That is the line fed to us by those who love abortion, which is murder of an unborn person. But who is forcing the mother? Is the baby holding a gun or threatening violence? No. Is the state and its laws actively requiring travel for an abortion? Only if one considers the alternative to be unthinkable and not realistic—which is to have a baby. But life is not a choice, and there lies the rub. We do not have to consciously chose life to conceive a child, and we lack the power to choose it precisely when we want. Rather, life as God’s creation chooses us. The Creator makes father and mothers by opening and closing the womb. We know life is not a conscious choice—since it requires two people to have a child—one alone cannot manage it, no matter how much they rationally choose. But to destroy life only takes one hardened sinner.
So “forced” implies that to do the most natural thing, and what we men and women were designed to do, is ruled out, leaving only one satanic choice: murder by abortion. The implication is that a life is not a viable choice, leaving death as the only acceptable option. That is not to deny that being a parent is real work and not easy. But that is part and parcel with being one flesh—which is the thing society takes for granted and assumes the right to without the assumption of that grave responsibility inherent in marriage. But gratification of the flesh and the non-choice of God’s Word impelling us to be fruitful and multiply is not easily denied. So being single and childless not a choice for most—unless God’s gives that ability. We are not given the choice to create ourselves for our own purposes.
Those claiming to be “forced to travel,” but make plans for their abortion vacation, show how optional it is. Yet, many do not choose to cross state lines to murder their unborn baby. Most even rejoice at the prospect of new life in this dark world. Were they forced? The gift of life is a blessing, while “forced” speaks of life like a curse. Suicide is also spoken of as a threat and promise—when it is a choice of murder, not a consequence of someone else ‘s actions or words. Why is murder billed as the only viable option in suicide and abortion? Because life is too distasteful for the person to consider if it is not on their own deranged terms. Those in darkness love death and can only see life in terms of death. Are murderers captive and forced by their sin to murder? That is closer to the truth of the matter.
The denial of the only moral choice—to take care of the life God blesses with for as long as possible—is not addressed honestly, but rather ruled out by default—leaving only the completely optional and immoral choice of murder left. That is the unstated, backwards logic employed to do the unthinkable. The difficulty and danger of caring for and giving birth to a baby, which is present due to sin’s curse, is said to not be an option all. But that is precisely what we were made for. Treating a baby, who is just as human as the parents, like a cancerous tumor requires twisting all logic and words; denying one’s own humanity in the process.
I think it is telling that the fathers are not present in the pro-abortion TV advertisements. Presumably, a man was involved at some point, but his involvement in the ending of life is conspicuously absent. That is the real unstated issue. Often times the male will not act like a manly father and lead, after doing his masculine biological function. Sometimes, it is the man forcing the woman to deny her biological role of motherhood—but that is not the baby’s fault or that of abortion laws. The inclusion of deadbeat dads would not make for a sympathetic political ad. But every unborn baby has a father we can safely assume.
The emotional ploys are made even in a stronger way: the mother says to save her very life she had to flee to another state (where there are no laws against this kind of murder) and then return home. But how do we weigh the certain death of her baby (in abortion) against the possible risk to health of the mother? How can we treat these as two separate things? It is unmotherly and unnatural to pit the two lives, so intertwined, against each other. After all, how can it be a true emergency when there is ample time to travel across state lines, close to the speed limit, and arrange to systematically evacuate the baby from the womb? Only one person faces certain death: the baby. But that is a choice. There is risk in being a mother, but there is also risk in driving in a car on busy roads. Our life and health as mortals is never a certainty, but to embrace the death of the most tender and helpless infant as the certain outcome of our will is surely an evil thing.
Mothers do risk their lives, though that is less the case now than in previous centuries. But all mothers must give up control of their bodies and independence in motherhood. It is not a choice to care for an infant, but a physical imperative. We should encourage and support mothers to do what they were made to do—and not judge them by the standards of the male body and role. We have hope in Christ that life is redeemed and worthwhile. No life is ever a waste, even if the sacrifice temporally is extreme. It becomes a holy duty for the Christian mother in service to her Lord. A man, for all his strength, cannot choose to be a mother, but he can support his wife and be a real father—not just a biological one.
It is the refusal to even consider giving up that selfish autonomy that leaves murder the only option left. It forces them to kill, in their minds, though it is completely a (wrong) choice to take life. So the preconceived power to live life unimpeded by the life of an additional person is the unstated assumption that makes the unborn child living unthinkable. How long must we be forced to endure such satanic excuses to be against life and love death? —ed.
Christian News 