If someone were to suggest to you that the solution to your headache would be to shoot your head off, how would that sound? I know it can sound absurd, but to me this whole debate about the solution being offered for the woman who is pregnant but does not wish to become a mother, the solution that the Medical fraternity is only too eager to offer in India especially, of aborting the life she is carrying, doesn’t sound too different.
What wrong did that unborn child do to be prematurely killed when it is in the most dependent state of its life?
Justice K. Kannan who is a former judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court wrote an interesting article in the Hindu recently questioning the way abortion is fast being offered as a solution to myraid cases of pregnancy: The fundamental question is: what makes killing a human being wrong? We may then consider whether these characteristics, whatever they might be, apply to the earliest stages of human life in the womb. Explanations that have roots in religion include the traditional Christian doctrines such as that all humans are made in the image of God or that all humans have an immortal soul.
Apart from the point of view of health and avoidance of disability, with modern notions of individual liberty, many a pregnant woman believes that apart from her, no one else will have a right to decide about what she wishes to do with the foetus.
It is also suggested that an alternative for parents faced with the decision to terminate their pregnancy is a perinatal hospice. A perinatal hospice recognizes the value of bringing these infants to term by treating them as beings conceived with a tangible future. This alternative is preferred because of post-termination psychological distress and because biblical teachings emphasise the dignity and worth of each foetus.
In response to this, a few well educated people from India including female Medical Doctors wrote about choice: [http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/abortion-womens-rights-and-human-rights/article8969843.ece]
“According to international human rights law, a person is vested with human rights only at birth; an unborn foetus is not an entity with human rights. The ethical issues here are not just of the rights of the foetus. The foetus is not an independent entity and depends completely on the welfare of the woman. Without her well-being, one cannot talk about the well-being of the foetus. We also need to consider the fact that the woman herself is a living human being in the here and now — the pregnancy takes place within her body and has profound effects on her health, mental well-being and life. Thus, how she wants to deal with this pregnancy must be a decision she and she alone can make.”
What even a school child understands is that there is life inside the bulging tummy of the pregnant woman.
The PCPTND act which forbids disclosure of the sex of the fetus in India, designed to thwart the warped sex ration in the country due to selective female foeticide over the ages, recognizes that there is life in the womb! Then what is the confusion?
I am reminded of a phrase: We have educated ourselves into imbecility. No wonder educated people can write such responses to the article written by Justice Kannan.
Perhaps this last image sums up my message:
I would also like to add, the men who caused the pregnancy must learn to take responsibility for taking care of the outcome equally if not more.
I hope you would say Amen. Even if you do not, remember, the King who created you, and loves you, decides what is right and what is wrong, not me and not you. His Kingdom is advancing swiftly.
On which side would you be, my friend?