Regardless of your political opinion on the lockdowns, mandatory masks, and business shutdowns, these actions highlight a principle utterly at odds with the fundamental arguments put forward by the abortion ‘rights’ movement: That our society should be ready to make tremendous sacrifices on behalf of the weaker and more vulnerable in order to ensure that they remain healthy and stay alive.
August 20, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Abortion supporters have many arguments they utilize to defend feticide, ranging from difficult and traumatic circumstances to disproven and unscientific babble about the child in the womb being a “clump of cells” rather than a human being (something no credible scientist in the field believes). But the primary argument used to defend the destruction of pre-born human beings in the womb is that of personal autonomy: The child is totally dependent on the body of the mother, at least until viability, and thus it should be the mother’s decision as to whether the child lives or dies.
I’ve noted before in this space that I actually believe that the argument for bodily autonomy based on the dependence of the pre-born child on his or her mother makes the pro-life case rather than the pro-abortion one. After all, our society generally recognizes that the weakness, vulnerability, and youth of a human being heightens our responsibility rather than lessens it. There are entire legal frameworks that exist for the sole purpose of protecting those members of the human family classified as “dependents,” and we collectively recognize that this dependence demands specific sacrifice and protection from the rest of us. In short, the strong have a unique obligation to the weak.