Abortion:  The premature ending or abandonment of an undertaking.

When referring to a human being, abortion is the ending or abandonment of a person’s life prematurely, specifically in the womb of the mother.  After all,

  • One could hardly argue that the “fetus” growing in the womb is not alive.
  • One would also have difficulty arguing that the living “fetus” in the womb is a dog, or a cat, or something else; we all know it’s a living human being.
  • Nor can one logically argue that the living “fetus” in the womb is a part of the mother’s body because the DNA of the two are different (this is made obvious when the “fetus” is male).

Hence abortion must be – by definition – the premature ending of a human life that is separate and distinct from the mother.
Another term for such an act is “murder.”

So what about a woman’s “choice”?  That choice still exists:  She can choose to act responsibly and avoid the potential for pregnancy, or choose not to do so.  What she cannot choose to do is avoid the consequences of her actions.  What she cannot choose is to commit murder for the sake of her own convenience trying to escape the consequences of her actions.  (Even if she chooses to have an abortion, she will experience unavoidable, long-lasting negative personal consequences due to that choice.)

The same moral standards apply to men as well.  If the consequence of sexual activity is a baby, men are equally responsible for that baby’s welfare as women.  Regrettably, too many men try to avoid their responsibility.  That is unmanly and wrong.

These same principles apply to all kinds of activities:

  • A person can choose to drink poison or do drugs, but none can avoid the consequences.
  • A person can drive recklessly but cannot avoid the consequences.
  • A person can do foolish things like jumping off a bridge, but cannot avoid the consequences.

Why should sexual activity be any different?

Unfortunately we are all fallen sinners and at times act irresponsibly and make mistakes.  Why should an innocent victim bear the burden of responsibility and consequence for another person’s folly?

Amazingly, our loving God did exactly that.  He willingly accepted and bore the consequences of our folly when Jesus Christ, the innocent Son of God, was crucified in our place.  (What He did does not give us the right to expect an innocent babies to bear the consequences of our folly.  In fact, He demonstrated how much we should care for them.)  All He asks in return is that

  • We believe in Him
  • Learn from our mistakes, stop acting irresponsibly, and ask for forgiveness.

Have you put your faith in Jesus?  We all have a choice.  Always.

All is not as it looks


  1. Lili
    August 3, 2016 at 6:01 pm

    I’m not going to argue here whether abortion is right or wrong but I want to point out that it is not the same as murder, at least not in the early stage of pregnancy.
    The fetus is not the part of woman’s body – this is obvious. The fetus is DEPENDENT on women’s body. In the same way as during transfusion the person receiving blood is dependent on the donor. Because bodily autonomy is the basic human right, the person offering blood has the right to withdraw transfusion even if that would mean death of the patient on the receiving end. In other words, a person’s rights to live can’t violate another person’s right to body autonomy.
    We might argue that refusing or stopping transfusion of blood for a dying person is unethical and selfish but we can’t say it is murder. In the same way we can’t say that early abortion is murder. Chemical abortion shuts down the flow of nutrients from the mother to the fetus. Ofcourse that causes the death of the fetus but not because the woman murdered it but because she refused to sustain it with her body – which she has a right to do as she has a right to her body autonomy.
    It’s understandable that some people focus heavily on the fetus and they would like to sustain it even against the wishes of the woman.
    The problem is that law needs to be consequent and makes logical sense. So if we want to refuse woman the right to her body autonomy, we need to extend that rule to other people and other situations.
    In this case a person who sign up for organ donation should have no right to change the decision and should be forced to give organs against their wishes. In the end they did offer their organs and should take consequences of their decision. In the end human life is more important and refusing to offer organs to sustain someone’s life is murder.

    • August 11, 2016 at 1:35 pm

      Thank you for your comment. I agree it’s pointless for us to argue. If we agree that a “fetus” is not a clump of cancer cells but an unborn person, then I would like to make the following observations:
      1. If a mother withholds food from her born child so that he starves to death, she will be held responsible for child abuse and possibly charged with murder because he is DEPENDENT on her and it is her RESPONSIBILITY to take care of that child.
      However, if a mother refuses to provide blood for a life-saving transfusion to her child she will not be charged, because the transfusion is a VOLUNTARY GIFT, not a responsibility. We could apply the same logic to unborn persons and conclude that actively terminating the life of an unborn person (by whatever method) is at least child abuse and potentially murder.
      2. If a pregnant woman is murdered so that the unborn person dies, the suspect can be charged with double murder. Clearly our laws consider at least some unborn to be persons with all the rights that go along with that status. Our Declaration of Independence specifically identifies three inalienable personal rights: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Life is the first and most important right; one that cannot be taken from anyone. Nowhere does the Declaration of Independence identify the choice to terminate someone else’s life as a right. In fact it’s called murder. Which brings us back to the responsibility situation discussed above.
      3. Lastly, please consider the following situation: There are two people stranded on an island. They have one loaf of bread between them. Jesus teaches us to share our blessings with each other. (Mat 5:40, Luk 6:29) Therefore the one with the bread is called to share his bread with the one who has none, even if it causes hardship for the one sharing. Therefore one could argue that Biblically the mother is morally obligated to share her sustenance with her unborn child. Furthermore, since it is impossible for a pregnant woman to naturally withhold sustenance to the unborn, she MUST share sustenance with the unborn. It is not a voluntary gift but a natural functioning of her body. Thus the transfusion analogy breaks down.

      I understand this is a difficult and sensitive subject. In the end, each one of us must deal with this issue personally between God and us individually. My opinion doesn’t matter. God is the one who decides what is right or wrong. He is the one who will judge each of us righteously. So please let me close by simply quoting His words:

      Jer 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; …
      Psa 139:13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.
      Isa 49:5 And now the LORD says, he who formed me from the womb to be his servant, …
      Eph 1:3-4 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, …

      According to God, life actually begins before conception! Now that’s truly mind-blowing.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: