Abortion has been a hot topic lately, causing even hotter more volatile emotions than I have ever seen around this subject. And, rightfully so. Laws are being passed where women can abort their child up to the point of birth, and unbelievable conversations are happening about the possibility of still killing the child post birth. Yes, you read that right; after the child is fully born the mother and doctor can discuss killing the ‘fully alive child’ while ‘making it comfortable’. I’m fairly confident that the argument for this option is that the conversation between doctor and mother would be had around some medically irreparable and unforeseen situation, but still, it sets a precedence that is the scariest one I have seen in our country yet. The ability to kill an innocent human being if it is ‘deemed’ appropriate.
But what about that slippery slope; killing a human being when it is ‘deemed’ appropriate? Can you see how a subsequent approval for ‘assisted suicide’ could also be approved? What about a young 20 year old woman who has an ‘incurable’ disease and is in excruciating pain? Of course, wouldn’t that be merciful? But what happens a year or two later when a cure is then known? Was it still mercy to take that young life that could have been redeemed? Is it too far fetched to then see how it could be deemed appropriate to kill an elderly person that is no longer living a healthy and productive life, becoming a drain on the financial systems of the government – the people? Or what about the clinically insane person that committed heinous crimes and will have to live behind bars for the rest of their life – draining the financial systems of the government? Is it ok to kill them? What would it take for a psychiatrist to deem a teenager an irreparable danger to society, needing to be locked up for the rest of their life? And could that individual ask for assisted suicide instead of being caged? How far away is this from the approval of gender or race selection? Is it still completely unfathomable that there would be a utopian idea of creating the ‘perfect’ race or human? What if you or your offspring are not ‘approved’ as part of that perfect human society? Would you lay down your life ‘for the greater good of the utopia’, or would you fight for it? You do realize that the roots of Planned Parenthood was formed around this concept, right? To eliminate the ‘less-thans’; the minorities and impoverished.
You see, this isn’t just about barbaric abortions, this is about the moral fabric of our society unraveling. Abortion is just the loose thread that, when pulled hard enough, will cause everything else to unravel. The conversation has to change from that of pro-life vs pro-choice; it has to be about objectively protecting the moral fabric and future of our country. The conversation needs to be one around the future possibilities, based on legal precedences set, and how the current laws can then equally be twisted, perverted, and capitalized on by those that do not have your best interests in mind. How can we approve one murder and then prosecute another? Are not all lives created equal? Are we going to revert back on our constitution and add an amendment that ‘most lives’ are created equal? What lives would those be?
Do you not see the issue here?