Abortion as self-love

The Dobbs vs Jackson decision on abortion has stirred up a hornet’s nest of pro- abortionists’ rage and media attention. We are now hearing all kinds of rhetoric and misinformation about the loss of women’s rights, the tyranny of the Supreme Court, and on and on.

As I opined on a previous post there seems to be little to no discussion in the media about the loss of a baby’s life. The concern expressed is always in regard to the rights of the woman. Many in the medical community have even embraced this narrative.

Self-love

The “My body My choice” mantra and excessive rage over the potential loss of the so called “right to abortion” raises the question of what is driving such passion?  The testimony before the House of Representatives Oversight Committee from Sarah Lopez provides some insight.  Lopez is an abortion “storyteller” of the pro-abortion organization “We Testify.”

Lopez testified that “My abortion was the best decision I ever made. It was an act of self- love.” The term “self-love” embodies the self-absorbed frame of reference of many pro- abortion advocates.  It exhorts a sense of extreme self-centeredness.

Under Roe v Wade a false constitutional right was granted to women.  They were ‘freed’ from any obligations to others, including their family or unborn child. A woman’s only obligation was to herself.

But the Dobbs decision ruled there was no such right. It opened the door for addressing the constitutional right to life of the unborn and consequent restrictions on abortion.

For someone who is self-absorbed, the Court’s decision lighted a fire of indignation. That outrage reflects the radical individualism and self-proclaimed autonomy embraced by many pro-abortion women.

Consequences

This type of individualism turns the whole historical and natural mother/child relationship on its ear. It becomes a non-relationship. It pits mother against child.

The unborn baby, however, is not the women’s body but a separate human entity. The baby requires protection regardless of the circumstances of conception. As such, the term “motherly love” is not just a cliché. It is at the core of that mother/child relationship.

This type of relationship is difficult to accept and respond to if the priority concern is one’s self. The unborn child can then be discarded because he/she is inconvenient.  The child is simply getting in the way of a mother’s autonomy and self-fulfillment.

In turn, such an attitude throws other relationships in jeopardy. The sexual bond for procreation between a man and women within marriage is also based on mutual obligations.  Parents both deny self in service to the needs of their children, both born and unborn. The distorted sense of a mother’s autonomy destroys this relationship as well.

Given the frame of reference described, such ego-centeredness can be a major cause for the rage.  We are seeing this in the seething reaction to the Dobbs decision. It’s a lashing out against a decision which implies one’s self may not get her way.

Unfortunately, such an attitude makes it more difficult to discuss abortion or the Dobbs case in a reasoned manner. But such a dialog is necessary if we are to change the hearts and minds of pro-abortionists.

Saint Mother Teresa

I quote Mother Teresa in many of my posts and her words are worth listening to again.

“But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? “

“Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.”