The downfall of the West begins five hundred years ago, with the so-called 'Renaissance'. This blight upon the world and upon humanity denied the idea of formal and final causation. Final causation is the idea that things happen with an end in mind. This does not mean that the end is necessarily intended by the actor - for example, a river does not intend to reach the river mouth, but that is its end - but it means that there is a discernible order in the world.
This left two forms of causation - material and efficient. To explain anything, we would turn to what made it up, and what it does. While these run into their own problems in trying to explain anything in science, we are looking at abortion only today.
Abortion is a crime against humanity itself. It not only murders the child within the womb, it not only kills the life within your own soul. It perverts the end to which pregnancy and sex are aimed. It turns the human act of love and life-giving into a murderous act of selfish greed and lust.
There are many arguments that the murderers of their own soul use to defend abortion - that the child is not a child because it is not developed enough, bodily autonomy, the mother's health, the health of the child, poverty or other material concerns. Each of these is easily countered.
The first is that the child's stage of development removes their humanity. This is a ridiculous idea. They usually say that either at some stage of development in the womb, or when they are born, they magically gain humanity. Push them further. Ask them why they say at that stage. 'Because they can survive outside the womb' is one answer - at that point, ask them how long a child will survive without any care at one day old. 'They have all the parts of humanity, all their organs whole' is another - then does someone who does not lose their humanity? Does someone who loses their arm in an accident lose their humanity? How about someone who donates a kidney? 'They are born' - then would it be right, if they were half born, to take a knife and stab it through their neck?
The second is the concept of bodily autonomy, the idea that no-one can be forced to have anything done to their body. Extrapolate this a little. Would it be okay for them to leave the newborn infant by itself to starve? Why not? Nobody can force someone to yield their bodily autonomy. Again they demand that the government come in and take your hard earned cash with guns and soldiers. Why is it that they demand bodily autonomy in one case, and not the other?
The mother's health is the next one, and it is the first that does not even attempt to be one based on either reason or logic, but emotions. After all, why should we murder someone because there's a chance of another person dying? It does not matter to the one making the argument, because it is not a valid argument. Ask them this question. What is more heroic? Dying to save another's life, or taking another one's life to save your own? They will say the first, but most people cannot do it. In which case you say 'but why should we promoting the less good choice of action?' And that is only in those times when the mother's life is threatened. 'Should I kill a man to make my life more comfortable? Why?'
The most abominable is the fourth - that of the health of the child. This one is pure evil, and no-one who cites this can be called human. 'We must kill this one, so he does not feel pain!' Merely point out that their reason is because of the child's quality of life, and they have reduced it to zero.
Poverty or other material reasons - age and the like - are merely fear. These must be sympathised with, but it should not be permitted to surrender before the fight has begun. This must be dealt with in one of two ways. If you are dealing with someone who is considering an abortion for these circumstances, you must act to stop them. Offer to help them, to support them. On the other hand, those who are making an argument that these should be allowed must be countered without mercy.
Adoption is an option, for which waiting list for newborns is far longer than the total abortions for every year. So age or poverty or state of life or what-have-you is not going to be the end of the world for either if you take that option. On the other hand, while it may be difficult for those who want to keep the child, if you try, it is not impossible. Extreme poverty does not exist in the western world. It simply doesn't. Charities, welfare, etc provide great support for those in crisis.
No argument lasts for abortion, only the argument against abortion. It is murder, plain and simple.
No comments:
Post a Comment