pro-life in the fast lane
by Ryan Porter
Published: February 27, 2008
Riddle me this.
Every year thousands of outraged Americans gather under the “pro-life” banner to protest the legalization of abortion. These outraged voices tout the statistic that roughly one million pregnancies have been aborted every year since the early 1970’s (The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform). “That’s 40 million innocent babies who were slaughtered!” they say. “How can we allow this?”
The difficulty facing this bunch is that success hinges upon their ability to change minds. Since abortion is legal, they must either convince the courts to overturn Roe v. Wade or convince pregnant mothers to pursue another option (93% abort for convenience). This means that despite their best efforts, no matter how many times they march in the streets, no matter how many abortion clinics they torch, no matter how many hours they dedicate to the cause, the same number of abortions may continue to take place. Or, in their words, the same number of innocent babies may be killed.
Now imagine this: what if saving millions of innocent lives did not depend on changing people’s minds? What if lives numbering greater than 40 million could be snatched from the jaws of death without resulting to violence or protest or unnecessary demonstrations? One would expect that these outraged “pro-lifers” would take advantage of this second route which could shift their potential success rate from 0% to 100%, right?
Unfortunately, this second route is the road less traveled. This is the road that leads to Africa and impoverished countries all around the world. While so-called “pro-lifers” are preoccupied with fighting the domestic powers-that-be, they typically pay little mind to the living who die solely because they let them. Because “we” let them. There are no minds to be changed. No one in sub-Saharan Africa is “pro-choice” when it comes to drinking water or healthcare. “It’s my body, and I can drink the suicide sauce if I want to!” Not a chance.
Malaria and tuberculosis alone claim three million lives every year, most of which are children (The One Campaign). But it’s not like we can do anything, right? The cost to prevent both of these for one person is almost as much a weekly Starbucks budget. That is a pretty steep price for life, if you ask me. Certainly none of us American paupers can afford such an expense (he says while enjoying his tasty frappuccino).
If the cost of a few drinks reflects the price tag on one life, then by my calculations the money spent to stage a typical anti-abortion rally could purchase at least 100 lives. I’m no mathematician, but the hundred lives strikes me as a better, albeit less entertaining option. Seriously, who doesn’t love a good riot?
Now this is not to say that sending aid to Africa is the only way to further a pro-life agenda, but protecting life does not end after birth. “Pro-life” has become a bit of a misnomer in many cases. Being anti-abortion is not the same thing as being pro-life. Issues like abortion and embryonic stem-cell research have become so personalized that their opponents forget why they started the fight in the first place. Protecting life should be the end game, not just protecting the unborn. While it is easy to incite an emotional response by throwing out terms like “innocent, unborn babies” we should be no less outraged by our collective indifference toward adults who die needlessly. Life is life. America is plagued by apathy, and though this plague does not directly harm its contractors, it still breeds death. Any sensible person who is truly pro-life will go with the numbers and work where there is the greatest potential for success. After all, aren’t fifty birds in hand worth slightly more than one in a vault?
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
