Tuesday, February 06, 2007

random musings

I'm not very knowledgeable about Ayn Rand's work except a little by reputation, so I was interested to note a question on Jimmy Akin's blog about whether her book Atlas Shrugged was worth reading. The response was informative, but something else piqued my curiosity. Several of the commenters (and I only skimmed down about a dozen--there may well have been more) actually credited Rand and her philosophy with having ultimately led them to Catholicism. From what little I know about Rand, I'd say it must have been in a veeeery roundabout way, and the old girl must be spinning in her grave.
Lifenews reports that Hope Ann Webb, a seven-year-old girl with trisomy 18, has died after outliving most victims of the disorder by half a dozen years. Her mother, Teri, was advised to abort when prenatal tests indicated the abnormality, but declined. "Had I listened to them," she says, "we wouldn't have had seven years of pure joy."

The notion that aborting a baby with a fatal genetic disorder is more "humane" than allowing it to live what little time it has with as much comfort as we can provide it is troubling, to say the least. I wonder if the intent of the advice is to save the parents pain rather than the child. If so, something tells me it's a fool's errand. The loss of a child is just that. Getting it over with a few months earlier doesn't make it less of a loss. And that's before you've factored in the difference between having to accept your child's death and having to accept your own active part in it. Before you've factored in the sheer brutality of the abortion procedure. Before you've factored in the permanent scars on your body and your psyche.

If I were going to lose a child anyway, I'd rather just have to deal with that loss.
According to another Lifenews story I can't seem to locate right now, the Arkansas state legislature will soon consider a resolution on the ERA. Yes, that ERA--the Equal Rights Amendment. I'm perplexed as to why now, and why Arkansas, but there it is. The Supreme Court declared it dead in 1982, but they've been wrong before.

In and of itself, the ERA (originally drafted by Alice Paul--who opposed abortion as "the ultimate exploitation of women") seems innocuous enough. It's tough to argue with the sexes being equal before the law. Unfortunately, it seems the ink was barely dry on the 1972 version before it was being nailed to courthouse doors in order to throw them open to unrestricted abortion. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but it seems to me that the refusal by the ERA's promoters to accept an abortion-neutral clause didn't help its progress during the last campaign. I might hafta look this one up.

Labels: ,


Anonymous Douglas Johnson said...

You can look it up here:

9:56 PM  
Blogger CMinor said...


8:46 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home