Aborting our Souls?

The Wall Street Journal today, in a story about an upcoming report on the effects of the abortion trauma on the mothers involved, quotes one clinic director, Susan Hill, who runs clinics in five southern states, as saying that, "'..women today need less counseling, less psychological care than they did in 1973,' when abortion was legalized but still carried an enormous stigma." We might speculate that this is in line with the overall loss of sensitivity for human life, generally. Over the last thirty or so years we seen a shift from a time when the film, Bonnie and Clyde

(From Warner Brothers, no less- What's up, Doc?) stirred such controversy over its gory scenes. Now Hitchcock's style of suspense stories has been replaced by "splatter films," and pop music now features brutal rape and murder in place of undying love and devotion.

Ms. Hill, who has been in the business of "providing abortions" for thirty five years, said she, "has tried offering postprocedure counseling sessions -- but very few women show up." In her words, "They want to get past it and move on with their lives." Overlooking the possibility of all kinds of motives for not returning to the "clinic" to walk through that trauma all over again, it might be good to consider the real effects on all the people in this picture.

Tragically, it seems, the one least considered, or the least present, in the picture is the father. He does not have, or show that he has, a clue about the care of the woman he likely made some claim to care for, and less about the life he is, yes, responsible for in her belly. It could be that his own father had shown little more interest in his own young life, or any number of other factors. Or, it could be that he is the one in the picture wanting to protect the young child but just isn't being heard. Either way, he suffers.

The mother may have somehow fallen for the notion that the life within her "isn't really human," or, viable, so there's really no harm done. This idea was popular in 1973, when the Supreme Court followed the old Darwinian myth that a child "evolves" in the womb, but genetic study has since proven that at every stage of human life, from the womb to the tomb, is entirely human; it is her child. She may believe all this "scientific" stuff, and have ingrained from school that life, even her own, is just an accident. In her heart, though, there is sure to be a voice of protest, that her life, and others' for that matter, can't just be meaningless. "Science" or no, she is not a fluke! When she splays herself on that table, and allows a white-smocked stranger to invade her most intimate regions with weapons of destruction, it is going to have an impact: Her heart is going to bear the damage!

The child in this story is not just a theoretical human, of a few cells invisibly tucked away in the uterine lining "for future consideration." By the time of the procedure she, (most likely female) is a fully-formed infant who only has some growing to do before her "great debut" in the delivery room. She may not be viable in terms of being able to live on her own, but then she wouldn't be for quite some time, would she? Nursing, diapers, being carried about... Really, being human means we're not designed to be viable in the strictest terms, except possibly a hermit who has yet learned survival skills from others! But she is secure, growing, and becoming ever-more aware of her surroundings when suddenly her body is covered with a burning, blinding, acid, or she is being ripped apart by cold steel pliers.

The "providers" are, likewise, affected. Day after day they witness the little struggles for life, see the tiny body parts carefully re-assembled for inventory, deal with the women who may be fighting their own consciences, or others as they callously shrug off what may be their fifth, or tenth, "procedure." At each juncture they are faced with the decision between what is right, and what makes the payments; and all too often hock their hearts for a pay stub! The suffering in their own hearts has yet to be accounted for. All this would be a hopeless, and a meaningless, scenario except for one final question: What is the "God part" of all this? In reality, God was on the scene first of all. However we might theorise the "how," the "who, what, and why" of our beginnings all point directly to Him. The harder scientists look at the data, the more necessary a Creator becomes. The very existence of DNA points to a huge degree of foresight, and for the DNA to actually develop into a viable creature of any description (and how many such are on this planet?) makes any roll of
the dice completely ludicrous on a good day. Not only the who and the what, though but why? Without comparing the particulars of theology, the bottom line is that God created us, spirit and body, to be His family. In short, there is a family resemblance that, though often distorted in one way or another, can not be denied. It's in our DNA, so to speak. Folks that have spent a lot of time on this call it the Imago Dei, the very image of God on each of us. That explains why people sacrifice for others, why marriage is still seen as honorable and "free love" shallow and selfish; why "Greater love has no man than this- that he would lay down his life for his friends" strikes a chord in our hearts in a day when "Looking out for number one" is the rule. Why we even have words like, truth, love, and justice in our language.

We are His children. He has made us, has given life, to be like Him. Are we truly His children? Is that all there is to it? The sad fact is that our sins, our pride and selfishness, have broken that relationship so that there is nothing we can do to mend it. In turning to ourselves for meaning and answers we have, effectively, set up false images of "god" in our hearts. In other words, we go through untold pain to scrape and scar away any resemblance to our Father- not just disfiguring our faces, but our very hearts! No human salve can heal this, no doctor can restore what we ourselves have destroyed. This is the reason that the Son, Jesus Christ, came to Earth. He taught and lived the simple truth of God's love, and then by His own suffering took the pain and disfigurement of our own lives onto Himself so we could be restored. Everything this implies is so wonderful that it can take a life of study to start to see the scope of it all. The simple truth is that, because of His love for
us we can give Him our hurts, our sins, our hopes and disappointments, all that we call our lives, and trust Him to restore to us what we never realised we could enjoy- sharing in the very joy and nature of God!

There will be a day when He gathers His own to Himself. Can we honestly expect Him to force those who went to such pains to deny any connection to Him to spend eternity in His presence? That those who have "invested" their God-given lives destroying all that He loves? The Bible promises that He won't. In His love, the choice is ours!

Image from Wall Street Journal article, "New Front in Abortion Battle."