Last week, Loyola Life erected thousands of blue and pink flags to symbolize the abortions performed each day in the United States. Last year, the same display yielded several unhappy letters to the editor. A few people expressed dismay, not simply at the opinions expressed, but also about the method of expression. I would like to commend the organization and challenge their critics.
Why would anyone object to such a display? I have most commonly heard people refer to it as “offensive” if they disagree. In an age of South Park and explicit rap, do tiny flags really offend?
I believe that those who say they are offended mean something else entirely. I think those who say they are offended are made uncomfortable.
Even if you are for abortion rights, not many people like the idea of abortion. More and more people have seen the new 3-D ultrasounds which make it visually and emotionally clear that a fetus is a baby. Seeing those flags in the quad reminds people that abortions end life.
I understand the reasons some people give for being for abortion rights. They often voice concerns for women’s health and freedom. I disagree with many positions held by the majority of Christian anti-abortion voters. But isn’t a display like Loyola Life’s the kind of political and social statement students should be making?
As a libertarian, I believe in private education, legalization of marijuana, I oppose the war and support tax cuts, and I believe that abortion ends a life. I say this only to demonstrate that opposing abortion is not a position reserved for fundamentalists or those on the extreme right. We need not accept our political positions in pre-packaged agendas.
To me, it seems clear that the question of abortion is not about the government’s role or the right of women to control their bodies.
The question of abortion is whether the fetus is a person who deserves legal protection. If the fetus is not a person, then abortion should be no different than a root canal. If the fetus is a person then millions of innocents have died at the hands of their mothers.
If a fetus’ heartbeat stops, is that not death? If a fetus, with a separate brain and nervous system, flinches in pain during an abortion, should that not suggest that we re-examine our laws that claim it is simply “tissue”? If a heartbeat, brain and sense perceptions do not make us human, are we not all simply “tissue”?
If you disagree with Loyola Life, I hope to see similarly engaged students making their opinions known. All I ask is those students for abortion rights answer the legitimate biological objections of the anti-abortion camp. Tell me why infanticide differs from partial-birth abortion, or how partial-birth abortions are substantially different from abortions performed at 38 weeks. How are abortions performed at 38 weeks different from those at 35, 25 or 15 weeks gestation?
When abortion rights advocates define a legal person, what is considered beside convenience?
