I have an amusing memory from late in my last pregnancy. I arrived at my doctor’s office one morning for a routine prenatal appointment, and as I was approaching the door, an older gentleman happened to be exiting the building. When he saw me, a look of exasperation passed over his face, and he heaved a gargantuan sigh… and turned back and held the door for me.
The hilarity of the incident absolutely brightened my day. I was laughing about it all morning! The rudeness of the exaggerated sigh so completely overshadowed the small courtesy, and of course, I hadn’t done anything at all to demand special attention, apart from simply being visibly pregnant. Today though, I was reflecting back on this little scene, and it started to seem weirdly uplifting. Obviously, the man was neither gregarious nor obliging by nature. He made no pretense of taking pleasure in doing me a service. And yet, it was somehow engrained in his mind that pregnant women must be assisted! Compare that to the attitude of the Democrats today.
We are told that, in order to be pro-woman, one must support (both morally and financially) the killing of immature humans up through birth and even a little beyond. It is obvious that this will not be in the interests of the infants (to put it mildly). Some have asked: can the rights of women completely obliterate even the right to life? It’s a reasonable question, but to my mind we are conceding too much even to conduct the debate on these terms. The Democrats’ extreme position is an offense against women and children alike.
Pregnant women are needy by nature. The howling little creatures they produce are even needier.
Understandably, people aren’t always eager to take on such heavy responsibilities. So, what happens when pregnancy becomes a woman’s own choice? It starts to seem reasonable that she should be held responsible for that choice. It becomes her project and her burden. Once upon a time, everyone understood that others (fathers especially, but also more extended family and the community as a whole) were obliged to give women particular care and support as they shouldered the burdens of childbearing and motherhood. In a pro-choice world, all bets are off. If you fought for the woman’s right to kill her child in the first place, you presumably won’t feel yourself responsible for the outcome if she decides to let it live.
As a closing note: do the Democrats have any words of wisdom to offer as to how that choice should be made? Pro-lifers sometimes lament the deeply offensive reasons for which people abort their children: because the sex is “wrong” (‘we wanted a boy”), because the baby has disabilities, because the couple wanted only one baby and not twins, and so on and so forth. As shocking as that is, I would reverse that line of thought and ask: what “good reason” could one give for having a child? How can my desire to experience motherhood possibly stand as an adequate justificatory reason for another complete human life? I don’t understand how pro-choice liberal parents can live with themselves. Do they never look at their offspring, and feel the crushing, overwhelming magnitude of what they have done? How can anyone truly take full responsibility for such a “choice”?