*The gauntlet has been thrown down. Pro-lifers have shown just how far they are willing to go to avoid instances of abortion.
Led by social conservatives, mostly Republicans, the House of Representatives recently passed HR 236. This is a bill that would allow healthcare providers to deny women abortions should the woman’s life be in jeopardy.
In terms of abortion in the United States the pro-life label is a bit of a misnomer. Those on that side of the fence could be more accurately called pro-fetal-lifers. The extreme nature of HR 236 exposes the pro-life proponents as hypocrites precisely because of their willingness to sacrifice women.
Tabling the question of morality, it cannot be argued that those who argue the “pro-life” position do so with inconsistent logic by supporting this bill. While professing to advocate for life in any form (fetal life should be protected in the same way that adult life is), they then unanimously choose the life of the unborn baby over that of the woman. Without any medical justification such a choice becomes arbitrary and hypocritical.
Also relevant is that many of those in favor of the “pro-life” position are conservatives who abandon their love of human life as time passes. Having refused a woman under duress an abortion, Tim is born. Should Tim engage in home burglaries as an adult, the same people who cherished his life as a fetus no longer speak of the sanctity of life. Much to the contrary many conservatives advocate protecting their homes with deadly weapons. Furthermore many of the same folks promote the death penalty should Tim avoid getting shot by a homeowner and get arrested by law enforcement.
Certainly in this scenario Tim has made poor life choices and deserves to be punished. In fact conservatives will point to the fact that when they refused his mother an abortion, he was an innocent being harmed whereas as an adult he willfully chose to harm others and take their property by force. But this is exactly where the logical inconsistency occurs. In the instance of abortion the mother was an innocent as well and yet Tim’s life was chosen as more valuable.
From another perspective a conservative might look at Tim as an invader in their home and decide that either Tim destroys them or they destroy Tim, most conservatives would choose their own life over Tim’s. In essence this is the same choice Tim’s mother faced and yet conservatives would deny her the ability to ensure her survival.
This brings us back to the question of morality. Someone needs to point out to me what ethical code these “pro-lifers” are following that allows them to adhere to it at times and ignore it at other times.
Trevor Brookins is a free lance writer in Rockland County, New York. He is currently working on a book examining American sports culture during the Cold War. His writing has appeared in The Journal News. He can be reached at [email protected].