Secular, Feminist, and Pro Life

Commentary by John Stonestreet on Break Point.org (Oct. 25):

The pro-life tent is constantly expanding, but some of our new allies might surprise us.

In the third presidential debate on Wednesday night, Hillary Clinton said women should be able to end the lives of their preborn babies right up until the very moment of birth, long after a child is viable outside the womb.

In a recent Marist poll reported by the Wall Street Journal, eighty percent of Americans and some sixty-percent of self-described pro-choicers oppose this extreme view. Instead, they support restricting abortion to the first trimester of pregnancy.

……………………

All of this led Ruth Graham to conclude in Slate that the pro-life movement is in the midst of a transition. But it’s not just in the sense that it’s getting younger. It’s also attracting the non-religious.

Not that long ago, being pro-life meant you were almost certainly a Catholic or evangelical. But now, the belief that killing unborn babies is wrong is transcending religious and even political boundaries.

Take Aimee Murphy, the 27-year-old founder of Pittsburgh’s Life Matters Journal. Aimee was raped by an ex-boyfriend who pressured her to get an abortion when she thought she was pregnant. That was when it clicked, Aimee says. “I could not use violence to get what I wanted in life. I realized that if I were to get an abortion, I would just be passing oppression on to a child.”

Her appeal, like that of a growing group of young pro-lifers who aren’t religious, is rooted in human rights, and the belief that our nation has committed an unspeakable atrocity in the name of convenience.

Kelsey Hazzard, founder of the group Secular Pro-Life, says the non-religious argument against abortion has the potential to bring people on board who would have never otherwise taken the message of life seriously.

And Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, a Dallas resident who founded New Wave Feminists, sees protecting the unborn and ending abortion as a deeply feminist cause. She told Slate she doesn’t understand why so many fellow feminists treat fertility “like a disease,” as if abortion is the only way women can achieve their dreams. The culture of death tells women they must bear the consequences of pregnancy alone, and Herndon-De La Rosa calls that “a grave form of injustice.”  [read more]

Humorist Dennis Miller once said the Left believe in cradle-to-grave healthcare but make it hard for babies to get to the cradle. So, true.

What abortionists don’t understand is if you kill off the potential human beings you are going to have under population because eventually everyone will grow old and die. You will need new people (babies) to at least replace the dead. Also, with the newly born come new ideas and innovation. The economic system will collapse without new workers. Russia has experienced this phenomena. And now China is telling its citizenry its okay now to have more than one child—actually just two children. Well, the citizens are basically giving the finger to the gov’t. The gov’t told its people for 30 years to only have one child because they were worried about overpopulation. Now, they have the opposite. This is what happens when Big Gov starts to play God.

One final thought. Most people believe abortions should be outlawed except if the mother’s life is in danger. This is in a lot of states constitutions as well. Well, what if the mother is pro-life and wants to sacrifice her life for her baby’s? Is that so hard to believe? It’s not so different than a mother pushing her child out of the way in front of a speeding car when she doesn’t have time to save herself. Just like people have a DNR legal order maybe potential mothers could have a Save-My-Baby legal order.