Worshipping Death | Abortion

Here is a tweet from our Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau:


He continues to conjure from the depths of progressive and contemptible ideology one of the most unnatural and harmful “rights” in all the world. Our Prime Minister has made himself the High Priest of a modern religion as he forces upon Canada the sacrifice and service to an all-consuming Moloch.


“Is abortion right?” is a hotly debated and triggering subject for many. To answer, we must answer the question, “When do we become human?” If we are human from conception, then abortion is wrong because it takes life. And if abortion is wrong, then just as calling theft “material liberation” doesn’t mitigate the crime, naming abortion “woman’s choice” or “reproductive rights” doesn’t make it moral. However, if we creatures do not become human until a particular moment in time marked by an event, a working heart, our birth, or a functioning mind, then abortion should be permissible until that time arrives.


1. "My Body My Choice"

“My body my choice” is the most common argument for abortion today. Of course, we are fearfully learning that this bold statement of independence doesn’t necessarily apply to vaccines. Nonetheless, the pro-abortionist, by invoking this declaration of power, is appealing that the child in the womb is not really a child at all. The hypothesis is that the child and his or her mother compose one organic being, and because we uphold the doctrine of autonomy, the mother ought to be able to do what she wishes with her (which includes the fetus) body.


But is it true that both mother and child are one being? If they are not, then “my body my choice” is invalid. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act in America recognizes the fetus as a legal victim. That is, the child and the mother are two distinct beings. But here in Canada, Section 223 (1) of the Criminal Code says:

223 (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not

(a) it has breathed;

(b) it has an independent circulation; or

(c) the navel string is severed.


Is this really our country’s definition of a human, a shallow, animalistic, primal, definition?


Section 223 (1) describes that a child is human when it has evacuated the safety of the mother’s womb. But of course, location is no determination of humanity. A human is a human whether he is living in a hotel, a cabin, a gulag, a hospital, or a womb. Too often we have forgotten this. The Holocaust is the most famous example. The captured Jew thrown into a dark and dank dungeon was as human as his captors (then acting like devils), who tormented Israel with indifference. Will we dare repeat this horrible mistake? Are we so foolish and deceived by evil that we are prepared to argue that a few inches of protective skin between the child and the harsh climate of the outside world determine whether or not that child is human?


Or what of the premature child? Is the one born two months premature human? If he is, how can the child, eight months in the womb, still be defined as less than human? To say so argues the remarkably incoherent idea that location determines the species of a creature. To believe that inside the womb we are not human, but outside we are, is like arguing that outside my home I am human, but inside my home, I am not.


What makes us different than the fetus? That we can breathe on our own? But many seniors and those who suffer from COPD can’t. Or perhaps we are different from the fetus because we are not entirely dependant on someone or something else? But then again, the toddler totally depends on his parents, and the man with polio depends on the Iron Lung. Surely it’s clear that a lack of independence doesn’t make the fetus less than human. Thus, the child and the mother are two distinct persons, and as such, "my body my choice" is not a permissible argument for abortion.

2. "Clump Of Cells"

Sometimes we listen to activists screech, in what is perhaps the saddest and most depressing devaluation of life, that the fetus is only a “clump of cells.” But of course, so am I. So are the activists. So are the politicians who pass such vile laws. And so are you. Shall we be subject to abortion?

Of course, we are really asking the question, “What does it mean to be human?” The secularist has no choice but to think our species on the level of animals endowed with the rare capacity to rationalize. But we are much more than that. Humans are humans because we are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26). No mere animal can claim such a title. For this reason, precisely because we are image-bearers of the Majesty in Heaven, acts like murder and theft are wrong in our kingdom but are meaningless for the animal. Because we are made in the image of God, we are infinitely valuable and indeed deserve to be treated as persons with that same worth and value.


Thus we must ask, “When is God’s image imprinted on our persons?” Outside the womb? Certainly not. Not according to Psalm 51:5. David judges himself guilty of sin from the time of conception; only humans can be guilty of sin.


We are forced to reconcile that a human is a human from the moment of conception.


Abortion, therefore, is wrong.


3. The Worthless Human

But these proofs do not often stop the proponents of abortion. Still, we hear:


“The child, if allowed to live, will grow up in poverty.”


He might, and poverty is a terrible thing we must work to remedy, but that doesn’t make him less than human. The poor man who lives today is as valuable as Bill Gates or Elon Musk. And because of that, to abort the child would be murder. And are we seriously going to discriminate and place that child in sealed prison of failure (whatever the world defines that to be) even before he opens his eyes to light? Perhaps he will grow up in poverty, but he might become a noted economist like Thomas Sowell, or maybe he will rise from the struggle of living with nothing to make something available to all. Who’s to say?


“If we don’t provide access to abortions, women will dangerously perform the procedure themselves.”


They might, and that is a tragic and horrible thing. Those people need every ounce of help we can provide. But shall we use the same argument for homicide or theft? “If we don’t legalize homicide, people will find dangerous methods to do it.” or, “If we don’t legalize theft, people will resort to dangerous methods to steal.” None of those statements make sense.


The deception that abortion is a “right” and should be glorified is further enforced with the introduction of newspeak. We rarely hear the term “abortion.” It’s too dirty, harsh, and precise a word. Instead, we hear about “women’s rights, affordable care, planned parenthood,” etc. All of these are lies—cheap attempts of employing speech to dilute the truth. When the truth cannot be communicated with precision as it ought to be, it becomes oblique. We are rarely confronted with the facts that depict women experiencing depression, loss, and shame, after an abortion; we never hear that side of the story. The new language, one that champions abortion as liberating and empowering, dominates the narrative. It’s all a lie.


If it is still believed that the fetus is not a human, then our humanity must also be questioned. And if it is recognized that the fetus is a human, and yet we still worship abortion to save the child from a life of poverty or possible abuse, or to save the mother and father from the challenges of raising a family, then our society really has embraced “…a new Dark Age made more sinister…by the lights of perverted science.”*





* See Winston S. Churchill, Their Finest Hour


Thank you for reading! If you’d like to stay informed about the Christian's perspective of current events, or if you’d like to join our growing community of members who love truth, subscribe here for free!


If you'd like to support our site and the work we do, click here! Thank you so much for your kind generosity!

0 comments