(Save the Storks) A few nights ago, Jimmy Kimmel opened his show with a tearful monologue discussing his newborn son, who was born with a rare heart disease and had to undergo an emergency surgery just hours after being born. Kimmel, who is known to be a big family man, was understandably shaken up by the event, shedding a tears on the stage.
Thankfully, after a successful surgery, William John Kimmel is now doing well and is at home with his family. Kimmel shared a picture of the healthy, smiling baby boy, which received a loud applause from the audience.
I always love when celebrities celebrate their wives and kids publicly and I admire Kimmel for sharing about this scary experience in such a vulnerable way. However, while my hope isn’t to downplay any traumatic experiences like Kimmel’s, I can’t help but notice the irony of this situation in relation to the tragedy of abortion.
Kimmel’s story tugged on heartstrings of people around the nation, not necessarily because he’s a celebrity, but because his story is about an innocent life that was in danger. Most everyone can agree that this situation is scary and that the life of a human being is the most valuable thing there is. However, to many, including most celebrities, a baby in his mother’s womb is not a human being at all, but rather a “clump of cells” and a “choice” to be made.
There are only two things that differentiate children like William from babies whose lives are ended in their mothers’ wombs – their location and the fact that they were wanted.
This contradiction is glaring and disheartening. How could these two things possibly change the value of a life so drastically?
The answer? They don’t. At all.
The irony only continues. After telling his story, Kimmel uses his experience as a platform to discuss a political issue – no, surprisingly not abortion or the value of life even at an early stage of development. Instead, in response to President Trump’s promise to repeal Obamacare, he chose to discuss healthcare.
In tears he said, “If your baby is going to die and doesn’t have to, it shouldn’t matter how much money you make. I think that’s something – whether you’re a Republican or Democrat or something else – we all agree on that.”
In response to the monologue, Whoopi Goldberg chimed in on her talk show The View, saying, “It should not be about whether you can afford to save your kid’s life, it should be that you’re entitled to save your kid’s life.”
Former President Barak Obama tweeted, “Well said, Jimmy. That’s exactly why we fought so hard for the [Affordable Care Act], and why we need to protect it for kids like Billy.”
Regardless of your views on healthcare, these comments should strike you as painfully ironic. The same people who passionately argue that we should be entitled to save the life of a child also believe that we should be entitled to end the life of a child. And that their political agenda protects “kids like Billy” but gives no mention to the 60 million kidswhose lives were ended by abortion.
Again, my hope is not to downplay or discredit the horror of being a parent whose infant’s life is in danger, or to take a stance on health care for that matter. My hope is that people like Kimmel, who display a beautiful and deep value for life outside of the womb, will soon see that the same care and protection must be afforded to the human beings inside of the womb.
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published by Save the Storks on May 3, 2017, and is reprinted here with permission.