Even God does not evoke such emotions when we doubt his existence. Some believe in Him, others don’t, and that’s it. In this case, faith or lack thereof does not end the argument. Every statement about abortion results in the fierce debate about whether to defend life or not, and if so, when it begins.
And at this point, no one stops at their worldview but has to convince the opponent to it. The majority agrees that life is the highest value. This is, of course, about human life. We tend to care less about other lives, although we are more eager to protect living species that are closer to humans, e.g. in case of the dogs, we are able to make impressive sacrifices in defense of their lives. The chicken evokes less empathy, and the carp or snail remain far behind.
And yet all of these lives are living beings unlike stones or even grass. So life is not equal to life? Well, definitely not. So maybe we want to consider that human life is an inviolable sanctity, and the commandment “thou shalt not kill” clearly teaches that there is no compromise here.
And yet in the Bible in the Book of Exodus we already have numerous examples of the death penalty, which the author recommends for various sins. So this prohibition against killing is a relative prohibition. There are many cases when just taking someone’s life is a commendable act. As a precaution, God allows these cases to be precisely enumerated.
The Church has taken thousands of lives in the name of some higher reason. Necessary defense is allowed today, though many of the biblical commands for capital punishment have been canceled. The death penalty in general has been universally canceled, let alone for such sins as disobeying the Sabbath, maligning parents, same-sex intercourse or marital infidelity.
The relativism of the Ten Commandments is a broader issue, but more important is the relativism of the validity of life. Basically, it begins at the moment of fusion of the egg cell with the sperm cell allowed to enter after being selected from a million others attacking the egg. It alone is not yet a life to be respected and protected. After all, every month most of it is excreted without mercy.
Furthermoe, these millions of sperm cells are not worthy of respect. After all, every onanist disposes of them without sentiments, having no idea of the criticism to which Onan, who was dropping semen on the ground, was subjected in the Bible. So it is only the connection that gives rise to life. But this portion of dividing cells in the uterus is far from being a human being.
The morning-after pill has nothing to do with killing children, because it works before the fusion of parental cells and before the beginning of zygote development. However, some fanatics claim that there already is a soul living in the sperm cell and suffering when it gets stuck in a condom. That is to say, a million such souls suffer even without a condom if one sperm cell succeeds and the rest face annihilation.
Whatever happens in the uterus after that, one must remember that it is not some laboratory bubble, but the female body, which is fully human, mature and respectable, and which possible suffering is incomparably greater than the presumed suffering of a sperm cell, egg, or proliferating zygote.
I do not want to argue with those who believe that it is God who bestowed a new life on two people and are thus held hostage by it. I just want to point out that this gift of life has developed and matured in the adult woman to such an extent that it is she who should be immeasurably more protected than those primordia developing in her belly.
After six weeks, these primordia begin to resemble a human being, and one can then wonder whether or not they are a separate entity. Until then, they are part of the mother’s body, and only she has the right to decide what she wants to do with this dependent biological phenomenon.
Defenders of life driven by their religious fanaticism often deceive people in an attempt to impose their point of view. They publish on the Internet and on scandalous billboards set up in public places shocking photos of dismembered bodies of operated unborn children from a much later stage of development. They use criminal terminology about ‘murdering children,’ ‘crimes,’ ‘genocide’ et al.
From California to the Urals, outraged public opinion, abetted by the fanatics, listens greedily to the stories about the disgraceful mothers and diabolical medical practices, demanding drastic penalties and laws that take away women’s rights to stand over their bodies. The inexcusable mistake of the Trump-appointed U.S. Supreme Court and the Duda-appointed Constitutional Court will weigh on the coming generations of mothers with terrible consequences.
Moreover, forcing women to give birth to children who are sick and genetically doomed to an early death is an incomprehensible cruelty of graybeards wielding power. This is a real crime. In addition, in order to cover it up, for example, in my homeland prenatal tests are forbidden. The same tests enable early detection of genetic defects and save not only the unfortunate mother, but also the terminally ill child from suffering, which the aforementioned graybeards do not dream of.
Their meddling in other people’s intimate lives and their efforts to control women’s sex lives for supposedly religious reasons are actually a pathology that would certainly be displeasing to the Creator of the world if such Creator existed and, in addition, was Love.
Written by Marek Weiss – author of more than a hundred theatrical and opera productions also present on the world stages from the USA through Europe to the Far East. Director of many theaters where he created an original opera theater recognized by Polish and foreign media as one of the most interesting phenomena in this field. Marek Weiss gradually withdrew from the directing profession to devote himself to literature. He is the author of several published and award-winning novels and hundreds of articles.
The article was originally published in Polish at: https://liberte.pl/aborcja/
Translated by Natalia Banaś