Life is Always Sacred

The 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision (January 22), a beautifully written speech and the moral status of this country have been weighing heavily on my mind.

Shortly after the massacre in Newtown, President Obama gave an incredibly moving speech. In it, he spoke of the importance and necessity of protecting our nation’s children. He stated, “This is our first task—caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged.”

I know Sandy Hook affected the President with the same shock, sadness and grief as the rest of the country and world. I don’t doubt that he felt the same sting of fear and horror that the rest of America’s parents felt that day. And I want to believe that the President truly does see the necessity in protecting the lives of all American children. Yet there is a stumbling block that prevents me from grasping Barack Obama’s sudden apparent concern for life: his radical pro-abortion views.

For once, I agree with Barack Obama when he says that “caring for our children” is our “first job.” Our society will, and should, be judged for how we treat the most vulnerable members of society. Yet I am confused as to how America’s children can truly be cared for when the termination of preborn lives is widely accepted and encouraged, and when our nation’s leader has no shame when it comes to supporting pro-abortion legislation. I recall Obama stating his support for abortion because, if his daughters “made a mistake,” he would not want them “punished with a baby.” Michelle Obama lobbied for the legality of partial birth abortions, which she actually considers a “legitimate medical procedure.” Barack Obama voted three times against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which would have had no bearing on the “rights of the mother” but would provide medical care to babies who survived abortions. While arguing against legislation in the Illinois General Assembly, he referred to a newborn baby as a “fetus outside the womb.” Obama opposes a ban on partial birth abortions. He opposes a ban on sex-selective abortions, and he supported funding groups that support abortion overseas.

I am incredulous as to how one can state support and dedication to protecting children in an eloquent speech when that individual has spent much of his political career supporting abortion in the name of “choice” and “women’s health.”

In his speech at the Sandy Hook vigil, Obama posed a series of questions:

“…can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children — all of them — safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know that they are loved, and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?”

Regardless of how many executive orders controlling firearms are signed in the name of protecting children, the answer to these questions will still be a resounding no. We cannot say we’re doing enough to keep all of America’s children safe when partial birth abortions are considered legitimate medical procedures—and when, according to recent statistics, an abortion stops a beating heart every 96 seconds. How can we let children know how much they are loved when, at the earliest stages of their development, many consider them a “choice” or a “fetus” or “blob of cells” rather than a human being? To quote Mother Theresa, “Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want.” When a country accepts the termination of life for the sake of convenience or choice, how can that country possibly even begin to teach their youngest citizens the very meaning of love?

Abortion itself is the antithesis of “[giving] all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose.”

Many of the children at Sandy Hook were around six to ten years old. I don’t doubt the President’s sentiments and well-intentioned efforts to increase safety for America’s young children, but the fact is that six to ten years ago, the children of Sandy Hook would have been little more to the President than a “choice” or a “fetus.”

NewSarahHindsIconThe widespread acceptance of abortion has severely bruised humanity. It’s created a culture that does not treat life as sacred, precious, and miraculous—but as disposable, a choice, a burden, and a medical problem with a medical solution. Perhaps nearly as bruising is the hypocrisy in one moment signing executive orders in the name of children’s lives, but having argued, in the past, against medical help for babies who survive abortions on the floor of the General Assembly.

After signing his recent gun control executive orders, the President said: “If there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation… When it comes to protecting the most vulnerable among us, we must act now. Let’s do the right thing.”

It is our responsibility to protect the “most vulnerable among us,” to speak for those who cannot yet speak for themselves. Life is always sacred, not just when it makes a convenient political point.

Sarah Hinds | Lindenwood University | @Sarah_Hinds76

Related News

10 Responses

Leave a Reply
  1. Tray
    Jan 25, 2013 - 05:29 PM

    Life is not always sacred. You destroy life every time you wash your hands with antibacterial soap. Stop lying.

    • Vinny
      Jan 28, 2013 - 02:53 PM

      You know Hinds was talking about human life. You’re projecting.

  2. *enchante*
    Jan 25, 2013 - 09:53 AM

    Since many of you out there are college age: i want ALL OF YOU to boycott MEHCAD BROOKS!..he made a PRO ABORTION movie for a JOKE!….:( HAPPY ANNIVERSARY ROE V WADE..that bothers me a lot, since im a black woman: and i feel he could represent us

  3. *enchante*
    Jan 25, 2013 - 09:46 AM

    When i use the term empowered, i mean women think they have control of the situstion. Dont forget what the scripture in the bible~~ GENESIS 3:16!! JOHN 3:16 is the way out!

  4. *enchante*
    Jan 25, 2013 - 09:35 AM

    I GET VERY NERVOUS when MEN starting making abortion more trivial. Many men could make more than one woman pregnant at the same time…and may be the culprit talking woman/women into aborting….and MANY girls listen to them thinking theyre EMPOWERED. Today many young men and women who are college eduated are out of work. Wouldnt it be better overall if BOTH call it quits unless married, and even then if you cant afford a child at present. Not all birth control works 100% of the time: and porn could cause psychological impotence as well.~cant function with a real woman

  5. Sue
    Jan 24, 2013 - 02:06 AM

    VERY well written!

  6. Trilby
    Jan 23, 2013 - 06:25 PM

    Do you support Obamacare given that studies have indicated it will prevent as many as 40-70% of abortions in the U.S.? Given that Romney would have repealed Obamacare, why would pro-lifers vote for him? He would have increased the numbers of abortions in this country by repealing Obamacare.

  7. Christopher Rushlau
    Jan 23, 2013 - 01:31 AM

    At what point does a human life begin? To call a fertilized egg a human being seems to be erring on the side of caution or fanaticism.
    I suggested to a biology professor that brain waves could be a guide. Someone said that a fetus had brain waves. The professor said that “green jello” has brain waves. So then the question becomes, what brain waves are characteristic of a human being?
    I still think this is a distraction issue for people who don’t want to face Israel’s genocide of the indigenous Arab people, which proponents of Israel feel is justified by their mythologies about God’s special love for them. That’s a major scandal (stumbling block). The definition of moral intelligence is that some things are worse then others.

    • Sue
      Jan 24, 2013 - 02:10 AM

      Life begins at conception. How could a fertilized egg be anything but a human life? Green jello has brain waves!? Whose erring on the side of fanaticism?

  8. Christina Lee
    Jan 23, 2013 - 12:50 AM

    Well written Sarah. Unfortunately they don’t make the connection. They state they want to make young women’s “dreams come true” by making it easy to abort a baby without interrupting a young ladies “dreams and aspirations” …it is totally sick!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © THE COLLEGE CONSERVATIVE. Managed by Epic Life Creative