Should a Pregnant Woman Be Executed?
GUEST COLUMN
In 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court declared in Roe v. Wade that it was unable to ascertain whether a fetus is human; the Court decided that a woman’s right to privacy prevails over any rights of the fetus, at least through the first two trimesters and prior to “viability.” Accordingly, any rights the fetus has prior to this time are subservient to the rights of the woman carrying the child.
While altering the laws of the land, the Court’s decision has failed to convince most abortion foes that the fetus is not a person with certain natural rights. Some have made theological or spiritual arguments; others have relied either primarily or secondarily on biology. Advocates of abortion-on-demand have, for their part, either emphasized the interests of the woman carrying a child or denied that the fetus is entitled to any rights.
You May Also Enjoy
He refers to God as Mother, encourages homosexual advocacy, denies the spiritual reality of Original Sin, and denies the necessity of the Cross for redemption.
It's the ordinary things that I'm fighting for: the bond between mother and child; the family; the dignity of the body, which is not "owned" and is more than matter.
The authors say abortion is "like pruning one's rose bush." Pruning a rosebush makes it bloom more abundantly. But when one aborts a child, does her capacity to grow improve?