There seems to be some misconception regarding the matter of choice in the pro-life movement. There is a vocal element that claims that those individuals who oppose abortion are anti-choice. Where we differ is not whether there is a choice to be made or not, but when the choices are made and where the matter of personal responsibility and logical consequences should be faced. Let me see if I can't shed a little light on the matter.
Example #1: My unmarried daughter is on an outing with a young man who feels that sex outside of marriage is acceptable. She faces a number of choices.
If she knew his views about sex prior to the outing, she made the decision to go with him anyway.
She must decide whether to continue the date or make an excuse and leave and go home.
She must decide whether to be alone with him or remain with a crowd.
She must decide whether or not sex outside is acceptable for her.
She must decide whether or not she wants to have sex with him.
She must decide whether or not to have sex with him.
She must decide whether or not to prevent conception if she decides to have sex.
She must decide whether or not to continue to have a relationship with him after the encounter.
If she becomes pregnant, she must decide what she will do about the baby.
She must decide whether to involve her parents, the young man, and any other significant support people in the decision or make it on her own.
There were at least eight identifiable choices before she had to decide the fate of an unborn child. With each and every choice she made, she set into a motion a specific set of possible consequences for her behavior. If she believes that sex outside of marriage is wrong and abides by that principle, abortion never becomes an issue in this scenario.
Example #2: A young woman is involved in a sexual relationship outside of marriage. She and the young man discover that she is pregnant.
Initially, they had to decide to have an ongoing relationship without benefit of marriage.
They had to decide whether or not to prevent conception.
Once the pregnancy is confirmed, they must decide how they feel about the pregnancy and their relationship.
If he is not supportive of the pregnancy, she must determine whether to stay or leave the relationship.
If he pressures her to have an abortion, she must determine whether to choose him over their baby.
If he threatens to abandon her or throw her out if she doesn't have an abortion, she must decide what other options she has if she chooses not to abort.
If she chooses to carry the child to term, she must decide whether to parent or place it for adoption.
If she decides to parent, she must decide if he will have any involvement in the child.
He must decide whether he wants contact with the child, and he may not have a choice as to whether to provide financial support for the child.
In this scenario, there are multiple choices prior to deciding the fate of the child. In only the last item is there a point where anyone besides the baby could be made to do something. Many young women in this situation, however, feel they have no choices. Many young women say they obtained an abortion because they had NO choice in the matter. And many abortuaries foster the illusion of no choice by not counseling these women on other choices they may have. These may include a place to stay if they are evicted, assistance with medical and financial help, and emotional support for parenting or adoption.
Example #3:A young woman is sexually assaulted or the victim of an incestuous relationship. She, too, has a number of choices.
She must decide whether or not to go directly for medical assistance to help prevent conception IF she is at the midpoint of her cycle and fertile.
She must decide whether to prosecute her attacker.
If she becomes pregnant, statistically a rarity, she must decide whether or not to continue the pregnancy.
If she decides to abort the child, she must decide if she can live with the guilt and consequences of an abortion added on top of the sexual assault.
If she decides to continue the pregnancy, she must decide whether to parent or place it for adoption.
Granted, the list is shorter, but the choices are still there.
Example #4: A young woman discovers she is pregnant with a child she set out to conceive. She gets appropriate prenatal care in the early stages of pregnancy. Her doctor suggests she have a specific test which looks for genetic conditions in the child.
She must decide whether to have the test or not and whether the risks to the baby are acceptable.
She must decide if she can live with the uncertainty waiting on possible multiple test results.
If the test comes back positive, she must decide whether to have a second test to confirm the results.
If the second test is positive, she may need to determine whether to have a third test for final confirmation.
If she determines that the child has a genetic condition, she must choose to continue the pregnancy or abort.
If the condition is not compatible with life, she may have to decide whether to abort the child or continue the pregnancy for as long as the child is able to sustain life.
If the defect is surgically repairable, she must decide whether to risk surgery in utero or post-partum.
If she decides to continue the pregnancy, she must choose whether to parent or place it for adoption.
If she decides to abort and the child was normal, she must determine how to live with her actions.
If she decides to parent, she must decide how she will adapt her life to meet the needs of the child.
Here again, many choices are open prior to the choice to abort the baby.
It would be foolish to assume that the only choice in each of these four examples is the choice to abort or continue a pregnancy. It would be equally foolish to deny that people who believe that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder are antichoice. They would point to the many places along the path where choices were made that led to the ultimate choice of abortion.
So, we come to the real differences:
What is the standard by which choices should be weighed? The Bible? Feelings? Raging hormones? Circumstances? Family values learned in childhood? Something else?
At what point does a woman's right to choose end, and a baby's rights begin? Conception? Birth? Convenience? Infancy? Childhood? If that child is female, shouldn't a woman's right to choose include her rights too?
Should a woman and a man consider pregnancy outside of marriage (or inside of marriage where a baby is unwanted) a logical consequence of that relationship and accept the responsibility to choose life-giving options? Should it carry the same weight as the consequences of an illegal offense (do the crime, do the time) or bad choice in judgment?
Should we teach children that they are simply animals that must give in to their raging hormones, or should we encourage them to accept responsibility for their actions, practice self-control, and affirm their right to choose to remain celibate outside of marriage?
Should we support the individual who chooses to abstain from sex outside of marriage by honoring her or him, or continue to socially stigmatize them with labels like: frigid, old-fashioned, odd, "not normal", etc.
Should we continue to focus only the choice between abortion and life, or help individuals learn to consider the consequences of their actions before a pregnancy occurs.
The Bible says there is one standard by which we govern life's decision. The Bible says that sex outside of marriage is wrong. The Bible calls the marriage bed honorable and encourages sexual purity inside marriage and outside of marriage. The Bible calls abortion is murder. The Bible acknowledges life begins at conception. The Bible says that God opens and closes the womb; sends and ends life. The Bible calls children a blessing and the fruit of the womb His reward.
Even God acknowledges that we have the right to choose. Adam and Even chose to disobey God in the Garden and reaped the consequences of their sin. Each and every one of us is faced with chooses every day. Several time in the Bible, God admonishes us to choose life. In numerous places, God is specific about the choices we face on a variety of issues, the consequences of each choice, and which options are morally right or wrong. The Bible spells out the ultimate consequences for a life lived far from the plumline of God's moral law.
I'm not anti-choice. I simply feel one should make the right choices at the right time, for the right reasons, and accept the consequences whether positive or negative.
As a Christian, a minister of the Gospel, and an individual, I am in favor of the right to choose. As a birth professional, I choose life (birth) over death (abortion). As a parent, I pray that my children make the right decisions and work to provide them with a definitive standard of moral right and wrong. As a loving parent, I will choose to love my children even when they make wrong choices. As a sinner saved by grace, I will forgive others and not seek to play God by judging them. However, I will not fail to hold up the standard of biblical morality and affirm that what God calls "sin" is sin.
