Conversations on Human Rights

I received a message today from a woman who stated she was a pro-life feminist, after commenting on a post she made on Facebook - one that was taken down immediately after my comment, or I would include it. I thought I would post both the message and my response here.

V. S.

Hi Jennie- Thank-you for your comment to my post. I sensed it best to message you as my hope in posting the comment was to simply bring overdue, and loving, attention to the children in the womb who need our protection as well as to mothers in need, including, post abortive mothers. I don't plan to engage in public debate now, although, that can be good.

There can be no debate, today though, that a child in the womb is simply that; a child in his or her earliest stages of life. Human DNA is present at conception. You and I; we were that earliest stage. An abortion kills a child. Just as the law protects children from parents killing their children, so it should with regards to abortion. I am sure my own children have caused me psychological stress over and over; children tend to do that as does love). I am sure I've caused them psychological stress! However, that gives me no right to take their lives and vice-versa. Maybe a parent in stress can get help to have their child(ren) cared for and-or adopted.

It is rare that a woman will lose her life during her pregnancy today with the benefit of medical technology, however and especially because this can occur, it is important to define this. For example, in etopic pregnancy both a mother and child can lose their life. Also, a good friend of mine was five months pregnant and it was discovered that her baby was attached to her uterus an, that, my friend could hemorrhage with a likelihood of death if she carried her baby to term. My friend sacrificed and went into the hospital where she stayed until her baby was able to be delivered prematurely through surgery. Today both she and her son are well and more than thriving.

Please know that I, too, am post abortive and it wasn't until I found the healing in a loving God I'm growing to know through that part of God who is forgiveness and mercy and so much more, Jesus, that I was able to truly begin my healing process and, yet, there is still grief that I took the life of my unborn children. I accept that grief today along with the love and forgiveness of our Creator. Many women become pro-abortion, adamantly, because the pain and grief of the abortion(s) they've experienced is too great to bear and, somehow, making abortion legal can, for some of us, make it seemingly ok then, on the outside, but it is the inside of us women which bears the pain, truth, and loss. Thanks again for taking the time to read my post.




J. F.


Okay, first of all, you need to know that I am in no way post-abortive, having never HAD the procedure. On only one occasion did I seek an abortion. It was denied. My (of necessity) final pregnancy resulted in an anencephalic daughter - she was diagnosed at 28 weeks, at which point my doctor recommended an immediate termination, due to the risk of carrying four times the normal amount of amniotic fluid in this pregnancy. The hospital board denied his request, and I was informed I would carry my fatally damaged child to term and deliver naturally. During that delivery, my water broke, and as my doctor had predicted, tore my uterus to shreds. As a result, I spent the next two weeks in an ICU. I coded twice. I required six pints of blood to replace what was pouring out of my body, and my uterus was removed.

By the way, I'd like to point out that every one of those "rare" pregnancies that result in severe complications represents a real human being - a wife, a mother, a sister, daughter, best friend. I've always wondered at the pro-life mindset that is unwilling to accept the death of so much as one single unborn child - but has no issue dismissing the preventable deaths of thousands of women each year, and the permanent injury to hundreds of thousands more. Perhaps it's merely a question of whether one supports ALL human life, or only supports human lives before birth. Even when those lives will end before birth even occurs, or end in immediate death by suffocation after delivery.

I know no one who disputes that a fertilized egg is the initial beginning of every human life on earth. The dispute comes when one tries to determine which life has the highest value and must therefore be sustained at all costs. For the pro-life side, the unborn fetus owns this ultimate value - no life currently being lived by any person on earth is more valuable than the one in the womb, regardless of developmental stage or ability to sustain life after birth. Even when that unborn child will, with absolute certainty, not survive birth, it must be the sole priority, and any lives lost in the effort to effect the natural delivery of that child are considered to be an acceptable price to pay. For the pro-choice side, a proven viable life, i.e., one already born and self-sustaining, takes precedence over one still unproven.

In truth, the impassable divide between the two points of view comes down to one simple issue - a pro-choice individual believes that the choice to risk one's life must ALWAYS be made by the person whose life stands on the line, and is willing to give their full support no matter what choice is made. They would no more fault a woman who decides to deliver a child that has the potential to cause the woman's death or personal injury, than they would fault a woman who decides that she is not willing to face that risk. The pro-life individual tells women that they WILL face that risk, and will be given no option otherwise, nor will any mitigating circumstances be considered. In my opinion, such dictatorial behavior cannot be supported.

In no other realm of human existence do we require a person to risk their life or health for any reason - this is why the draft has been illegal for nearly half a century.  In no other realm is a person required to provide biological support to sustain another person's life - this is why we are not allowed to require people to donate blood or bone marrow, and why we need written permission to remove an otherwise usable organ from even a corpse. By banning abortion, we place pregnant women in a category in which they are required, by law, to face risks and perform actions that are required of no other class of person, regardless of how many people may be injured or killed by a non-pregnant person's refusal to face those risks. The only way this treatment may be justified is by placing the unborn child at all stages in a category exclusive only to them, one in which they have rights no other human life is entitled to - and by extension, putting pregnant woman into a category in which they lose rights given to every other human life, unborn or otherwise. If this is an acceptable view to you, feel free to work towards making it a reality. But please refrain from stating that you support equal rights of any kind, as your view endows a special class of rights upon one stage of life while removing rights from a single class - and gender - of other lives.