Children are the least of these...

 Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:06 am

As my mind has been on little children, as well my continuing interest in politics, I just want to sound off my apparent incapability to understand how we allow legislative process to end the lives of the most innocent and vulnerable.

It has been quite a few years since we last debated on the issue of abortion. But with a number of our family becoming new moms and dads, I just wonder if there is some shift in thoughts about this most gut-wrenching of issues?

As I drove home from Mom's place last Saturday after dropping her off, I was listening to the radio analysis of the "Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency," and later caught a rerun on TV, I heard the stark contrast in belief (or lack of it) on when life begins between McCain and Obama. McCain stated simply that it begins "At conception," but Obama admitted to not knowing and "Above my pay grade."

Then there was the news on the Illinois "Born Alive" legislation aimed to protect late-term babies aborted through induced labor that somehow survived, on which Obama was the only member who voted against.

In his defense, Obama cited his concern of the bill jeopardizing Roe vs. Wade as primary reason for his "no" vote. There is no reason to believe that Mr. Obama is not truthful or sincere in making that judgment; neither is it helpful to the discussion for some pro-life people to suggest that Obama is for infanticide because of this vote. I did an extended research to verify the facts and explanations, and found mostly spins on one side or the other.

But sometimes we get lost in our own intellectuality and defense of an idea. Taking away all the intellectual and ideological arguments for and against an issue swirling about in one's own mind or cloistered in a sterile senate chamber, what is one to do when one is confronted with a fully formed new born laying on the floor crying and gasping for life? There is no time to ponder whether it is a human, has viable life, or who has jurisdiction on decisions to make on its behalf. What does one's gut instinct tell one to do? Hospitals have premie wards to take care of even younger babies, why is there such lack of clarity as to whether a living aborted baby is deserving of warmth and sustenance? Is the difference between a loved baby and a discarded one based simply on a whim?

One can argue the language in a bill to protect Roe vs Wade from subversive intent, but how can one equivocate on the right to life of a living human being that is no longer in a woman's body? How can one be in such weak moral position on the right to life as to pass the decision on to the doctor and mother and not forming an opinion on the fate of a child?

It reminds me of when I watch nature shows of injured animals. The narrator or the observing naturalist almost always state something to the effect that "we should not interfere with the course of nature," all the while the poor animal is dying or hunger, thirst and pain. Forget about the grand scheme of universe, what about this specific individual...what can one do for just one to alleviate pain or end suffering? But it also warms my heart to see animals rescued by just everyday people who just knew what the right thing to do was and not think about any greater ramifications.

And what about the practice of honor killings that has shown its ugly face in the U.S. recently? Just because it is a regular practice in other cultures, should one be less hesitant to point out its evil and guard against anyone seeking to take ownership of a child for life and to take life? What is the difference than, if one weeps at the taking of a teeanger's life, and the abandonment of a new born? We punish those who throw their babies into garbage bins, why then are some allowed to die in a hospital room where "Primum non nocere" (First, do no harm) is a sacred pledge? Where does the ownership end?

When I see the helplessness of babies, and hear the laughter of children, I just can't get over why some would prefer snuffing out its life rather than allow it to be born and have a chance at life. No one knows when life begins, and, yes, practical consideration must play a role. But if one can support a position of choice, isn't there also a responsibility to make sure that the suffering of babies is minimized? A form of life begins at conception, but one can set boundaries at the first detection of heartbeat or a fully formed brain or nervous system so as to protect from indiscriminate and barbarous treatment of a nascent human being due to a lack of moral courage or clarity.

Michelle Obama said recently that "that we cannot measure the greatness of our society by the strongest and richest of us, but we have to measure our greatness by the least of these."  Who is less than a newborn?