New York’s New Law Isn’t Abortion Extremism, It’s Abortion Consistency

New York’s New Law Isn’t Abortion Extremism, It’s Abortion Consistency

When we call late-term abortion 'extreme,' we imply that there is a more moderate abortion position, something more palatable; this is not true.
Sam Riley
By

Infanticide and late-term abortion are easily criticized as barbaric, and abortion supporters are determined to give us every opportunity to do so. Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Del. Kathy Tran, and Gov. Ralph Northam have been one-upping each other to be the most supportive of killing the oldest babies.

But by only showing outrage with abortion when it’s on 6-pound babies, conservatives are displaying ageism of their own. It’s been a long time since this level of outrage at abortion has been sustained––the buzz around New York and Virginia’s new laws is only now starting to die down after nearly a month. It’s been re-upped by all but three Democrat senators voting against a U.S. Senate bill to require medical care for babies who survive an abortion. But it shouldn’t take Democrats embracing infanticide for us to become outraged.

Ageism should, of course, be expected from the left. They’re quite open about their lethal discrimination against the young and small. However, even more troubling is the somewhat ignorant bigotry coming from the right, people who ought to know better. Needless to say, ripping a third-trimester baby apart is thoroughly grotesque and evil, but the thought of sucking an any-size child out of the womb at a force 20 times that of the average household vacuum cleaner ought to fill us with the same level of rage and dismay.

Abortion Is Inherently Extreme

If the headlines tell us anything, New York just crossed the line into “extremism,” but what exactly is extremist about late-term abortion when considering the political left’s underlying philosophical dogmatism? Nothing. Embracing 40-week abortions is simply a consistent application of their values.

They have long maintained that one is awarded rights by virtue of his development. When one abortion supporter draws the line at a heartbeat, another draws it at viability, and yet another draws it at sentience, by what possible standard can anyone decry one as wrong or qualitatively worse than the other? If we operate on a human rights spectrum, there is no philosophical or moral grounds to decry New York but applaud a conservative state like Alabama. Both have submitted to the Supreme Court’s self-appointed authority to legalize murder, and they apply equally arbitrary standards for determining which humans are legal persons.

The tendency to be more angry at the killing of babies who look more like us is understandable. That’s part of the human condition, and something our reform-minded predecessors have lost blood, sweat, and tears to correct. But to treat the killing of 8-month-old babies differently than the killing of 2-month-old babies is the definition of ageism. It’s incoherent discrimination.

In our haste to denounce New York and Virginia’s advocacy for 40-week abortions and infanticide, we have adopted rhetoric that betrays our case. When we call late-term abortion “extreme,” we imply that there is a more moderate abortion position, something more palatable for a just society. But can we really believe that abortion is ever more acceptable? Sure, a later abortion might involve more blood and gore, but it’s unreasonable and immoral to say that filling a bucket with blood is worse than filling a cup or a petri dish with it in the process of killing an innocent human being.

We must realize a fundamental truth: late-term abortion is not “extremism.” Abortion is extremism. Fighting fire with fire makes sense, but fighting ageism with ageism does not. We wouldn’t fight racism with racism. The pot calling the kettle a less-valuable-than-white but still-shouldn’t-be-enslaved black is hardly a defensible position. Value spectrums are not only nonsensical, they’re immoral. Abraham Lincoln said it best.

You say A. is white, and B. is black. It is color, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.

You do not mean color exactly? You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and, therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.

But, say you, it is a question of interest; and, if you can make it your interest; you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you.

Abortion Is Tyranny of the Old Over the Young

In terms of abortion, one could say: You say A. is old, and B. is young. It is age, then; the older having the right to kill the younger? Take care, by this rule you are to be killed by the first person you meet, with further development than your own.

You do not mean age exactly? You mean the born are more self-aware than the preborn, and, therefore have the right to kill them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be killed by the first person you meet, with greater self-awareness than you have.

But, say you, it is a question of bodily autonomy; and, if you can make it about your bodily autonomy; you have the right to kill another. Very well. And if someone makes it an issue of their personal freedom and autonomy, she has the right to kill you.

Unsurprisingly, a culture that has swallowed secular materialism hook, line, and sinker simply has no grounds for moral outrage. If there is no God, we are ultimately left to a society dependent on power and emotion alone. If good and right are individually subjective, why, then, it’s perfectly acceptable for some to decide there’s nothing wrong with killing a defenseless human.

Christianity, on the other hand, has a very good reason for telling you that it’s wrong to rip apart a little baby at any stage: we are made in the Imago Dei or the Image of God. To murder a human being at any stage not only does a horrible injustice to a child made by God, but it blasphemes God by lying about him. If we are his representatives, and we murder, we are in effect calling God a murderer. But to a materialistic culture, drawing lines based on one’s preference of age, sex, or race can’t be considered immoral, because we are all blobs of cells to the materialist. The only difference between you and a two-week-old baby in that paradigm is that one has more atoms.

When we call late-term abortion extreme, we have dropped the deadly poison of relativism into the collective punchbowl, and everyone dies in this particularly stupid battle of wits. Killing human beings is never moderate. It is always extremism. So be angry that New York aborts small babies, but be angrier that New York and your entire country allows the abortion of any babies.

Sam Riley is the content manager and field captain for Created Equal, an anti-abortion non-profit organization that focuses on education and cultural engagement.

Copyright © 2019 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.