Is an unborn baby "a life worth sacrificing?" The question is horrifying, but the argument was all too real. In a recent article, Mary Elizabeth Williams of Salon.com conceded what the pro-life movement has contended all along -- that from the moment of conception the unborn child is undeniably a human life. And yet, Williams argues that this unborn human life must be terminated if a woman desires an abortion. The child is a life, but, in her grotesque view, "a life worth sacrificing."
The abortion rights movement has always had a problem with language. The average American still hears the world "abortion" with some degree of moral revulsion. Activists did not need sophisticated marketing analysis to understand that much. Early on, the abortion rights movement shifted its public argument to the language of choice -- a woman's "right to choose."
But to choose what? No legal revolution was necessary in order for a woman to have the right to carry her unborn child to birth. What was demanded was the right to choose to kill the unborn child. This is the moral reality that was clouded and camouflaged by the "pro-choice" language.
In recent weeks leaders of Planned Parenthood disclosed that they are moving away from the pro-choice language because it just isn't working. Mary Elizabeth Williams agrees, saying that the change is "long overdue." She argues that the pro-abortion movement has fallen prey to the "sneaky, dirty tricks" of the pro-life movement -- a movement she says has controlled the life issue for too long.
Then, in chilling candor, Williams proceeds to affirm that every single unborn child is a human life. But, her argument is not pro-life. Far from it.
[Read the rest of the article at AlbertMohler.com].