It's A Child Not A Fetus Analysis

700 Words2 Pages

It’s a child, not a fetus
Susan Schneider broadcasted her myopic and unbiblical views on abortion in a 1981 article for The New York Times. She made illogical claims about the value of a mother, regarding her individual rights, versus that of a child. Also, she said rape justifies abortion because no one would want to love and raise a child from that situation. Her statements say people should abort babies with birth defects, however, she does not take the further implications of that practice into account. Babies carry the image of God, so no one, not even the mother, has the right to kill a baby that God brought into existence.
Both a mother and her child have immense intrinsic value to God because he loves them as his creations. However, Schneider claims a mother has more value than her child and should bear no responsibility for conceiving that child, therefore a mother has the right to dispose of her unwanted child. She wrote with distaste, “under this ‘new’ law a fetus would be declared a person with full constitutional rights from the moment of conception, but the mother would forfeit all rights and privileges as an individual” (Schneider 13). Her statement claimed that mothers have more value their baby due to autonomy. If a woman has not …show more content…

Schneider asks “who is supposed to raise and love this child once he is born?” (Schneider 11). None can visualize the terrible agony caused by rape, but how much worse would a burden of murder weigh? God loves that baby so much he sent his son Jesus to die for it. No amount or degree of mental pain justifies a murder of what God loves. Rather than kill her baby, a mother could put her baby up for adoption. If the mother gets called by God to raise her child herself, she would have a struggle, but God makes all things possible. Despite bad heritage, that child may have salvation by Jesus and experience God’s

Open Document