A Threat to Whom? The Colossal Insensitivity of the Pro-Choice MindSeptember 27, 2021 2 Comments
The headline caught my eye: “Threat to Roe is a threat to women’s sports.” Oh, my. Say it ain’t so. Women’s sports are threatened by the possible reversal of Roe v. Wade.
The article was in USA Today, September 21. It was written by Nancy Armour. Armour argues that if a woman does not have the right “to decide when or if to have children” it jeopardizes her potential for playing soccer or basketball or whatever sport she might choose. Armour believes that abortion is all about the health and well-being of a woman.
Nothing is said, mind you, about the health and well-being of the baby in her womb. As far as Armour and other pro-death advocates are concerned, the only body that matters is that of the mother (that’s right, the woman who has another life inside of her is a “mother”!). It matters little if at all that an abortion entails the torture, dismemberment and slaughter of an unborn child. Does the health of that mother matter? Of course! Who would ever suggest otherwise?
It is “access to abortion,” Armour continues, that has made the pursuit of sports and a possible Olympic gold medal a reality. So, let me get this right. More important than a human life is the opportunity to kick a ball or swim in a race and enjoy having a gold medal hung around your neck.
Armour contends, as virtually all pro-abortion advocates do, that a woman must retain the right to decide when or if to have children. I agree. If you don’t want children, don’t have sex. If you insist on having sex, use a contraceptive. And if you get pregnant, realize that it is not any longer an issue of what you can do with your body but what you cannot and must not do to the body of another human being.
The cauterizing of the conscience of many is almost beyond imagination. If a baby gets in the way of my using my body to shoot 3-point baskets for the WNBA, to hell with the baby. I’ll kill it, lest it threaten my athletic career. How have we come to such a place in our society that human life is so horribly cheapened and subordinated to the selfish ambition of so many?
Sad to say, it gets worse. Three days later, in the September 24 edition of USA Today, Armour is back at it. This time she calls for canceling the state of Texas because of . . . , because of what? Because of its overt and hateful racism? No. Because of its border crisis, which, by the way, is not the fault of the state government of Texas? No. Let’s cancel Texas, she says, because the state has passed a law that refuses “to allow them [women] control of their own bodies.”
Of course, Texas law does no such thing. What it does is to prohibit a woman’s use of her body to dismember and destroy another person’s body. Armour insists that no sporting event, be it amateur or professional, should be allowed to occur in Texas because Texas stands to defend the life and dignity of the unborn.
Armour refers to the many women “who filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court on Monday over the Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks, well before viability. The amicus brief argues that women wouldn’t be able to take advantage of the opportunities that sports affords – athletic scholarships, professional careers, commercial opportunities – without also having access to abortion.” Now, take note of how pro-death people use language. What the amicus ought to say is that “women wouldn’t be able to take advantage of the opportunities sports affords . . . without also being able to kill their babies.”
Yet again, language is mangled to portray abortion as largely harmless. Armour refers to it as a “procedure.” Yes, a procedure is undertaken, one that brutally destroys a human life, a life that can feel pain, a life worth living.
I find it nothing short of mind-boggling that playing a game in a competitive setting is more highly valued that nurturing, cherishing, and protecting the life of a human being. Kill the latter so you can keep the former, is what we are being asked to endorse. And if you disagree, well, we’ll cancel you and deprive your state of tens of millions of dollars. My recommendation to the states of Texas and Mississippi is to tell the abortion industry to take that money and well, you know what comes next, but I won’t be so crude as to say where it should go. Although, I don’t know why I’m concerned with being verbally crude when the killing of a child in the womb is about as crude and cruel as one can get.
Now, one final observation. I’m sure the pro-death advocates would push back because I failed to mention those who are pregnant because of rape or incest. Ought they not to have the right to kill the baby in their womb? Rape and incest are horrific crimes, and the perpetrators should be punished to the full extent of the law. And our hearts should break for the victims of these heinous deeds and our generosity should be effusive in helping them navigate this challenging experience.
But may I remind you that the life conceived in the womb of such victims is no less valuable than those conceived by love. The origin or cause of conception does not diminish the dignity of the one conceived. The child conceived by rape or incest is no less created in the image of God than all others. These precious babies should not be deprived of their right to life simply because their conception was not consensual.
I’ll close with the words of my friend, Michael Brown. In a powerful article published on September 2, 2021, he asks us all to consider these undeniable facts:
“Do you realize that, at the moment of conception, the child in your womb receives its unique coding — to be precise, three billion base pairs of DNA coding? One science website explained that, “If you stretched the DNA in one cell all the way out, it would be about 2 meters long and all the DNA in all your cells put together would be about twice the diameter of the Solar System.” Put another way, at conception, this baby, which is barely visible to the human eye, “contains more information than fifty sets of the physical 33-volume set of the Encyclopedia Britannica.
All that is planted inside that tiny baby as soon as the egg and sperm join together, almost miraculously. Talk about meticulous and careful planning. Talk about evidence of design. And it is at that moment we believe God breathes life into that little one. At that very moment, you are pregnant with a girl or a boy (or twins or more).
You can call the baby a clump of cells or a mass of tissue or a tumor or an “it.” But this is a “who,” not an it. A “who” that has been carefully formed in your womb with purpose and destiny and potential, even if by rape or by accident. It is God who gave this little one life, and that life is sacred. . . .
This is why we are so adamantly pro-life. It is not because we are heartless. It is certainly not because we are misogynistic. (Many, if not most, of the key pro-life leaders are women.) It is because we recognize that the moment a baby is conceived, it is a human being with rights and dignity and purpose, and no one has the right to snuff out the life of that child” (An Open Letter to Women Who Say ‘My Body, My Choice’).