While there exists a good number of heroin-addicts who go to their grave wishing they’d never even heard of heroin, there are very few individuals who, having never in their lives used heroin, are filled with an aching regret over the fact. As far as I know – though it is an admittedly large and crazy world – there exists no support group specifically for those who don’t do such drugs. Though such a therapy session would be interesting:
“Hi, I’m Daniel-”
“I’ve been clean for 32 years-”
“Good Lord! Somebody, quick, addict him to something!”
Given this, it would be reasonable to assume that, if the weighty mass of regret lies on the side of the heroin user, and none at all lies with heroin-refuser, the use of heroin is a Very Bad Thing.
To use another example: Given that the number of individuals who regret cutting themselves outweighs entirely the number of individuals who regret not cutting themselves, it would be safe to say that cutting oneself is – likewise – a Very Bad Thing.
All to which I hear a collective “duh”. Which is awesome, because it means that human beings are being very sensible beings. The obviousness badness of heroin-use and self-abuse is apparent, for we judge the tree by its fruit; the action by its effect. If the effect is pain and regret, it is a pretty darn good indicator that the action is bad. With all this common sense radiating from our minds, why is it that the following statement I’m about to drop is controversial, contested and denied? Here, have it:
While there are thousands upon thousands of women who regret having abortions, there are few women who, having given birth to their child, regret not having an abortion. It is thus safe to assume that abortion is a Very Bad Thing.
Suddenly, what seemed like the ordinary introduction of basic logic might as well have been the unleashing of a python in the cafeteria. Everyone freaks out. “No!” come the cries, “that’s not logical at all!” But why not? It worked fine for the other actions. “Woman don’t regret their abortions!” might be a particularly desperate attempt to brush it all off. But such a lie does not even manage subtlety. It is not as if Rachel’s Vineyard – the post-abortion healing ministry – is recruiting. No, women are hurting: that’s why the ministry has over 700 retreats a year. I assume there is no similar ministry for those who decided not to have an abortion. If we are going to be reasonable, we must not forsake reason the moment it disagrees with our preconceived notions.
If it is right to judge heroin by the fruit it blossoms in a person, then it is right to judge abortion by the same. And what is entirely, terrifyingly apparent is that the fruit of abortion is bitter beyond belief.
But on a joyful note, the living fruit of a child is always sweet. This is not to make any naive statement that motherhood is all velvet and roses; it may very well be the most difficult experience of a woman’s life. But life itself is undeniably good, and I hold that there is not a single woman the pro-choice movement could muster up who, having made the decision not to have an abortion, looks at her growing daughter at eight, nine or ten, and wishes more than anything that she had been killed in the womb. It is ridiculous to consider. And that’s why the pro-choice movement is so entirely laughable; so focused are they on death that they never look up and see the mother and child, without regret; living, breathing proof that life is the good and beautiful choice.