The following link will take you to a story about a woman who gave birth to a baby in a McDonald's restroom and then tried to dispose of the child by flushing him down the toilet. Incredibly, the child was rescued and is recovering. I'm firmly convinced that such an act will be roundly condemned by virtually everyone. The ghastly deed is simply too vivid, violent and brazen to be sugar-coated or glossed over by euphemisms touting freedom.
But I'm forced to ask: How is it that such an act receives universal censure while abortion, especially the partial-birth sort, is touted as a right; something to be manifestly celebrated as an authentic expression of free "choice?" There is no substantial difference between the two acts. Both are inspired by the desire to terminate something, I would argue a human life, via free choice. The difficulty pro-abortion advocates run into is that they have based their entire movement on one word: choice. But freedom to choose is not an absolute right. If they want to be consistent, they should argue that the bathroom incident is a legitimate expression of an unimpeded choice. While there are some on the feminist side who might agree with that, most would probably take offense. But they would be the ones guilty of faulty application of their "choice-based" philosophy.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295063,00.html
gross!
ReplyDelete