Is it possible that a woman who can terminate the life in her womb with no qualm or regret is at risk of withholding the love and empathy needed by the life she allows to come into the world? It may be hard to believe that there are such women, until you witness the bizarre reactions of some, hooked on “pro-choice,” when you bring up the subject of abortion.

To the everlasting dismay of hardcore “pro-choicers,” the dead-end wall of legality constructed by judges who pretend to follow the Constitution does not stop the hard questions that they refuse to face regarding the termination of human life.

The time is past overdue, however, to face those questions squarely and honestly. And I ask one rarely asked: How are love and empathy – central to the wellbeing of human life − switched on and off? I’m reminded of the mental switch that allows a hunter to kill a deer yet remain locked against harming a fellow human being. In the case of human life and death, a matter that tops all others, the separation of mind and feeling that allows a woman to accept or reject the baby developing in her womb is a direct and immediate threat to a human life. A mind so blurred or dulled by pro-choice rhetoric as to bypass the instinct to protect human life has entered a twilight zone where sanity is absent.

9-month fetus (photo credit: Jason Wilson CC BY 2.0 license)

So, for instance, if a woman wants what is developing in her womb, it’s a baby; if she doesn’t want it, it’s not a baby. Huh? Well, this is what pops out when you remove the mask of “pro-choice.” I do wonder at times if the woman who can hold such a bizarre notion ever thanked her mother for not thinking that way when she was in the womb.

The person who can believe that snuffing out human life is a “right” – making the value of human life depend on a private decision – could receive a moment of truth when facing the barrel of a gun held by some­one who agrees.

She or he who can detach human life from human value with such complete unconcern has been so desensitized or washed of common sense as to have become a zombie-walking member of the cult of death rolled out by phony liberals after the middle of the twentieth century. Major credit for including infants in the death cult must go to justices of the Supreme Court who, with their heads in the shadows of a penumbra, issued a formal death warrant on unborn children in 1973. Their “shadowy” Roe v. Wade decision was a ruling that they believed justifies the killing of unwanted babies, something that now occurs “every 89 seconds...in the United States, adding to the rising death toll of more than 60 million preborn lives claimed under the guise of reproductive healthcare... .” [source]

Ultimate responsibility for putting an unborn child to death rests with the woman who so decides. Whatever the specific reason for it, such deliberate intervention against that child’s life is an act of violence that devalues human life.

Modern feminists may make some believe that the fetus is disposable tissue, like a tumor or an appendix. But to the everlasting rage of radical feminists, na­ture dispels that view and reveals the centrality and importance of motherhood to human wellbeing. Before the “liberation of women” in the last century, fringe feminists apparently never stopped to wonder why mothers have been revered in word, deed, affection, literature and art for centuries.

The resulting war on the family that heated up in the 1970s became part of the culture war in America, now hotter than ever. The great many who have taken on the fight − even as they are gagged, “canceled,” threatened with violence and/or death – elected the first president in American history to seriously challenge the cultural assaults on families, on unborn children, on common sense, on common language, and on the wide-ranging adulteration of reality by false liberals in hopes of imposing their deranged way of life on everybody.

But the distortions of reality from fake liberals regarding abortion must, however much they fight it, face the heat of truth. Ending a baby’s life because the woman carrying it doesn’t want it will not stand because it has no real ground in justice.

The fake claim to justice in the phrase “it’s a woman’s body” − equating a fetus to a tumorous growth or some extraneous tissue – does not alter the reality that what is being rejected and expelled is the body of someone else. This is a fact proven over and over by every person who survives that crucial step in their life. Words, thoughts, and feelings do not transform a fetus into a lump of disposable tissue – for which we must all be grateful.

I must ask a few more important questions: How is the deliberate extinguishing of a human life inside the womb less bar­baric than killing a baby outside the womb, or less barbaric than killing an innocent adult by murder or decree? How does “legalizing” such termination of innocent humans differ in its brutality from sanctioning any wanton homicide? How do words like “reproductive right” cancel the evil of ending a human life?

What stronger evidence of the intent to kill a human being is there than the infanticide committed when a baby that survives an abortion is put to death because it isn’t wanted?

Those who wake up in time to see the truth that deliberate abortion is a form of homicide and accept the children that come from their love-making – or, unable or unwilling to care for them, offer them for adoption – are acting out of a love of humanity and justice. Tacitly or outspokenly, they are rejecting the warp on reality pushed by elites with no moral sense, backed by a complicit media.

The vast majority of Americans follow their hearts, even if at times they are confused about the right thing to do. For she or he who loves children will not willingly harm them at any stage of their development. They know that trashing innocent human life is no part of being human.

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a lifelong culture warrior