Jump directly to the content
Jump directly to the content
No Exceptions: The Case for a Consistent Pro-Life Ethic

No Exceptions: The Case for a Consistent Pro-Life Ethic


Sep 12 2012
Is unborn life not worth protecting in cases of rape and incest?

The trouble with "exceptions" on abortion—whether one is pro-life "with exceptions" or pro-choice "with exceptions"—is that exceptions make doling out abortions seem as capricious as Seinfeld's Soup Nazi: "No abortion for you. Next!"

With the recent blunder of a pro-life politician hedging on the rape and abortion question, the "hard cases" in the abortion debate have gotten the pro-life movement in trouble again.

While well-intended (and politically prudent), the attempt to demonstrate compassion in cases of rape and incest by taking a "pro-life with exceptions" position commits the fatal errors of ignorance and inconsistency.

Consider the mental gymnastics exercised by pro-lifers uncomfortable with prohibiting abortion in cases of rape and incest: on one hand, you have those who make exceptions in such cases (thereby putting the lie to the sanctity of life claim); on the other you have those who try to make the case that pregnancies don't even occur in such cases, not the "legitimate" ones, anyway. (Note: Medically necessary abortions done to save the life of the mother are not in the same category as "elective abortions," which were made constitutional by Roe v. Wade and now constitute the vast majority of abortions.) Whether the "exception" is a victim of rape or incest, pregnant with a child who has an abnormality, or simply not too far along to trouble the pro-choice conscience, the result is essentially the same: a choice permitted by virtue of an arbitrary line rather than a clear, consistent principle, a la the capricious Soup Nazi. Once begun, such parsing—of abortion, of human life—can go on ad infinitum.

Such capriciousness, even if motivated by compassion, is inherently cruel. It generates an air of judgmentalism in deeming some situations appropriate for abortion (rape or incest) and some not (consensual sex). The implied judgment spills over like boiling soup onto all cases, even the "exceptional" ones. When even more parsing occurs to determine which cases of rape are "legitimate" and which are not, justifiable outrage only grows.

Indeed, pro-choice advocates have long charged that opposing abortion is rooted more in punishing women for sexual behavior deemed immoral than in protecting human life. It's hard to argue otherwise when some claim to be pro-life but favor exceptions based not on the sanctity of life but on the sexual situation surrounding the pregnancy. Such positions, ironically, are based on choice—namely, the role that choice plays in the circumstances leading to the pregnancy.

Comments

Displaying 1–10 of 69 comments

Merilyn Emanuel

October 09, 2012  4:33am

Americans have supported legalized abortion based on the perception that the “hard cases” are more common than they really are.

Report Abuse

Jazmine Scherer

October 06, 2012  1:53am

I would support the integrity of a woman’s moral will where it concerns her body with no exceptions as well.

Report Abuse

Tim Donovan

October 05, 2012  12:16pm

I am a pro-life Christian, and I not only oppose abortion (except in the rare cases needes to save the mother's life) but also oppose capital punishment, favor government programs to aid the poor, elderly disabled, and others in need, without creating a culture of dependency. I I also oppose war, except under extraordinary circumstances). It is a biological fact that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization; ant standard biology text will confirm this. In terms of the quwestion of personhood, I really don't think it's relevant to the debate. Consider this. Princeton Prof. Peter Singer, an advocate of legal abortion, also favors legal infanticide for newborn infants. Without being prideful, I have a degree in Special Ed, and have worked with disabled persons for 20 years. I'm now partly disabled myself. Yes, some people do suffer from being disabled, but on the whole, I've found that they find life worth living. I certainly sympathize with victims of rape. I know a woman who was raped, and she and her physician husband adopted a child with anecephaly (most of the babies brain was missing). Yet, they still cherished their child. Even atheists oppose abortion. Journalist Nat Hentoff, a self-described Jewish atheist and former Board Member of the NY Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, is pro-life. Rev. Martin Luther King, leader of the commendable civil rights movement, was loined by people of many races and creeds. He opposed legal abortion-on-demand. This has been attested by his niece, Rev. Alveda King, a woman who has had, and regretted, 2 abortions. There is a long history of political involvement in moral issues, from the abolitionists, the civil rights movement. Liberal Rev. Al Sharpton has run for President, as well as conservative Rev. Pat Robertson. Some 3000 pro-life agencies nationwide provide women and their developing babies with care. Most are staffed by volunteers, receive little government funding, and often provide care both before AND after birth. Yes, illegal abortion is a tragedy. But consider these remarks from the late Dr, Bernard Nathanson. He performed over 5,000 abortions, and was the co-founder of "Pro-Choice America." In his 1979 book, "Aborting America," he admitted that he and his fellow "pro-choice" activists deliberately grossly exaggerated such maternal deaths. President Obama has done some good, and Mitt Romney is hardly perfect. However, the President's HHS regulations will require that Catholic and other religious hospitals cover employee health benefits that will force them to dispense abortive drugs. According to a 6/16/12 AP report, one out of six Americans receive healthcare from catholic hospitals. When these close-and sadly, they will-think of the resulting misery. Remaining hospitlas will be overwhelmed by people in need of critical care. I might add that thousands of people die from overdoses of cocaine and heroin annually. Would it be wise to legalize these drugs. The pro-life movement, in the short term, does need to take an incremental approach to banning most abortions. But our society should have the long range goal of protecting both pregnant women and their developing babies, and care and support (both through pro-life agencies and goverment) in helping people in difficult circumstances.

Report Abuse

alint

September 28, 2012  12:51am

When the woman I love broke up with me, my world fell apart. I had gone to several casters and I got no results or insufficient ones. I found winexbackspell@gmail.com and gave another try to retrieve my lover and restore the passionate relationship I had with her. I’m so glad I did and trusted him. He performed a spiritual cleansing to banish negative energies and cast a love spell. After 4days, the man I missed dearly started to call me and told me few days ago that she still loves me and wants to try again. Thank him fo me.

Jim Foxvog

September 21, 2012  10:07pm

A consistent pro-life ethic also opposes capital punishment, war, and the poisoning of the environment, and works toward alleviating hunger and health care for all. Pro-life should not end at birth.

Report Abuse

RAYMOND BENOIT

September 21, 2012  1:18am

I do thank you, Karen. A very hard and emotional subject for many of us..

Report Abuse

KAREN SWALLOW PRIOR

September 20, 2012  9:48pm

@Gayle, I am so sorry for what happened to you.

Report Abuse

RAYMOND BENOIT

September 20, 2012  3:58pm

We have convictions, but because of the legislation and laws passed in the last 2 years, to me, an important question is WHEN should the government step in to protect life? I lived in a time in this country when contraception was illegal, now to some, it's still immoral and sinful, but it's lawful. The Personhood Ammendment protects life at conception and, so far, the voters are not convinced this should be forced on all women with penalty. President Bush signed a bill banning late-term abortion, which I believe to be an appropriate government reponse. I was raped almost 50 years ago, before "legal" abortion or morning-after pills, but God was merciful. I resent it when politicians speak of carrying a pregnancy from rape as making lemon aid out of lemons. I do admire the ladies that have made that choice with all my heart.

Report Abuse

kellerie

September 20, 2012  7:18am

I have had 6 miscarriages, all of them between 7 and 10 weeks. At this point, the fetus had a heartbeat, but did not have brain function. I thought about the Bible verse that states "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart" (Jeremiah 1:5) If God knew each of my children in the womb, then why did he take each of them away so soon? The conclusion I have come to is this. God put each of those children there for a purpose, and they served their purpose in that brief time. None of them were meant for life. I believe that God has a plan, and he knows already how this plan will work out. We may be experiencing things for the first time, and not know where it will take us, but God knows. That said, I think that God knows already which babies will be aborted, well before the abortion takes place. If he knows this will happen, why does he allow that woman to get pregnant in the first place? Well, one, because God gave us free will. He doesn't want us to make decisions because the law tells us to; he wants us to exercise our power of thought and make the right decision for us. And, more importantly, that baby is there for a reason, which means that abortion takes place for a reason. Maybe the mother is supposed to learn something from the experience that will inform her life later on. Maybe the experience is supposed to affect the doctor performing it. Maybe it will be life changing for a person the mother tells the story to 30 years from now. All I know is, everything happens for a reason. God knows what decisions we will make well before we make them. Everything is part of his plan. I do not think that women should choose to have an abortion. But I have never gotten pregnant through rape. I have never been a pregnant 15 year old. I have never been pregnant with a severely disabled baby. I have no idea what decisions I would make in those situations, so I refuse to judge those who are. I think abortion should be legal. I think we should educate the youth of today so they can make good decisions, and not find themselves in desperate situations. And finally, I think that we should trust that God knows what he is doing.

Report Abuse

KAREN SWALLOW PRIOR

September 19, 2012  8:17pm

@kmichele: Wow. That was powerfully, eloquently, and insightfully expressed! "We live in a country with more rights, opportunities and expectations than half the known world. Why can't we extend grace? Why cant we choose life?" Thank you.

Report Abuse

 *

1000 character limit

* Comments may be edited for tone and clarity.

See All 69 Comments
To add a comment you need to be a registered user or Christianity Today subscriber.
Login
or
Subscribe
or
Register
More from Her.menutics
The Seminary Gender Gap

The Seminary Gender Gap

Why we should be concerned that women remain outnumbered in theological education.
The Real Value of Sex

The Real Value of Sex

Examining the lies that sex is worth nothing or sex is worth everything.
Suburbia Needs Jesus, Too

Suburbia Needs Jesus, Too

A woman's take on the New Radicals.
Angelina Jolie's Breasts and the Bravery of Letting Go

Angelina Jolie's Breasts and the Bravery of Letting Go

Refusing to let beauty become a trap.
Get Instant Access
Christianity Today Magazine
Subscribe now for a year (10 issues) at $24.95 for print, iPad, and instant web access.

International Orders

Include results from Christianity Today
Browse Archives:

So Hot Right Now

Are Women Really Saved through Childbearing?

Mother's Day, infertility, and redemption.

Follow Us

What We're Reading

CT eBooks and Bible Studies