I’m writing in response to Randy Evans’ opinion article published in the July 11 edition of the Solon Economist. In his article, Mr. Evans provides a one-sided summary of highlights from the Iowa Supreme Court ruling reinstating the Heartbeat Law. This law protects an unborn child from abortion once a heartbeat is detected, typically around 6 weeks.

The article and quotes provided therein from Chief Justice Christensen and Justice Mansfield, are filled with many distractions from the key issue at stake in the abortion debate:

Is the unborn fetus a human life?

If the answer to this question is “yes” (and we know that it is), then the follow up question isn’t one of ‘Choice’, ‘Women’s Rights’, ‘Reproductive Rights’ or ‘Healthcare’ but instead…

When is it okay to take the life of an innocent human?

Is it okay when that human is at an early stage of development? Is the stage of development what gives life value? This line of reasoning won’t hold up, especially when we live in a day and age when advancements in technology enable the survival of increasingly younger premature babies. Is it okay to take innocent human life because it’s inside my body (‘my body my choice’)? Is location or degree of dependency what gives life value? If my newborn belongs to me, lives in my house and/or depends on me, is it my right to choose whether she lives or dies? Is it okay to kill a baby in the womb when the pregnancy is unexpected or inconvenient or when it’s a hardship? No doubt, these are difficult circumstances, but the solution isn’t to take the life of the baby, instead we need to provide support to the moms/families in these situations. Unfortunately, these are some of the top reasons why we as a country take the lives of nearly 1 million babies each year. Less than 2% of abortions are performed due to rape and incest despite the hyper focus on this in the media– again, a deceptive distraction in an attempt to take the focus off the core topic–unborn babies are human beings and we have no right to take their lives.

Please don’t be deceived by the rhetoric of pro-choice advocates who often seek to distract from the foundational issue at hand and justify the termination of innocent life in the name of ‘choice’ or a ‘right’ or ‘healthcare.’

With regards to ‘choice’, there is no other circumstance in our society where it’s acceptable to ‘choose’ to take another life with the exception of self-defense and the death penalty. So why do we think it’s okay to kill an unborn baby in the name of ‘choice’? Abortion is often framed as a ‘women’s rights’ or ‘reproductive rights’ issue. Justice Christensen’s comments, for example, refer to a woman’s “right not to procreate,” as well as the “decision not to have children” as the fundamental right in this debate. However, abortion isn’t merely not procreating or not having children; rather, it is the act of ending the life of an already existing human child, which is not a choice we have the right to make. Abortion is a human rights issue, not a women’s rights issue, and those whose most fundamental human rights are at stake are the unborn.

Further, it is insulting to call abortion ‘healthcare’. Healthcare doesn’t take life, it restores health and gives life. A baby is not a disease.

How easily we can be swayed by loud voices and deceptive words that play on our emotions. The current debate around abortion is worth our attention. It is not just a personal matter; as Thomas Jefferson said, “The measure of society is how it treats the weakest members.” It is our responsibility to know the facts and follow the logic deeper to the heart of the matter. The truth will become evident if you let your conscience guide you. Please speak out and stand up for the unborn!