Religion & Law

"Yes, abortion is killing. But it's the lesser evil."

That's the tiltle of an op-ed by Antonia Senior that was published in the Times of London on June 30, 2010. The essay is causing a stir. See this response by Albert Mohler. I haven't found a good link to Senior's essay. 

She begins the essay by explaining that she was in the Tower of London and encountered an interactive display that asks visitors whether they would die for a cause. After some reflection, Senior answers that the cause for which she would stake her life is the cause of women's liberation, and for Senior, that includes the right to abortion.

Senior acknowledges that an abortion involves the taking of a life. But she concludes that that realization doesn't change the calculus. She states: "you can't separate women's rights from their right to fertility control. The single biggest factor in women's liberation was our newly found ability to impose our will on our biology." She concludes her essay with these words--"As ever, when an issue we thought was black and white becomes more nuanced, the answer lies in choosing the lesser evil. The nearly 200,000 aborted babies in the UK each year are the lesser evil, no matter how you define life, or death, for that matter. If you are willing to die for a cause, you must be prepared to kill for it, too."

I wish that Senior had heard the fine talk that Erika Bachiochi (see) gave on pro-life feminism at the recent annual conference of University Faculty for Life.  

Richard M.