This is an article about one woman who became pregnant after being raped. She chose birth for her child. Instead of being traumatized by this experience, she has made something good out of the bad.
She says:
“Every mother has that obligation to fight for the life that's in her. Each day that life grows and after nine months you have a baby; if you have an abortion, you don't have anything. It's a decision to have life or not to have life. Is it right for me to hurt someone who can’t speak for themselves or just go with the flow?
There are many people who oppose abortions, but make an exception for rape. I think that is the product of weighing interests. They understand that killing a fetus is wrong, as his life matters. But, based on an emotional reaction of "what if I were raped?" they don't want to "traumatize" the mother and have her respect her unborn child's right to life.
I can imagine that choosing birth for an unborn child conceived in rape can be tough. No doubt about it. However, the unborn child has human rights, too. Feelings can be healed. People can move beyond trauma. I know that some people think that once you're traumatized, there's NO WAY you can get past that, and compulsory parenting would make it worse. The reality is, people do move on. That's what therapists are for.
But even if that weren't the case, an unborn child's life is not less important just because of the circumstances of his conception. He should not be punished just because of his parents' decision. Many women like to con themselves into thinking that killing an unborn is an act of love because they're not bringing a child into a negative situation. How is killing an innocent person an act of love? I think this thinking is the product of relativistic morality: if you give an act a certain intention, then that's the morality of the action. Which of course is ridiculous.
H/T Hailey at Free Dominion
Check out the Big Blue Wave Message Board
