My Take: Why the abortion issue won’t go away
The 2011 Right to Life march in Washington.
January 23rd, 2012
10:01 AM ET

My Take: Why the abortion issue won’t go away

Editor's Note: R. Albert Mohler Jr. is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.

By R. Albert Mohler Jr., Special to CNN

After recently addressing a large secular assembly on issues of moral controversy, I turned and faced a woman who urgently wanted to ask me a question: “Why won’t the abortion issue just go away?”

I knew exactly what she was asking. I often meet abortion rights advocates who honestly thought that the national controversy over abortion would simply melt away within a few years of the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion, handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973.

That was clearly the hope of the Supreme Court majority that signed onto the opinion written by Associate Justice Harry Blackmun. In a note he wrote to himself as he drafted the final opinion and looked to its aftermath, Blackmun revealed a rather optimistic assumption: “It will be an unsettled period for a while.”

Surely, he didn’t mean for that “while” to extend four decades.

Sunday marked the 39th anniversary of the decision, and the abortion question is anything but settled. Just look at the crowds gathering in Washington on Monday for the annual March for Life.

In fact, America has been unsettled ever since Roe. Abortion has become a central issue of political conflict, debate and division. If the court had hoped to calm the waters, it failed spectacularly.

As Guido Calabresi, then dean of the Yale Law School, observed, the aftermath of Roe v. Wade produced a “sense of desperate embattlement.” As Calabresi noted, the court’s decision failed to produce a national consensus. Rather, Roe “made it impossible for the opposing views to live with each other.”

Those who thought that the decision of the Supreme Court would settle the issue had reason for that hope. On other controversial questions, the court’s rulings had produced initial furor and outrage, but the nation rather quickly accommodated itself to those decisions. Take integration in public schools.

Not so with abortion.

Why? Professor Lawrence H. Tribe of the Harvard Law School, an ardent defender of abortion rights, at least recognized that the abortion question presents nothing less than a “clash of absolutes.”

Tribe attempted to propose a means of avoiding “pitting these absolutes against one another.” All such efforts have failed, precisely because the competing claims are indeed absolutes.

When abortion-rights advocates and their allies ask why the abortion issue will not just go away, they really mean to ask why, given the stark reality of Roe, the pro-life movement has not dissipated and retreated into the history books.

Here are five reasons why:

First, the radical character of Roe – overthrowing abortion laws in 49 states – galvanized pro-life forces. The judicial imposition of abortion on demand, virtually without restriction until the third trimester, produced both shock and outrage among those who believe that the unborn child has an inalienable right to life.

Within months of Roe, an organized pro-life movement came into shape, looking for any means of limiting and eventually ending the termination of unborn life.

Second, Roe also had the effect, surely unforeseen by the Supreme Court, of bringing millions of evangelical Christians into the fight on behalf of unborn life. Prior to Roe, even many evangelicals believed that abortion was a Roman Catholic issue.

Roe was a legal earthquake that awakened a massive number of evangelicals to the deadly reality of abortion. With remarkable speed, evangelicals soon educated themselves on the issue and then mobilized themselves both politically and culturally.

Third, the death spiral of abortion simply defies adequate calculation. Over a million abortions are performed in America each year. Reports last year indicated that over 40% of all pregnancies in New York end in abortion, a rate that increases to almost 60% of pregnancies among African-American women.

The sheer scale of the death toll sears the pro-life conscience. Young people can now see that millions are missing from their own generation.

Fourth, abortion has proved to be exactly what pro-life activists warned it would be: a deadly threat to human dignity that would target specific populations. Prenatal testing has produced a deadly reality for unborn babies considered less than acceptable by their parents.

The vast majority (90%) of unborn children diagnosed with Down syndrome are now aborted. Sex-selection abortions are legal in the wide-open “right” to abortion declared by the court. Prenatal testing of other characteristics means that parents can now abort a baby that does not meet their specifications and try again.

Fifth, powerful imaging technologies now allow a look inside the womb, a privilege unknown to previous generations. That window has transformed the equation, as millions of parents have seen their unborn children and witnessed the miracle of life.

They have seen the little human form and the actions of the unborn child, sucking its thumb as it nestles within its mother. Millions of siblings have seen the images of their unborn brothers and sisters taped to the refrigerator door.

Those of us who believe that every single unborn child has a right to be born cannot resign from the effort to protect those lives.

The greatest advances made by the pro-life movement have been made among the young, the generation that has known the death toll from Roe v. Wade all their lives. More evidence that the abortion issue will not simply go away.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of R. Albert Mohler Jr.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Abortion • Opinion • Politics

soundoff (1,716 Responses)
  1. A

    I think that the abortion issue shouldn't be sooo big. Look, it's a choice that a woman should have. End of the question. As a man, I WILL NOT tell a woman what she can't do.
    Now, I think abortion should be illegal after, say..the 1st trimester. Aborting for safety/health reasons should be allowed.
    However, not for downs or something like that. They can function, too.

    My biggest issue that the religious-right is so focused on abortion. If we had that many more people, we might have a big issue here. More unemployement..more people to just deal with. (Yeah, they would probably complain about that.)
    Also, I'm sick of these right wingers forgetting the starving, abused, or beaten babies. Yeah, the ones that are a few months old and have to suffer through absolutely terrible things. Do something then. Don't just make them born and forget about them.

    February 5, 2012 at 11:59 am |
    • joe blowsky

      well, that settles it.

      February 5, 2012 at 2:55 pm |
  2. Wendy

    Any student who can classify algae as a plant life knows a zygote is human. Any one who knows anything about human development knows that your body is never done making replacement cells in a living person. Even after death some cells will still be made until your blood gets "old". The Bible says you should not murder but informs its reader that there are people who will. The Kings in the Bible who found out that women had killed their children cried. I'm anti-abortion pro-choice for the same reason I'm anti war pro soldier. No one who kills their baby will be sent to hell by me I'm not God, the Bible is clear what He will do at the time of their appointment. I pray that all will be given the right to live not only by their Creator but by their Mother and Father too.

    February 5, 2012 at 10:36 am |
    • momoya

      Oh, your belief is plenty disgusting just as it is. You believe that the being with the best morals possible is going to run an eternal torture pit. You wouldn't do that; you're better than your god. Drop your silly delusion that demands you worship a horrible pain-dealer and start thinking for yourself.

      February 5, 2012 at 11:23 am |
  3. walkedintoabar

    this issue hinges on when one thinks – not knows, thinks – life begins, and once one knows what he thinks, there is very little chance of changing his mind

    February 5, 2012 at 2:26 am |
  4. Oregon Alley Cat

    Gotta love that religious sense of morality that the evangelical right has. Pro war, anti health care, pro death penalty... and somehow also pro life.

    February 4, 2012 at 10:00 pm |
    • walkedintoabar


      February 5, 2012 at 2:27 am |
    • Marvin

      gotta love the generalization

      February 5, 2012 at 2:32 am |
    • A

      yeah..totally agree with that!

      February 5, 2012 at 11:56 am |
  5. CoCoDol52



    February 3, 2012 at 8:02 pm |
  6. Pro-Life or Hypocrite?

    If pro-lifers were truly "pro life" then they would put an equal amount of energy into stopping prison executions which are unarguably taking actual human lives.... but that isn’t happening. Pro-Abortion and Anti-abortion supporters argue about the point at which life begins but there is no disagreement that prisoners on death row are fully alive, then killed in a well planned method. Where’s the outrage about this taking of life which happens hundreds of times a year in the U.S.? Do pro-life supporters support the death penalty? Hmmm…….

    February 3, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • periwinkle

      I see your point, but, I'm sure that's why they use the phrase: "innocent life".... in other words, an inmates' life is not as valuable, but an unborn child still has a chance to be "good". I understand your logic, but, well, have you ever met an inmate, or more exactly, one on death row? Yeah, I don't think they are worth the food, water and air conditioning. They are in there for a reason. Let's be reasonable. For the record, I am pro choice.

      February 3, 2012 at 4:37 pm |
    • PrimeNumber

      The Catholic church teaches what is called "Seamless Garment". THe church long ago decided that if it is to be prolife, it must be so in all cases. THe Catholic church is against capital punishment. Periodically, there are executions at our state penitentiary. Several of our priests go there and stand with other protestors rebelling against this inhuman practice.
      Why didn't you know this? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ?

      February 3, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • @ PrimeNumber

      Thank you for helping to illustrate my point. "Several priests" demonstrating does not nearly equal the energy put into the anti-abortion efforts. Does the catholic church need to balance its voice a little better if they are truly pro life?

      February 3, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
    • Marvin

      And if pro choice was truly pro choice they would spend the same amount of time educating women about their choices regarding adoption, programs to help young mothers and other options and not just abortion.

      Your right it IS hypocritical.

      February 5, 2012 at 2:31 am |
  7. travelinpants

    The issues of abortion for or against are personal decisions. Right now, it is legal in this country to provide such services that kill unborn human beings. I think it is a very hard thing to decide in todays society and obviously 40 years ago. Personally I don't believe anyone should get an abortion. At the same time, I believe the right to choose is fundemental to our country's beliefs. For those that choose to, should have the option of having a safe procedure performed as well instead of going back pre- Roe vs Wade. When that decision was handed down, things became black, white and gray depending on whose eyes you were using. This issue is never going away, not ever. Pandora's box is open!!!!

    February 3, 2012 at 12:58 pm |
    • wr

      You can't have it both ways. Either the fetus is a person whose life must be defended (as surely as if it were already outside the womb), or it's a bunch of cells, a mere pimple, and the woman is free to do as she will.

      February 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm |
  8. mishu

    Most Pro-Lifers are elderly....did they stand up before now? No, they are politically charged. Pro-Life relates to many issues: insurance for those who cannot afford, gun control, illegal drug traffic, poverty (homeless, elderly, etc. widows and orphans)....we are becoming pawns used to dominate the politics of losers who cannot justify their candidacy by any other means.

    February 3, 2012 at 10:25 am |
    • Credenza

      mishu – I truly wish you and others would stop making UNTRUE sweeping statements to underline your point.
      "Most pro-lifers are elderly......" Sheepdip.

      You probably didn't see the Pro Life March for life in Washington last week because ONLY EWTN showed it. But 500,000 [HALF A MILLION] people walked that day and MOST of them were young people and young families.

      The only reason you see elderly pro-lifers protesting is that we are NOT at work or at college on weekdays. At recess time the students come too.

      The march for life was organized again by the Knights of Columba. They are a Catholic organization who PAY for medical treatment; birth costs and accomodation for young moms who decided to keep their babies. NO JUDGEMENT – just love. prayers and lots of practical help

      I hope this helped.

      February 3, 2012 at 2:13 pm |
    • momoya


      You're wrong. According to Gallup, the 65+ age category has the largest percentage of "pro-life" advocates, while 50-65 was the next largest category.

      February 3, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
    • Aaron Tant

      @momoya. While you are correct that elderly do favor pro-life. According to Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/147734/americans-split-along-pro-choice-pro-life-lines.aspx), 42% 18-34 are pro-life, 43% 35-54, and 49% 55 and up. Another Gallup poll (http://www.gallup.com/poll/126581/Generational-Differences-Abortion-Narrow.aspx) shows that the 18-34 group is trending more pro-life (or, as they say, "Anti-Abortion"). So, your statement is relatively true. But, it looks to be trending in favor of young people being pro-life. Good stuff! Keep rocking @Credenza!

      February 3, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • momoya

      @Aaron Trant

      The key word in your post is "trending." Yes, the numbers are showing a trend that IF CONTINUED would mean that perhaps one day in the next few years or decade there might be more 18-34 who consider themselves "pro-life."

      My statement is not "relatively true," it IS true. You're being dishonest when you claim that it is "relatively true.' Frankly, I don't really care or see how it makes a difference, but you can't say that the trends the data shows are actual figures–they aren't–that's why they're TRENDS. Credenza said that mishu's statement was "sheepdip," when, in fact, mishu's statement was correct fact. Here, and in other posts, Credenza shows a willful subversion of the facts and a blatant disregard for the reasoning of her own argument. That's extremely poor representation of one's own position.

      February 3, 2012 at 6:40 pm |
    • Credenza

      Momoya – you just illustrated my point. Gallup polls are carried out during working hours or evenings on landlines. Seniors are at home with their landlines; and College kids and adults 25 – 50 are at work all day and the vast majority use cell phones.

      Plus as we all know – polls are not worth the paper they're written on. But thanks anyway for your help.

      February 4, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • Marvin

      @ Momoya Because hey those who have more experience with life, don't know crap about this subject right? Hmm this sounds familiar..... Oh thats right like that phase where children think they know more than their parents...........

      familiar indeed.

      February 5, 2012 at 2:28 am |
    • Tracy

      And the trend will continue. Haven't you heard. Over 1 million possible Pro-choice people were aborted last year alone.

      February 5, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • momoya

      @ Credenza, ah, I got it now. You don't care what the polls say, you'll make up an excuse to pretend that your OPINION is correct over the facts on display. Classic Christianity; I really should have expected that.

      February 5, 2012 at 11:18 am |
  9. Thumb's Up

    Guttmacher says, "abortion provider in US has fallen to 1819 from 2000 after the abortion was banned in some US states."

    "Why the abortion issue won’t go away?"

    Simply because, Professional hitmans in white or green suits don't want to loose their income.

    February 3, 2012 at 4:15 am |
    • KP

      learn to spell "lose"

      February 3, 2012 at 4:19 pm |
  10. Anthony Missouri

    The Catholic Church and the members should clean up all the molestation of kids. The Catholic Church is so hypocritical it’s ridiculous. They are a butch of molesters. Fix your own issues before you tell someone else how to live.

    February 3, 2012 at 1:53 am |
    • PrimeNumber

      Pedophiles, not CHurches, molest children. Pedophiles, not universities, molest children. Pedopiles, not youth organizations, molest children. I suggest we fix the pedophiles.

      February 3, 2012 at 10:01 am |
    • momoya

      But the church isn't "fixing" the pedophiles! It's the RC's reaction to the scandal that places the blame on the church and not the pedophiles. The church doesn't remove the pedophiles, it helps them find anonymity. If the school system had as many pedophiles as the Catholic church and treated them as the Catholic church does, the US would be up in arms–and rightfully so.

      February 3, 2012 at 10:28 am |
    • PrimeNumber

      @momoya Believe me, I hate the pedophile/church scandal as much as you. I am as humiliated as a Penn State Alumn must be. But as a catholic insider, I can tell you that the Catholic church is in fact fixing the problem. The media doesn't discuss this fact much. When I was a kid, I grew up near a Benedictine monastery. I was alone with priests in rectories, cars, sacristies, confessionals, swimming pools. NOT ONCE was I ever so much as touched by any of these men. Mental images are easy to create and are not easily gotten rid of. Now, when the word "priest" is mentioned, people will naturally think "pedophile". Feminists did the same thing with the word " patriarch".

      February 3, 2012 at 10:39 am |
    • momoya

      Way, way too little, and way, way too late. The sheer scope of the problem exposes the fact that the RC knew about this problem for a long, long time and chose to help the pedophiles find protection rather than eliminate the source of the problem. If the RC had come out a couple of decades ago and asked the public for help in exposing the pedophile priests so that they could be excommunicated and imprisoned, they might have a leg to stand on, but they didn't do that. The RC is the organization that caused the word "priest" to be read as "pedophile" by the general public–nobody else.

      February 3, 2012 at 10:59 am |
  11. DevilDog

    jesus can walk on water, but Chuck Norris can walk on jesus.

    February 2, 2012 at 10:07 pm |
    • *facepalm*

      Jesus saves, but Crosby scores on the rebound

      February 3, 2012 at 1:56 am |
    • Truly Sad

      Chuck Norris is a Christian.

      February 3, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
  12. Republicans Need Abortion

    Leaving the issue unresolved, solidifies their Christian voting base in the next election.

    February 2, 2012 at 8:27 pm |
    • *facepalm*

      I don't understand why the single-issue voters don't see that they're clearly being used. I know a large number of christians who would vote democrat based upon social policy, but won't because of the single issue of abortion. It's in the political rights best interest to never make serious gains on this issue.

      February 3, 2012 at 1:57 am |
  13. Elijah

    Planned parenthood is an oxymoron if you included abortion as part of this planning.

    February 2, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
  14. AGuest9

    Top Susan G. Komen Official Resigned Over Planned Parenthood Cave-In

    February 2, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      I hope that the Komen foundation has a mass Exodus (lol) due to their idiotic move.

      February 2, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
    • Rick

      Planned parenthood for unplanned s e x? all your planning is in vain if you are choosing to abort.

      February 2, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
    • momoya

      @Rick, What if abortion is part of the plan?

      February 3, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
  15. Lee

    I need someone who is prolife and firmly stands behind that belief to answer a few questions for me..If Roe vs Wade is overturned at a federal level and is handed back to the states....some states will ban abortion all together, others will keep abortions safe and legal...so, what will the punishment be for a women who gets an abortion in a state where it is not against the law if they live in a state this is..Say a woman lives in Tennessee , , could a woman who wanted to terminate a pregnancy be allowed to leave the state and travel to California for a safe abortion, or would the state of Tennessee hold her against her will..would states have to monitor every uterus of every child bearing woman in the state ... What do we do with murderers in this country? Simple, they either get life in prison or we give them the death penalty ....imagine a country where abortion is illegal in some states but not others and the penalty for abortion is death or life in prison? What would be the penalty in Tennessee for any mother who made the choice to have an abortion ...guess we would either be giving them a lethal injection or have prisons full of women who chose to have an abortion or attempt to have one. And would Abortionists be convicted of second degree murder??? Would they be brought from another state to trial... Fathers would have to be accessories in some way too.....come one...after all, they caused the condition that resulted in the abortion...What would happen to fathers who left after impregnating the mother? Would they not be subject to some serious criminal penalty

    February 2, 2012 at 3:36 pm |
    • DrJudge2002

      Excellent point! I just hope it never ever gets that far. Don't get me wrong, I am not a person who would consider having an abortion, but at the same time, I would never impose my view on another woman. And lets look at another fact...If these people call themselves pro-life, what about lives of the mothers? No birth control is 100% effective (unless it is permanent) so there is a chance that a woman will get pregnant at the time when she isn't able to have another child. Perhaps the family is on a limited income, perhaps they are already dealing with issues that are beyond anyone's knowledge. If she decides to give birth to the baby, who will support this child? Certainly not the pro-life people!!!!! In all other developed countries in this world, a woman has the right to take at least 6 months of PAID maternity leave, except in the US. It should be illegal to have a mother return to work 2 weeks after giving birht because she can't afford to take the time off to heal and to bond with her baby. Who ever says that women are just trying to milk the system are clearly forgetting that they were given birth by one! I wish that all those pro-life people would stop advocating for something that ends at 40 weeks...and actually do something for the women who have a baby but can't afford to make ends meet!

      February 3, 2012 at 9:58 am |
  16. jp

    "Third, the death spiral of abortion simply defies adequate calculation. Over a million abortions are performed in America each year. Reports last year indicated that over 40% of all pregnancies in New York end in abortion, a rate that increases to almost 60% of pregnancies among African-American women"

    where is the most dangerous place for a black man???

    his mother's womb

    February 2, 2012 at 2:55 pm |
  17. Freak Watcher

    Keep these strange religious freaks and their insane political hack representatives OUT of the PANTS of America's wives, sisters, daughters and mothers. Keep your filthy, grubby hands OFF of these women!

    February 2, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • jp

      you meant to say...Keep your filthy, grubby hands OFF your BABIES

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • drschwarz

      Dear Freak Watcher,

      I'm sorry that you're not ready yet to discuss this in a rational, calm, dispassionate, and intellectually honest manner that doesn't resort to making straw-man arguments out of the other side's positions.

      February 2, 2012 at 5:51 pm |
    • James Layne

      If an unborn child is a human being, it doesn't belong to you, unless of course you believe in slavery.

      The question then is whether a child suddenly becomes a child because it moves from inside the womb to the outside. If you believe that, you have serious problems with modern science.

      February 2, 2012 at 6:40 pm |
  18. Tom

    Abortion is a national issue because some people have a fundamental need to interfere in things that have they have nothing to do with them personally. If only you could mind your own business and leave other people alone so much wasted time effort and money could be put toward something useful.

    February 2, 2012 at 12:31 pm |
    • jp

      Abortion is a national issue because it MURDERS BABIES

      February 2, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
    • Actually

      "Abortion is a national issue because it MURDERS BABIES"

      A fetus is not a baby and it's not a baby till it can survive on it's own.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • James

      So if someone comes along and makes a personal decision to sever your head from your body, we should look the other way because it doesn't involve other people personally? Nice logic.

      February 2, 2012 at 6:42 pm |
    • ─▪┐◊┌▪─

      "So if someone comes along and makes a personal decision to sever your head from your body, we should look the other way because it doesn't involve other people personally? "

      Nice try at a scare tactic but a fetus isn't a person till it can survive outside of the womb.

      February 2, 2012 at 6:49 pm |
    • Really?

      "A fetus is not a baby until it can survive outside of the womb."

      Please, enlighten us with a credible citation that advances this oh so noble scientific fact that you proffer. A baby has a heartbeat at 8 weeks. Please argue how that is not a life.

      February 2, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
    • Aaron

      So actually says "A fetus is not a baby and it's not a baby till it can survive on it's own."
      Really? I've never seen a newborn that can survive on its own. Put a baby just out of the womb on the floor and walk away, it will die. Being outside of the womb does not mean its not dependent on its mother for survival. So according to your definition one should be able to kill toddlers until they can survive on their own...


      February 3, 2012 at 8:18 am |
    • DrJudge2002

      A heart beat doesn't mean you can live outside of the mother! I lost a baby due to complications in pregnancy at 16 weeks (4 months). He had a heart beat and was moving inside of me, I could feel him just the day before...but he didn't make it. Until the 24th week of pregnancy, a fetus, a baby, whatever you want to call the little person, is not equipped to survive on the outside. And even after 24 weeks, there is only a slight chance that they could survive, thanks to the modern medicine, but then be faced with a life of health problems! So, again, a heart beat doesn't make you able to survive. It takes a lot more growing and maturing on the inside to be able to make it on the outside.

      February 3, 2012 at 10:03 am |
    • Marvin

      Welcome to the justice system, there's something called laws to govern one's actions. If people really ignored what other people were doing, we would have something called: no law or order. But hey lets make an exception right?

      February 5, 2012 at 2:20 am |
  19. cold hard facts

    The reason why is, because this is a stiffnecked hard headed people just like the ones in the wilderness... 🙂 🙂 🙂

    the source of the problem is the men who have traditionally left the pregnant woman alone to fend for herself....Roe V Wade came from the womans rights movement...
    { this demonstrates that people give a hell of a lot more ofa damn about whats' in a womans uterous than the actual Woman they can see with their own eyes...

    🙂 well, the bible dies say , "the jsut shall walk by faith nad not by sight" roflol 🙂 🙂 🙂

    February 2, 2012 at 12:21 pm |
    • cold hard facts

      The lord gave the word and great was the company that published it... 🙂

      the word si John 15:7....Jesus says , "if you abide in me and my words abide in you , you shall ask what you will and it shall be doen unto you" 🙂 🙂

      February 2, 2012 at 12:24 pm |
    • jimtanker

      Using the bible as a source of "facts" is just ridiculous.

      February 2, 2012 at 12:28 pm |
  20. Wondering

    So just wondering...

    If I have an abortion people call me a murderer.

    If I die due to child birth does that not make my child a murderer? Yes I do understand that it doesn't have a choice in the matter.

    Now if i choose to have an abortion because I know I have a high risk of death due to childbirth, that is still murder, but I would then adopt out of response of this desicion. Of course I would personally be scarred for having an abortion but I would also be thankful that someone can offer me a child.

    But does this make me a nice murderer? Also, wouldn't God be thankful that I can raise one of his children while not dying myself because I am also His child? I myself would think that this well known father would be thankful.

    February 2, 2012 at 10:22 am |
    • James

      No offense. I'm sure you mean well, but It's hard to know where to start addressing such shockingly faulty logic. First off, murder is an intentional crime. Dying in child birth is not intentional. Do you think the child is intentionally causing you to die? That's just strange, warped logic.

      A more appropriate analogy is this: Someone takes you and your infant child hostage. You are threatened that if you don't kill the child, he will kill you. If you don't kill the child, there is a good chance you and the child will die. May you morally turn the gun on the child and kill the child? Obviously, not a perfect analogy, but it involves intention, which is what's missing from your example.

      You insult women who have made the horribly difficult choice to die so that their children could live. Nobody doubts it's a hard choice, but the morality is clear. You cannot take an innocent life, even to save your own.

      February 2, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • nothing new here

      1. So easy for you to say – you are a man.
      2. Don't plan on killing anyone in self-defense, even to protect your own life. You could harm an innocent bystander.

      February 5, 2012 at 1:55 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.