Letter of the Day | Abortion – then and now
Published:Saturday | December 21, 2019 | 12:00 AM
THE EDITOR, Madam:
It wasn’t long ago that in our culture and society as a whole, there was almost unanimous consent that abortion involved the taking of a human life and therefore deemed morally reprehensible. Such a sentiment was ubiquitous and permeated public life and discourse.
Indeed, one recalls the many areas the rejection of abortion was to be found, a common place being in our music. So what has changed? How are we now at the place where the idea of abortion, being the termination, or killing of a human person, is now lost under such euphemisms as ‘rights’? Is this cultural change due probably to the many illegal abortions being performed? Are we seeing or are we now far into a culture shift?
THREE REFLECTIONS
Regardless of the foregoing, we are here. I proceed to offer three reflections between then and now that remain consistent, despite our seeming change in culture:
1. The premise of the pro-life position still maintains that the termination of the ‘body’ within the womb is a living human being, be it potential or actual, as some may posit. All human beings are endowed with the right to life. This has not changed. Those who tout a ‘woman’s right’ must still contend with this argument. No sustaining refutation is thus far presented.
2. Cultural changes are not always brought about by careful consideration of existing mores and ethics that pervade society. Some are brought about by prevailing, temporal ‘fads’ that disappear with the passage of time. The latest ‘meme’ in the abortion discourse is the questioning of men’s eligibility to speak in the matter, seeing they cannot become pregnant. Of course, this is completely ignoring the fact that women of their own do not produce babies. This, too, shall pass.
3. Values still remain preferred. Majority of abortions are done due to the inconvenience the infant will bring about if termed. This was very well known back then and caused the wide-scale rejection of abortions. But it still holds that responsible behaviour is desired above irresponsibility, and restraint over indulgence.
Though values have depreciated, life still remains the most prized possession among human beings – the greatest of God’s gifts. Whatever values, ethics or cultural norms change, this remains irrelevant to the question of the unborn right to live.
JOHN CONSTANTINE HENRY