In his column today, Ross Douthat captures well the paradox of how we view the fetus today in America:
In every era, there’s been a tragic contrast between the burden of unwanted pregnancies and the burden of infertility. But this gap used to be bridged by adoption far more frequently than it is today. Prior to 1973, 20 percent of births to white, unmarried women (and 9 percent of unwed births over all) led to an adoption. Today, just 1 percent of babies born to unwed mothers are adopted, and would-be adoptive parents face a waiting list that has lengthened beyond reason.
Be sure to read the rest of it here.
January 3rd, 2011 | 11:53 am
How about this for a paradox?
The sanctity professed for unborn human life is at odds with the diminished quality of life that the person of unwanted birth is likely to endure.
On the whole, the pro-life position on early-term abortion contributes to human suffering rather than human flourishing. When it comes to late-term abortions, the question of fetal personhood becomes salient and there is an debate to be had there.
January 3rd, 2011 | 12:17 pm
Um, no. Those who believe the sanctity of human life without differentiation are not the ones neglecting and abusing the children. You could have a 100% ethic of sanctity of all human life and no children harmed, if people didn’t abuse or neglect children in their care. It’s not the life ethic that creates the suffering, and it only “contributes” to it in the same way that not killing all humans painlessly before birth contributes to human suffering.
January 4th, 2011 | 10:43 am
I totally disagree that those who have ‘diminished quality of life’ do not have the same dignity and value as anyone else. Do you really think they would prefer to have never been born?
January 4th, 2011 | 6:34 pm
Any explanation will have to include why these souls with “diminished quality of life” do not kill themselves.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact