The abortion debate has going for too many years to count. It will continue, no matter how laws are changed, until the end of time. Women do not have the right to choose an abortion. The reasons for this are as many as the years this topic has been debated and will continue to be debated.
There is, of course, the religious side to this debate. The Bible says not to kill. I've read it many times and there was no age restrictions on this law. The Bible also says that God is not a respecter of persons. Why is this being mentioned? Because the Bible also says that God knew Jeremiah before he was even conceived. It also says that Jeremiah had a purpose to his life before he was conceived. If God knew Jeremiah and gave him a purpose before his conception, seeing that God is not a respecter of person, it stands to reason that every human was known by God and has a purpose before being conceived. It is that simple.
Women do not have the right to choose to have an abortion because, despite Roe vs. Wade, abortion is unconstitutional. People within the borders of the United States, everyone has has the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Abortion takes away the right to life. When does life begin? It doesn't matter. Centuries of history teaches that pregnancy ends in the birth of a baby. The baby is a life. By ending the pregnancy, life is stopped. The right to life is taken away and, subsequently, so are the rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In addition, all persons in America are given the right to "due process under the law." Roe vs. Wade doesn't give all unborn babies due process; it only gave the baby in question of that one particular court case due process. Those who are in favor of the the right to choose should also be in favor of stopping the majority of criminal court cases. Chances are, similar court cases have already been brought before a judge and won or lost. Because the circumstances are similar, they should never be brought into court; just as every abortion is not brought into court. There would an outcry of injustice ringing throughout the country and rightfully so. Criminals, regardless of their circumstances be similar to other cases, are taken to court because they are entitled to due process of the law. This should also apply to unborn babies. Just because the case was brought up to the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade, that one decision should not apply to others. All of those dead babies in plastic bags marked "medical waste" were not given due process under the law.
The question of when life begins was brought up. What is the answer to that question? Most have head of the circle of life. Most believe in this concept. Death, true death, occurs when there is no electrical activity in the body. It is a medical fact. It has nothing to do with breathing or the heart beating. Lack of electrical activity constitutes death. It stands to reason, based on that fact and the circle of life, that life would first begin when there is electrical activity present. This occurs immediately as the sperm breaks into the egg. Once the sperm has entered the egg, there is electrical activity. That, too, is a medical fact. Life begins at that moment. And, if that is not true? Better to err on the side of caution. Perhaps no one earth truly knows the exact second life begins. Caution should be used to ensure that a life is not taken. When child abuse is suspected, but not proved beyond a shadow of doubt, the children are usually removed from the home "just in case." Better to err on the side of caution and stop the possibility of abuse until either side can be proved. The children can always be taken back home; once a child is abused, it can not be taken back. Abortion can not be taken dead.
In today's society, where recycling is so important and that waste is looked down upon, it is surprising the activists pushing that agenda has not gotten on the pro-life bandwagon. Abortion is waste. Having an abortion is wasteful. Who are we to waste a human life? How do we know what that little life will grow up to be or do? People complain about the public school systems not allowing children to live up to their potential. Abortion does the same thing. That tiny life being aborted will never live up to it's potential. All life has potential. Even if it doesn't, who are we to judge which life does or does not have potential.
The whole basis for abortions being legal is that the baby can not sustain life on it's own, without medical intervention. Does that mean every life that can not be sustained on it's own should be snuffed out, murdered? Nothing was ever mentioned that Christopher Reeve, the embryonic stem cell research advocate, should not be allowed to continue live. He could not sustain his own life without any medical intervention. What about all the insulin-dependent diabetics in the world? They can not sustain their lives,for any length of time, without medical intervention. Should they too be murdered? If not, what is different between them and an unborn baby? Is it size or age? Is it because people know them, care about them? That goes back the age question. When a baby is born, wanted or not, there is a long list of people who want to get to know them, love them.
The abortion issue is also a matter of choice and right. Is a choice and a right the same? Are these two words interchangeable? Of course not. We all have the choice to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. That does not make it a right. We all have the choice to pull a gun on someone and kill them. That does not make it a right. Pro-lifers out there, hold on, this may be shocking coming from another pro-life person. Abortion is a choice. An awful, evil and indescribable choice. Abortion, however, is not a right. No one has the right to take a life, stop a life from being born, and to stop that life from living up to it's potential.
What if the woman has medical issues that would prevent her from carrying a baby to term? With today's medical advances and technology, this should never be an issue. Unless you are George Tiller, abortion doctor (baby killer) in Wichita, Kansas. It has been documented by Tiller himself and in court documents that he has performed abortions, even late term (very late term) abortions on women with medical issues. These issues included several late term abortions that were performed because of the woman's mental health issues. The documents, his and courts, states the several abortions were performed due to depression and the possibility of suicide. One woman complained she couldn't find dates because of her pregnancy and this was depressing to her. Another woman complained that she could no longer barrel race and this was causing her a deep depression. Let's not even speculate what would happen if a real crisis ever happened to them. There is no way they could stand the depression that might occur if they were facing unemployment, a mortgage foreclosure, the death of a parent or any of life's hardships people face daily. In fact, the line at the grocery store might be too much for them, considering their fragile state of mind and emotion.
What about medical issues with the baby itself? Just as with the woman seeking an abortion, with the medical advances of today, this should never be a reason to kill a baby. Adoption agencies all over the world have lists of names of people waiting to adopt a special needs child. These lists are not as long as those wanting a so-called normal baby, but they do exist. Again, the issue of potential is brought up. Even a child with severe problems has potential. The issue of being able to sustain one's own life is also brought up. If babies diagnosed with disabilities before birth can be killed, is it possible children and adults living with the same disabilities can be killed as well? Based on the arguments of the pro-choice side, it is possible. How long until it becomes a reality? A reality again? There was a man, a poor excuse for a man, that decided people with disabilities or those who didn't fit into his idea of perfect people were murdered. The number people were killed was high, over six million.
Were you wondering when Adolph Hitler would be brought up? Now was the time. If we do not learn from history, we are bound to repeat them. So many of the arguments pro-choice advocates use were used by Hitler. He made choices. He did not have the right to make those choices. Not good enough to live, not "normal," not wanted, a burden to society. These were all arguments he used to torture and kill so many.
Torture is another issue. The videos of abortions tells the whole stories. Inborn babies being aborted by the use of a saline solution being introduced to the womb, move away from the solution as it get closer to them. When they have moved as far away as possible, as a last result, they cover their eyes with their tiny hands that are still forming. Even before birth, just a time after conception, they have the instinct, the God-given sense, to cover their eyes. Adults do the same thing. We throw up our hands to protect our eyes when something splashes toward them. Even if none of the other issues concerning abortion should be considered, which they should be of course, this issue is by far the most compelling.
Sustaining life. These little unborn people do all they can to sustain their lives. Even though the battle will be lost, they fight to the best of their abilities.
They fight for themselves and their right to live. We should do the same for them. They want to live, to be born, to grow up and be whatever it is that they want to be or can be. We should want the same for them. We want it for other children. We even want it for adults. Abortion, no matter what the excuse, should never be legal.