Hello, Roland Warren here.
A few weeks ago, Washington Post humorist
Gene Weingarten published an article on the
glaring “dishonesty” of pro-life rhetoric.
Gene is upset that pro-life people call themselves
“pro-life” and he insists that this is
“a political term, invented by anti-abortion
advocates to make their advocacy seem more
inclusive.”
After all, Gene asserts, who could be anything
but pro-life?
While at first glance Gene’s article may
seem to be a logical and balanced position
on abortion, a closer examination reveals
that it is nothing more than a logically inconsistent
and incoherent response to the pro-life movement.
Gene begins his piece by explaining that he
resents the implication that he is “pro-death”
simply because he supports “a woman’s
right to choose.”
He insists the two are not related.
Further, the abortion debate centers on whether
the fetus is a baby.
He writes, “I believe that aborting a first
trimester fetus is not ‘killing a baby.’
You, presumably, do.
That's where this giant political issue incubates.
I am not in favor of ‘killing babies.’
But If I genuinely think that a 12-week fetus
is not a ‘baby,’ I am not pro-death, and
I deeply resent your labeling me as such.”
Here we find the subtle yet key misdirection
of Gene’s article.
Gene jumps from whether or not he is "pro-baby"
to whether or not he is "pro-death."
This is a skillful sidestepping of the central
issue.
He can disagree with whether a baby and a
fetus should be thought of as the same thing,
without disagreeing that the fetus is a life.
Pro-life arguments regarding the humanity
of the developing fetus do not rely on the
belief that a 10-week fetus and a one-month
old child are both babies, but rather that
both are human lives at different stages of
development.
That is the key charge he claims to be defending
himself against and that is the one he completely
sidesteps.
If in fact the fetus is a human life, and
he is in favor of ending that life through
legalized abortion, he is, by definition,
not pro-life.
The reason Gene pivots his argument this way
is because few people think that a fetus and
a two-month-old baby are the same.
By shifting to “well, it’s not a baby”
he makes his pro-choice narrative more appealing
and looks like the voice of reason in a hotly
contested debate.
To further his “balanced” position, Gene
uses the term “12-week fetus” to imply
he is only in favor of first-trimester abortions.
Yet, earlier in his article he writes “I
am very much in favor of allowing a woman
facing the prospect of a grievously disabled
newborn to abort that fetus so she can try
again with better luck, maybe producing a
cancer researcher instead of a lifelong insensate
invalid.”
Setting aside the noxious idea that only potentially
“productive” people are worthy of protection
in the womb, the reality is that the majority
of pre-natal diagnoses take place in the later
part of the first trimester or well into the
second.
This begs the question, what form of abortion
is he comfortable with?
Only first trimester, unless the child faces
a disability diagnosis?
Like many similar “balanced arguments for
abortion,” Gene’s fails to provide any
criteria for determining when the fetus has
any rights.
Furthermore, his response enshrines social
prejudices against those currently living
with down Syndrome and other “disabilities.”
The womb is the most dangerous place in the
world for a child with down Syndrome, and
Gene’s logic would only increase this threat.
Gene concludes his article by writing that
pro-life people should abandon the moniker
“pro-life”, “Because you and I both
know this issue is complex.
And the term ‘pro-life’ denies that complexity."
Gene is right, the development of human life
within the womb is a complex miracle that
science is still working to unravel.
What is not complex, however, is the answer
to the question: “Is a fetus in a woman’s
womb a human life?”
Biology, genetics, and fetal research all
confirm that, without a question, it is.
And that is the question Mr. Weingarten should
have answered instead of deliberately sidestepping
it altogether.
Until next time, may God bless you daily as
you serve Him faithfully in all you do.
