Skip to content


Published on February 21, 2011

Greetings everyone, thanks for coming to check out the 4th article in this hopefully helpful series on abortion. This will be the second to the last article, with the final article focusing on mental and physical results of abortion.

Before we jump into today’s topic can I just rant for a sec? OKAY I CAN’T TAKE IT ANYMORE!! There is a ridiculous argument that seems to be prevalent in the Pro-choice community that is so baseless and dumb I have to comment on it. To illustrate the argument, I’ll actually quote a pro-choice blog, it states:

“Pro-lifers tend to use graphic images of fetuses in the womb, sucking thumbs, to attempt to cause maximum distress to women who have had or are considering having an abortion. If you conducted a poll on those same Pro Lifers my guess is that a high proportion hardly bat an eyelid at the numbers of people killed in Iraq each day as a result, directly and indirectly, of the Big Nations occupation/invasion of that country. Those same people would not give two figs about the number of children dying around the world as a result, again directly and indirectly, of unfair trade policies, debt demands, impossibly high loan interest rates, financial aid provided with strings attached and many other examples.”

This is the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard and it seems to be a really popular one in pro-choice circles. The truth is not only do they not have any facts to back this up and use complete speculation, but the statement is actually contrary to statistical verification. According to countless studies most pro-lifers are religious believers. Religious believers statistically participate and engage in outreach programs, human rights organizations, benevolence and charity, missions, etc more than their non-religious counter parts. SOOO!!! They are far more likely to be active in all forms of injustice and place more value on lives being lost, thus they do care about deaths in Iraq, and due to poverty etc. Which is why most of those outreaches are based out of religious organizations. JUST DUMB!!

I apologize if my tone seems far more aggressive in the text above; I have just been listening to so much nonsense lately that tries to pass its self off as a good argument or rationality that I have become jaded.

Anyway, let’s get to the topic at hand. HERE IS THE BIG ONE!!! RAPE!!! In truth this is where most pro-lifers begin to really struggle when it comes to being completely pro-life, especially women. I can’t imagine it but women have to live with rape and attack as a constant fear. And they can sympathize, empathize, and completely relate and understand the violation, the fear, the horror that can come from rape. As such, the idea that someone might have to carry a constant reminder of that rape for life causes most pro-lifers and most women to at least ‘take pause’.

And I would answer, rightfully so. Rape is an unimaginable terror and wrong and we SHOULD be gripped with the impact and detriment it can have on a person, families, etc. That is why when it comes to this topic most pro-lifers will usually back up from their position a little bit when this topic is raised. Knowing this I approach this topic with as much gentleness as I can muster. Is rape really the ONE exception to the rule? Is it the one elective abortion that we should tolerate?

Before I jump into answering this question, I thought I would first lay out a statistic I believe is relevant to the discussion.

Rape/Incest is often billed as a huge problem when dealing with abortion, but to put it into perspective: Only 1% of abortions each year are due to rape and incest ( Now many people will argue some cases are rape but the woman won’t report it as such. Others may argue that in many cases people lie that it is rape in order to obtain the abortion. So the number is essentially a little above or a little below 1%. Which means that focusing on RAPE in the abortion debate is like taking issue with a whole book because of a prepositional phrase in the first chapter. Essentially it is majoring on a minor (and I in no way mean rape is minor- it is a major issue, just not one that drastically effects the abortion discussion).

So with this statistic in mind, even if we were to say that rape and incest were the only cases where elective abortion was okay we still could say that 99% of abortions are morally wrong. But, is Rape really an okay rationale for abortion? Let’s take a look at it.

In the last few articles we focused on the unborn and illustrated that they are biologically separate and distinct human beings, and that there was no significant difference between them and a human being who is outside the womb. You can check those articles out here (It Ain’t Really a Baby… IS IT?! ) (Slave to the mom & The S.L.E.D. test). So if it is indeed true that the unborn are human beings with human worth and value than the answer to the RAPE question becomes that much simpler. Why complicate the crime of rape with the crime of taking an innocent child’s life? Or, to put it another way: Why should the child pay with its life because its father is a rapist? To really examine this idea thoroughly let’s look at some hypothetical’s.

Scenario 1: Let us say that a woman was raped, but she did not become pregnant. The man who raped her was 6ft tall black hair with a thick beard. Now this rape was a terrifying event and every time the woman sees a man of that description it reminds her of the rape. Would we justify her killing a man who fits that description? Why not? Doesn’t he remind her of the rape? What if he works with her? Then he is a constant reminder of the rape, can she kill him? We would all answer no, because he didn’t perpetrate the crime HE IS INNOCENT! Just like an unborn child.

Scenario 2: Let us say that woman was raped and they catch her rapist. Can she kill the rapist? NO the system says he has enough human worth and value (even as a rapist) that he cannot be murdered even though he is guilty. If she is not able to kill the actual perpetrator of the crime why the innocent child?

Scenario 3: A single mother, is raped, becomes pregnant and decides to have the child. After the birth she attempts to go about life as normal but becomes depressed. The child she had is now 4 months old but is a constant reminder of the rape. Can she then murder that child because he reminds her of this horrific event? No we wouldn’t allow that either.

Well if we examine the last few articles and find that there is little to no difference between an unborn child and a human being on the outside of the womb then we can see that rape is not a justification to kill anyone, including the unborn child.

Someone might answer that the pregnancy that comes from rape does damage to the mother’s body and that is what makes the difference. To which I would reply that in many rape cases permanent damage is done to the victim. To their ovaries, their cervix, etc and we do not allow this to be rationale for murder. So that shouldn’t be a rationale for murder of the unborn.

Again I reference the discussion we had in the second article, the real question is not is rape a bad enough reason, but is the unborn a human being, with rights and human value. If indeed it is, then inconvenience, women’s rights, or Rape CAN NOT serve as a rationale for abortion.

SCRIPT is a youth minister, discipleship leader, and member of Black Americans for Life in Kansas City, MO. Find out more about SCRIPT here.

Share this:

President/CEO of The Corelink Solution and Holy Culture

Get the Latest!


( We don't do spam, ever. )

Get the Phone App!

Listen to CHH 24 x 7. Plus Hear Programs, Mixshows & More!