During the Mother’s Day Rally and Walk for Life in Toronto on Sunday May 8th, the pro-abortionists had a plane circling overhead with a streamer tied to its tail. The banner read, “Motherhood by choice: not by force.” It looked beautiful against the bits of blue in the sky and as I watched it I found myself agreeing with both statements. Of course motherhood should be by choice and never by force. No woman should be forced to marry and outside marriage she has neither the right nor the obligation to perform the act by which a child is conceived. If she is married, she is still free to choose, provided she does not contravene the rights of somebody else.

Not a unilateral decision

How could choosing not to be a mother infringe upon the rights of another? When two people marry they have equal rights regarding the big decisions of their partnership. Surely the question of whether or not to have children is not a minor issue! So, a wife, who, against the wishes of her husband, refuses to have a child is denying her husband the right to be a father. She is not being faithful to her contract and covenant.

Already a mother

Another way in which a woman can infringe upon the rights of another is by refusing to continue a pregnancy. She is not refusing to be a mother – she already is one by the fact that she has conceived. She is, in fact, terminating her motherhood along with the life of her child. She has a physical choice, just as the man with a gun has the physical choice to blow somebody’s heads off. But, like the man with the gun, she has no moral choice because nobody has the right to kill another human being. There is no geneticist or fetologist of any standing today who would deny that each human life is in existence from the moment of its conception.

The rallying cry

The slogan “Freedom of Choice” has become the rallying cry of the pro-abortionists. It has had much success because unthinking people do not follow the expression to its logical conclusion.

Freedom to do what? The answer is “freedom to kill a child.” Nobody is free to choose to take a life for whatever reason. Freedom of choice ends where the rights of others begin, and the right of the unborn to live begins at the moment of conception. So the statement, “I am pro-choice” is morally valid when seen in its proper context.

Our choices are always limited

If your choice is a personal one which does not contravene the rights of another of the laws of God, then you are free to choose. But, if your choice infringes on the rights of others or on the commandments of God, you are NOT FREE. Abortion mot only breaks the commandment of God, “Thou shalt not kill,” it also tramples on the basic right to life of an innocent human being. When a human life is at stake, it is not pro-choice – it is no choice!