|
Being a Pro-Life Atheist
|
|
 |
I am an atheist. I believe in equality, I believe in freedom, I believe in self-determination, I believe in a way of living other than dictated by the United States, I believe in standing up for the right cause. I would generally be considered a lefty or a socialist, but I am one of the few who make up their own minds about things. |
| There are many pro-life webpages, and there are many ‘pro-choice’ pages (promoting a choice for the mother but not for the child). Yet there is one very obvious difference between the two: many pro-life sites provide photographic proof of their case that the child is a human being while those suggesting that they are only a ‘tissue blob’ don’t offer any photographic material to support their claim. |  |
Many abortionists use the size of the foetus or its dependence on the mother as an argument for abortion. A six-year-old child is still smaller than we are and depends on his/her parents; what’s the conclusion?
Generally mothers who decide to abort their children are told not to look at their dead (or dying) offspring; it may make them feel guilty. Many mothers who saw pictures of unborn children changed their minds and said they wouldn’t have done it if they’d known.
 |
I think that most abortions are a case of ignorance. Being on the left side of the political spectrum makes many people unquestioningly accept any position held by their comrades, and that is why they believe in the tissue blob myth. In my opinion every mother considering an abortion should be confronted with images like these. |
The best-known example is probably Norma McCorvey. She was Jane Roe in the infamous Roe v. Wade decision in which the US Supreme Court placed the right of privacy of the mother above the right to live and ruled that any mother may abort her child for whichever reason.
For the following two decades she vigorously kept promoting the right of mothers to get rid of their children. (Since 1973 the Roe v. Wade decision has killed as many civilians as WW II.)
Ironically Norma never had an abortion (she had fabricated a rape story in order to get one, but the Supreme Court's decision came too late for her), and after seeing an image of foetal development, she changed her views and became a pro-life supporter who unsuccessfully tried to have Roe v. Wade overturned.
In my opinion there is no way of rationally discussing the issue of abortion – it would be like rationally discussing the holocaust with Klaus Barbie or rationally discussing slavery with John C. Calhoun. Some things are just wrong, no matter how many people defend it.
There are different views regarding the point when human life begins. I agree with the British Medical Association and many others who consider implantation as the beginning of a pregnancy (and therefore human life) when the egg settles in the womb and the embryo hatches (between 6 and 12 days after fertilisation).
Many supporters of abortion demand exceptions for mothers whose life is in danger or who have been raped. There are absolutely no cases in which an established pregnancy endangers the mother's life. What CAN happen is that the necessary treatment of the mother may lead to a miscarriage, and in these cases the life of the mother is paramount.
As for the rape exception, the child is not responsible for their father's actions, and the concept of children being punished for their father's sins is a rather religious one.
In most cases the problem could easily be avoided by providing free and anonymous contraceptives (including emergency contraceptives).
 |
|
(from my collection Nail on the Head)
As the author of this article I release it, with the explicit exception of the poem The Day of the Unborn, into the public domain.
The above images have been taken from the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR), www.abortionno.org, and may be used according to their conditions.
