Under the current regime of Roe v. Wade, it is legal for a mother to have her unborn child killed at any stage of pregnancy. Yet this week a San Antonio father was convicted of one count of capital murder for killing his unborn child (read the story).
This tragic story here in Texas highlights the inconsistency and injustice of abortion-law in the U.S. In Texas it is a capital offense to kill an “unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.” Currently, there are at least 36 states that have such homicide laws defining a fetus as a person. Yet abortion remains legal in the U.S. at every stage of pregnancy under Roe v. Wade.
What is the difference between the unborn child that is killed by the abortionist and this one that was killed by his own father? The only difference is that in the former case the mother wants the child to be killed and in the latter case she does not. The humanity of the unborn is the same in both cases, yet one child can be killed legally and the other cannot.
The regime of Roe v. Wade has given us the intolerable situation in which the will of the strong totally defines the rights and value of the weak. If a mother wants her unborn child to live, then we call it “murder” when someone kills it. If the mother wants the child to die, then we call it “legal abortion.”
It is amazing to me that more people don’t see the contradiction within our own laws concerning the humanity of the unborn. Nevertheless, the appalling contradictions are there. It is for this reason that I believe the culture of death will one day collapse under the weight of its own inconsistencies. I’m hoping and praying that time will come sooner rather than later.