Saving life in the womb is everyone’s business

To the editor:

If a moral outrage is being carried out in society, those calling for and working for an end to that moral outrage are not to be silenced just because they don’t have an answer to all of the social consequences that happen when that outrage ceases. No, you stop the moral outrage first, simply because it is a moral outrage. That’s the priority. Just stop it. Then you deal with the consequences one-by-one.

For instance, if someone or something is going around killing 2-year-olds, you immediately work to stop the killing of 2-year-olds. You don’t ask, who is going to adopt all of these 2-year-olds who will no longer be killed? Is it you? Don’t know? Then shut up about saving 2-year-olds until you can guarantee the adoption of each and every 2-year-old saved.

Reasonable people don’t think that way. And so those calling for stopping the murder of 2-year-olds do not have to answer that question; they don’t have to guarantee those adoptions. They want to stop the murders first. George Fisher’s demand that pro-lifers must account for the 620,000 children now in the adoption and foster care system is a type of “red herring” fallacy, i.e., diverting attention from the issue at point (murder of human life in the womb) to another issue (adoption).

Mr. Fisher poses the question “Why is it that pro-lifers only care about what goes on in a woman’s womb, which is none of their business, and not the children that are killed on a daily basis by guns and drugs?”

Who says pro-lifers don’t care about those things? And who says that pro-lifers “don’t want tax money to go” for children fed, housed and educated? What?! How much tax money goes for this or that is a legitimate debate and that will differ among pro-lifers but to imply that pro-lifers want no tax dollars at all distributed for social services is simply not true. These are wild, hysterical overgeneralizations.

In fact, many pro-lifers adopt many children and engage extensively in charity and social service beyond the womb. For instance, Abby Johnson’s pro-life organization And Then There Were None, has delivered thousands of dollars to children in camps on the southern border, seeking entrance into the U.S.

Yes, women have bodily autonomy, that is true. At the same time, we recognize that there is a separate body in question here, which also has autonomy. That body, the one in the womb, has a distinct DNA from its mother and might even be a different sex than its mother. And so when speaking of pro-lifers, it is not true that what goes on in the womb “is none of their business.” Mr. Fisher and I do hold this in common — we were both there once, i.e., in the womb. We have a stake in the game. It is our business.

Rev. William Weary

Pastor, Sacred Heart of Jesus Church, Lewistown

Saint Jude Thaddeus Church, Mifflintown