The Pro-Life Response
The abortion issue is a non-ending spiral of contention not only in the Philippines but all over the world, especially when one speaks of the marvelous and elusive power of "freedom of choice". It is a power one can muster to ravel a tapestry of available options in life. It has become the snippy, crafty and stirring battlecry of pro-choicers to justify the Abortion Bill.
A close look at the phrase reveals a seamy, quiet, seething rage. It is about a raw outrage for the injustice done to rape and incest victims that is transformed into an abhorrence of pregnancy. This phrase is cunningly twisted by the pro-choice camp to mean: save the mother by eliminating the child. By this definition, freedom has simply become a choice, and choice is c categorically reduced to mean, convenience. Anything that interferes with one's freedom is seen as an inconvenience. Crisis pregnancy is an inconvenience. Thus, terminate the pregnancy, and be free! "Freedom of choice" therefore has become a false dilemma, an imposed obligation to make a blurred choice where there appears to be no choice at all.
| What Would You Decide? The father has syphilis, and the mother has tuberculosis. They had four children. The first one was blind, the second one died, the third one was deaf and mute and the fourth one had tuberculosis. The mother is now pregnant with her fifth child but is willing to have an abortion if you determine that she should. What would you decide for her? If you choose abortion, congratulations! You've just murdered Beethoven! Medical history from: R.C. Agnew USC Medical School |
We need to redeem the true meaning of the freedom of choice. We need to proclaim that "choice" is adverse especially when the fundamental right to life is at stake . We need to reaffirm our commitment that the most viable choice is to love both the mother and the baby in her womb.
Sister Pilar Verzosa, RGS, National Coordinator of Pro-life Philippines replied to the invitation of Congressman Roy Padilla to send comments regarding the House Bill. Pro-life advocates believe that the legalization of abortion is not necessary to accomplish the government's concern for the mothers in crisis pregnancies.
According to Sister Pilar Verzosa, indirect abortion has always been allowed in cases when the mother's life is in danger. Everything must be done to save the life of the mother, because if she dies, the baby will also die. Whatever medication or procedure to cure or save the mother should be given. If the baby dies along the way, this is considered a most unfortunate death, something that was never intended or induced. However, direct abortion has never been a way of curing the mother. In fact, it often entails more risks to the mother. Catholic Church teachings and Bioethics support this stand therefore, no law is necessary to implement it.
What most pro-lifers are also afraid of is that once people know that "abortion is now legal", this will now be applied to various cases, not only to the special cases mentioned. This will be the start of the "abortion is the answer mentality". In the countries that have legalized abortion, the original intent was only for "special cases" due to the compassion for women. But today, their abortion statistics show less than 1% of the cases are due to rape, defective babies, or health of the mother. The 99% are for family planning or women's choice" reasons. Those countries are also wrought with women suffering from pos
Pro-life organizations further asserts that if the government would want to reach out to women with unwanted pregnancies, help should come in providing counselling services, education programs, maternal and child care services, economic and social development programs that would put a stop to rape, incest, sex outside of marriage and other causes of unwanted pregnancies. Abortion or the "quick fix" is therefore not the solution.
No comments:
Post a Comment