,
or face the stigma of "unwed" motherhood, or an endless number
of other scenarios.
Beyond this basic contention, proponents further claim that the mother has
the "right" to privacy, the "right" to choose, and the
"right" to equal protection, all of which require a "right"
to abortion.
The right to privacy, continues the argument, protects the woman's ability
to make personal decisions in private, without the imposition of "Big
Brother."
This mode of argument culminates with the conclusion that it is this "freedom
of choice" that enables a woman to compete equally with a man.
CONTROLLING ASSUMPTIONS
What is astonishing about this reasoning is the
assumption behind each of these "injustices" - - that the only
way a pregnant woman can accomplish anything is for her to kill her baby.
What is even more incomprehensible is that some women accept this specious
reasoning and actually fight to keep the ability to legally kill their unborn
child as a claimed "right"!
What is the rhetorical ploy at work here? Abortion supporters compare unfavorably
the life of one human being (the unborn child) with the "right"
to live without the temporary condition of nine months of pregnancy. The
result is that the temporary condition and its inconveniences trumps the
child's very right to exist.
When you reach this point, remind your listeners that this way of reasoning
threatens everyone's right to life. Determining who shall live and who shall
die has become completely arbitrary.
Let's look more closely at the argument that "a woman has the right
to control her own body."
Certainly she has the right to control the use of her arm by choosing to
swing her arm. However, that right stops when her arm approaches the tip
of my nose.
She may even have the right to scream at the top of her lungs that she hates
the movie Titanic, but she doesn't have the right to scream "fire"
in the crowded theater. Reason and historic experience teaches us that unless
we protect the rights of others, our own rights soon diminish as well.
Note also that, as is so often the case, abortion supporters have simply
defined the unborn out of existence. Or, more specifically, they contend
nobody can know "when human life begins."
An essential part of your response to this family of argument is to remind
your audience that it is not a mere opinion that two bodies are involved
in this decision but a scientific fact. It is important to understand that
a surprising number of people have convinced themselves that the unborn
child is not a separate human being, meaning the entire focus is on the
mother.
Shorn of its individual existence, the child is reduced to a "problem"
to be eliminated. What is your counter?
Remind your audience that the unborn child is the smallest, least seen among
us, and thus, is the most vulnerable. Buttress your appeal to our common
humanity with some of the elementary points of embryology. This little human
being has a beating heart as early as 18 days, with tiny little fingers
and toes.
All her genetic definition of who she is for now and always - - the color
of her eyes, her hair, how tall she will grow to be - - was present at the
moment of fertilization. Therefore, in every abortion a helpless someone
dies.
Answering this argument also allows the pro-lifer to bring attention to
the least understood facet of the abortion debate: that most women feel
trapped into their abortions. This is a great opportunity to point out that
women usually make their decision with little or no accurate information
about their pregnancy or knowledge that assistance is available for them
from the over 3,000 pro-life mother-helping centers around the country.
We must help people to grasp that women aren't really in control of anything
if they do not have the right to know the whole truth before they have an
abortion. Point out that anyone who supports "choice" surely should
support an informed choice in this context as well.
Yet, attempts to pass protective legislation insuring that women are given
information about risks and alternatives to abortion and scientifically
accurate information about the developing unborn child are routinely opposed
and challenged by abortion advocates. Only a handful of states have recognized
the right of women to be fully informed. There is a real insult to women's
intelligence in that fact.
As women we believe that perhaps the greatest crime committed against women
by the legalization of abortion is the ugly idea that our ability to bear
children is a punishment or a failure on our part. That notion has sent
a message to three generations of women that they must - - at all costs
- - reject their own children if they are going to avert failure.
Women have to stop apologizing for the fact that they bear children. Gently
but firmly emphasize that, ironically, as long as women give into the expectation
that they ought to kill their children in order to get further in this world
(that is, compete equally with men), they really are "second-class"
citizens.
A major element in much of the rhetoric that is used within this particular
category of arguments is the tragic notion that the unborn child is an enemy
of her mother. Mother and child are pitted against each other.
We must help our questioners to realize that mother and child are not antagonists
but equals who must both be protected by law.
The only reasonable perspective is that every human being's life must be
protected from the moment of fertilization until natural death. It cannot
be subject to the arbitrary whims of others, or soon each of us will find
ourselves or our loved ones being defined out of existence.
Finally, the constant rallying cry attendant to this "women must control
their own bodies" argument is the clever but evasive rejoinder, "Who
decides?" You can point out that the more appropriate question is,
"Who dies?"
Since every abortion does in fact stop a beating heart it is absolutely
essential that a just government pass laws to respect the right to life.
Slogans like "Keep your laws off my ovaries" are simply a distraction
from the power of the truth about the unborn's life. Our elected officials
are bound on our behalf to ensure that protection is provided every human
being.
Ultimately the only way to actually protect the mother's rights will be
by enforcing laws that secure her child's right to life.