A letter to the editor in the Pioneer Press and dispatch by
Richard M. Powell, MD, Scandia
is an eloquent defense of the Church’s stand on Life and abortion. It is quoted in full below. The link at the top will take you to the PPD article, but links such as this have a short half-life.
“The moral equation” (July 7) presents several thoughtful comments on the abortion issue, but the writer misses the primary moral point. As pro-life advocates, we do not presume to impose our morals on anyone, rather we apply differently the historically mandated morality regarding the taking of human life. I am sure the writer agrees that destroying another human being is not only legally, but morally, wrong. If so, she holds to the same basic moral principle that I and other pro-life believers embrace. Where we differ is that we absolutely and unequivocally believe that life begins at conception, which is the central point of contention in the abortion debate.
Given our very defensible belief regarding the beginning of life, we have no choice but to advocate for the unborn. We stake no claim to moral superiority; we simply apply the nearly universally understood innate value of human life to the unborn, just as we do to the infant or toddler. We would be morally bankrupt to do otherwise.
Where the writer presents poignant reasons for people choosing abortion, one need only substitute the words “1-year-old” for the word “fetus” to understand our position. If we advocated, using a couple of her examples, that the woman of “tender age” or “strained family relationships” may choose to terminate her 1-year-old, there would be no debate at all.
I certainly agree that there are many unfortunate circumstances surroundingunwanted pregnancies, circumstances that
a compassionate society should address. Taking another human life, however, does not make that unwanted pregnancy a non-existent event, often does not alter those unfortunate circumstances and, for many women, it adds a lifelong burden of guilt.
Regarding the morality of contraception, it seems that the writer has accepted at face value the Democrats’ contrived “war on women.” Contraception was never the issue in the objections to the Obamacare mandates on contraception. The issue was, and is, one of religious freedom with contraception simply being the vehicle bringing that issue to the forefront.
I agree with the writer that we are indeed living in a moral wasteland. While I personally decry the moral decay exhibited by the drug culture and the sexual revolution and the decline of family values that accompany that decay, there can be no greater example of our fall as a morally decent and God-fearing nation than the genocide of abortion, which we have so regrettably endorsed.