Dear fans in Newspaperland: Cousin Reggie has sent a few questions to me, which I dutifully want to answer. I have already dealt with one in my previous column. He seems bent on asking me contentious questions, but I will try to respond as rationally and politely as possible. I don't want to be rude or ignorant in my responses. There is really no place for that, is there?
I really like writing witty columns, ignoring the deeper, more pressing matters. However, from time to time, someone somewhere needs to speak up for what I see a serious injustice in health or education (for starters). My motive is sincere, a good place to start.
He writes me: "Hey, El Fungo. Do you care to comment on that abortion brouhaha in Georgia, as well as in other places?
Reggie, old boy, you sure like controversy, don't you? Do you know that if you keep on bringing up these taboo subjects they may call you names, and lump you in with wingnuts like me?
Whether it's the life of a living child (vaccination) or a pre-born child (abortion), the stakes are too high to simply turn a blind eye.
It's just that it can be such a heated, irrational discussion that it's almost not worth the headache.
But on the other hand, I feel a moral duty to speak of the killing of innocent babies (or better, infanticide). That's tad inflammatory, but this is a highly inflammatory issue.
You know, dear distant relative of mine, the real issue is not a woman's right over her own body, though we would discuss it endlessly if it was that basic. But it is that simple; it's just that the so-called pro-choice faction are focusing on the wrong issue.
The matter hinges on whether the "fetus" within is a living human being or not a person. Everything in this argument starts (and ends) right there. Or at least it should.
If that fetus within (though I use this word loosely; I would rather say "life [or baby] within") was a mere blob of cells, it would be no big deal, wouldn't it? But I have often wondered why the medical professionals perform in utero corrective surgical procedures on what is just a blob? Why the fuss over caring for a mother who goes into early labour, if what she is delivering is just a cluster of cells?
Why is that fetus within subject to an ultra-sound , gender identity, and even a possible name, if it is really just extra flesh within the mother? Even using the word "fetus" (instead of "baby") minimizes the reality of a living, human being.
It really boils down to terms: blob or baby? Cells or child? The mother is indeed a significant player in this matter, but real issue is the child within.
I'm not sure if you have sensed some serious inconsistencies when it comes to why people kill, or permit others to kill, a defenceless little human baby. That action is barbaric, sadistic, unnecessary, and inconsistent with all that decent humans stands for.
Again, that is really provocative talk, but this is a really a provocative matter.
If that human being is not wanted by its birth mother, there are tens of thousands of families that would be willing to adopt it and raise it.
The state of Georgia (and now others) nailed it: Blobs don't have heartbeats, but living human beings do. Good on Georgia. It would be great if our provinces had the same courage.
No comments:
Post a Comment