What the Abortion Debate Misses

When it comes to contemporary issues dominating Christian focus and concern, there are two topics that generate the most interest: homosexuality and abortion. While there are many topics worthy of discussion and apprehension, it is these two topics that are currently making the most headlines. Hidden in the storylines of the past three weeks are separate plot lines along the abortion agenda across the globe that seem to have gone relatively unnoticed.
Several weeks ago BBC issued a story that contained within it several chilling statements about the mindset of abortionist agenda advancers including the notion that abortion is a form of justifiable family planning (you can read my previous article on the BBC article by clicking here). That same week Oregon passed the most pro-abortion laws to be found across the country that increased availability and funding for it. And this week it was the topic of abortion that revealed the internal strife within the Democratic Party. As the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee expressed a willingness to fund candidates who are anti-abortion, the New York Times ran its own article proclaiming one’s abortion stance as a litmus test for being part of the nation’s liberal party.These most recent stories are a continued demonstration of things that are missing from the abortion debate.
While generally speaking the arguments for and against have continuously remained the same, there are several key points that are continuously ignored in the debate. In fact, the debate does the following:
  • Ignores Alternatives: Interestingly, the position that calls itself pro-choice denies a person’s right to choose. Consider the law in Oregon that uses public funding to pay for abortions. As taxpayers, Christians who may not agree with this have no ability to choose where that money is directed. Even the New York Times’s article this week suggests if you are not openly involved in this agenda you should not be able to choose your ability to join the Democratic Party (we could also make the case that this is a form of discrimination, especially in the case of the Oregon law’s mandate that does not exempt anyone for religious reasons).
  • Ignores Abortion: Second, proponents ignore the realities of what abortion is. Instead, they have chosen to misdirect people by redefining the debate about secondary issues.
  • Ignores Affliction: By redefining the issue and detracting from the abortive aspect of abortion, the focus is also taken off of its damaging effects. It denies the affliction and harm that take place.
  • Ignores Accountability: Finally, it ignores the concept of accountability. First, as demonstrated by BBC’s article, there is no accountability for one’s actions. The expectation is that a person does not have to deal with the consequences of choices. Furthermore, doctor’s have no need to be accountable for what they do or do not do. Recent years have demonstrated that providers can do as they please and even be filmed admitting it and fault will be redirected not at those doing wrong, but at the whistleblowers instead.
At varying times these missing points may be briefly discussed, by overall they are either overlooked or suppressed in favor of drawing attention elsewhere.
The abortion debate misses these four very important points and should cause us to recognize three missing aspects. The first is consideration. Both sides fail to give meaningful reflection to the debate and often are quick to respond instead with anger and hostility. Such a reaction leads to the second missing element, logic. In the ignored aspects above we can repeatedly see how logic fails to be an influential characteristic when rationalizing the debate. Finally, the debate is missing compassion. Often the debate is characterized by disrespect, anger, and selfishness. Compassion doesn’t mean compromise, but rather impacts two areas. First, it impacts the way discussions are handled. Secon,d compassion causes everyone to consider the affliction abortion causes to the unborn child, to those undergoing the abortion, and those partaking in it (and yes, there are consequences for those partaking in it whether we want to admit it or not).
There is much lacking from the discussion within the abortion conflict. In a fallen world this is anticipated, but that does not make it excusable. At stake are lives, making this a serious issue and therefore it requires seriousness in both our disposition and our discussion.
To read articles on some of the points discussed here, click the following links:

Photo ‘Little Lives’ courtesy of user norsez Oh and Flickr.