One of the most unfeeling and unthinking pro-abortion rants in recent memory appeared on July 26 in Michigan State University’s newspaper. A column by MSU sophomore Shane Krouse attempted to offer up an open-and-shut case for abortion-on-demand but wound up as more of an emotional tirade against pro-lifers than a reasonably articulated thesis for abortion. Don’t get me wrong: I think it’s wonderful that a person from my generation would take the time to put pen to paper on this issue. Even though I strongly disagree with Mr. Krouse, I respect him as a fellow human being. Unfortunately, he is unwilling to extend that same respect to the “least among us” – the 45 million unborn boys and girls who have been butchered in this nation since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. That is one of the most significant differences between pro-lifers and abortion advocates – a sincere, deep-down respect for human life, regardless of its size or development.
OK, on to Mr. Krouse’s column itself. He begins by falsely attributing the scientifically-vindicated notion that life begins at conception to the “fundamentalist community.” This kind of leading is blatantly duplicitous. Consider Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry’s own statement during the ’04 elections: “I oppose abortion, personally. I don’t like abortion. I believe life does begin at conception.” Last time I checked, John Kerry is far from a card carrying member of the “fundamentalist community.” In fact, he’s the most liberal man to ever run for the U.S. presidency. Yet he candidly admitted that life begins at conception. Instead of lambasting the pro-life community, perhaps Mr. Krouse should direct some pointed criticism at his own presidential candidate for making such a rhetorical faux pas. After all, pro-abortionists cannot afford to admit that life begins at conception without losing significant moral ground. If life begins at conception, an unborn child is alive through all nine months of pregnancy; if an unborn child is alive, it just might be a human being; and if an unborn child is a human being, there is the remote possibility that he or she has “a right to life.” Read the rest of this entry »
