By TB Chamomile – BarbWire guest contributor
We live in an age of post-modernism where what is right or wrong is a matter of what the individual believes. The sexual liberation movement is the most obvious manifestation of post-modernism. Sexual liberalism is a seductive one as it promises people that they can fornicate with each other without any consequences, whether they are social, cultural, physical, emotion or moral consequences. It has promised people that no longer do they need to cooperate with their spouse in their sexual relationship, but they can now use their spouse to serve only their sexual expectations, and that when they are no longer “satisfying”, they can discard them like a plastic wrapping that protects goods while being shipped to its owner.
Owing to their inability to respect the human dignity of others, while at the same time desiring respect from others, people have sought to eliminate the physical consequences of fornication through birth control, including abortion which is the ultimate form of selfishness that dares to excuse the sacrifice of the life of another, only to suit the sexual gratification of oneself.
Abortion supporters often equate abortion opponents or pro-lifers to being backwards, or denigrate pro-lifers as “old men” who seek to “control” a woman’s “right to choose”. They’re even audacious enough to assume moral superiority over pro-lifers by berating them as people who seek to single out women for responsibility of abortion. They howl with false anguish for these “victims” who end up “having to” kill their baby. While many of them may have been encouraged by a boyfriend to procure an abortion, any person who intentionally seeks an abortion is already morally guilty by that intention alone.
Women who claim that it is their right to choose to kill their child, while claiming that child abuse is wrong are extremely hypocritical. They take pride in lambasting those men who seek to use them for their own sexual means, while boasting about how liberated they are because they can fornicate without social criticism and then murder their baby whenever they choose to. Such women are wicked, evil, deceptive, manipulative and perverse, all while pretending to be victims of the ones who they are in a sexual relationship with. If one has no moral values oneself, one has no right to even think about the morality of the actions of others.
On the other hand, the arguments against abortion are that which do not regard the killing of an innocent child itself. Instead, they falsely claim that the woman who procures abortions is innocent because she will suffer emotion and psychological damage as a result of the abortion. Such is guilt, and one should feel guilt for committing an evil act. To console a woman who feels guilt from having an abortion to like consoling a man who murders a woman for the guilt he feels after he has been sentenced to life imprisonment.
It is true that whoever tries to encourage another to have an abortion is guilty of murder in their heart, but this does not negate the moral responsibility of the woman who intentionally murders her baby. Abortion is the murder of a child in the womb, and there can be no argument against this. Murder is inherently wrong in the absolute sense. Why should the murder of a child under the deceptive guise of “convenience” be excused? What could possibly justify the murder of an innocent child? Of course, the abortion supporters would dismiss this as simply sympathy for a baby for being a baby.
Many ask what if the baby killer of a woman was raped. While it is absolutely tragic for that to happen to anyone, the rape is an incident that is separate from the murder of a baby. The rapist has committed one crime; the one who procures an abortion has committed another heinous crime. Therefore, to argue that a woman is entitled to abort her child because it was conceived in rape is not merely misguided; it is to blame the baby for the crime of the father. Why should a baby conceived in rape pay in blood for the crimes of the father? Why? This is extremely obvious when one actually thinks about the crime of the mother herself. Thus, it can be concluded that the real reason why people use this argument to invoke sympathy is because they are ultimately trying to justify sexual liberalism for themselves.
It is the act of abortion itself that is evil for what it is. Therefore, the consequences of abortion on the woman who had the abortion are completely irrelevant as to its wrongness. As long as the pro-life movement falsely paints the woman as a victim, it undermines the moral purpose of fighting abortion – to fight evil. This is analogous to saying that one must help the pedophilia from raping children by showing him sympathy because he is trying to stop his desires but he cannot.
No! The woman who intentionally seeks abortion is a cruel, evil, heartless woman. Such sympathy shown towards such women is not only naive, but false misguided sympathy that looks only at the circumstances rather than the heart. As such, it is incapable of reaching the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is a matter of the heart: pure selfishness from the human heart.
The minds of abortion supporters who accuse pro-lifers of being immoral are utterly depraved. They do know that abortion is wrong, however, because of their perverse minds, they idolize the new god of convenience and sexual “freedom” and become blind to the abomination of abortion. Sexual liberalism is their religion and anything that is good and shines truth on their evil acts is offensive to them. This explains all the attacks against the pro-lifers.
No wonder modern society is so depraved and blind towards what is right and what is wrong. Society can only blame itself.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.