For decades, the phrase "pro-life" has implied a support of heavier restrictions on abortion procedures, as if the people who oppose them are "anti-life", somehow. Presumably, that's also the rationale behind the opposition's selection of the term "pro-choice": to make the other side by definition "anti-choice".
Whose life? Whose choice? THAT may be the most disturbing part of the whole argument to me.
The folks on the left side who believe in "pro-choice" leave fewer choices for the baby whose life hangs in the balance. The folks on the right side who believe in "pro-life" don't always seem to care about the actual life of the baby or the mother; just that it's born. Both have proven their monikers to be misnomers at best, and in some cases downright deceitful.
Let's examine what a truly pro-life standard would be.
The Bible says in more than one place that life begins at conception, in that God has plans for us long before our birth. If our life is ended before we even emerge from the womb, we have thwarted God's plans for us before He can even begin to implement them. So, let's assume from the founding premises of Act II Ministries that a "pro-life" stance seeks to preserve the life of the unborn child up to the point where its own life causes potential "anti-life" effects on the mother bearing it. Inconvenience is not an applicable reason if sex was optional. Modern contraceptive methods are more than 99% effective if used correctly, and abstinence is just about 100% effective over the last two thousand years. Severe health effects on the mother are the starting point for any and all discussions on this subject; however, it's not the place of this blog in this article to make any more definitive legal restrictions without bogging down and missing the point of this essay.
The point of this essay is to continue this pro-life stance beyond birth.
If you're truly "pro-life", you seek not to preserve breathing but preserve a QUALITY of life. It means more than just making sure a baby and a mother are ALIVE; it makes sure they can be cared for as well. Prenatal and post-natal care must be not only available but to some extent mandatory, if you're truly pro-life, to protect the lives of both child and mother when the mother doesn't care enough to care for herself. You can't force-feed someone with free will, but you CAN mandate check-ups at reasonable intervals, both before AND after birth. You can make sure that every mother of a child under school age has the means to keep that child healthy. Ironically, these positions are the ones that many "pro-life" lawmakers oppose as too costly.
Once a life enters school, we want to make sure that it gets an education allowing it to support itself. That requires an education system available to all that allows students to acquire the skills required to start a career, ideally one appropriate to their abilities and interests.
When a life starts a career, he or she should be able to make a livable wage, if you believe in "pro-life" - that sounds like the very definition of the term. Note that these premises together would greatly increase the tax base of this nation, besides being "the pro-life thing to do". That would probably make most lawmakers happy, regardless of their political beliefs.
Once a life has exhausted its working years, it seems that the "pro-life" thing to do would be to make sure that they have a quality of life that is sufficient for their needs in their old age. Our opinion at Act II Ministries is that the elderly are discarded heinously in this country, and a cultural campaign needs to be waged to give them not only the physical and economic support they need when they've retired, but the respect and valuing by the rest of society which desperately needs their knowledge moving forward into the unknown years ahead. Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. A truly "pro-life" government would not just make sure medical expenses were NOT the highest in the world, but that medical care was accessible to all, especially the elderly who've earned the right to care for us after a lifetime of their taxes supporting everyone else.
Finally, a truly "pro-life" stance would favor a humane death for all those facing the end of life in unlivable pain and distress. I'm not going to go all "Doctor Kevorkian" on you, but there has to be an ethical means of helping someone at the undeniable end of their life stop suffering needless pain, at their choosing. This issue is already handled gracefully by every doctor I've ever met involved in such circumstances, and a "pro-life" stance would provide them the freedom to adhere to the wishes of the patient and the family.
What does it mean to be PRO-LIFE? Shouldn't we ALL be "pro-life"? Is there anyone who is "ANTI-life"? If you're going to use the term, stop being hypocritical about it.
And as for those of you who claim the moniker "pro-choice", I'd ask you to consider the proposal above and think about WHY you might object to the above. If it's because you don't think a child's life begins at conception, at least I understand your argument (God disagrees with you, by the way). I suspect the rest of this fits your belief system - now, extend that argument to its logical conclusion and help us prevent the needless loss of pre-birth life. The abortion rate has been dropping for more than two decades now, through sex education AND abstinence encouragement. There IS room for both!
Seventeen years ago at the moment of publication of this blog (Feb 17th, 2000, at 2:16 pm), my second son Emerson was born, dying in the process of birth when he pinched his umbilical cord between his shoulder and his mother's hip. He lived those thirty-five weeks as surely as I've lived these past fifty-plus years. His mother and I could tell you tales of his personality - his favorite song was definitely "Cowboy Take Me Away" by the Dixie Chicks - and like the five siblings who survived their births from my first wife, he was full of spirit, and the Spirit, from the moment we could feel him. I can't wait to meet him when I get to Heaven, and every day I pray that his mother will accept Christ's love so that she can see him there face to face as well.
This column is dedicated to him.
No comments:
Post a Comment