The hypocrisy of people is amazing. Many religions have a deep respect for life, or they claim to. This respect of life goes so deep that they refuse to allow a life to be thrown away. Though this respect is a double edged sword. They refuse to allow a cluster of cells be eliminated, what they term abortion of pregnancy, though they kill clusters of cells that grow in tumors. Further, when a life is lost, and all that remains is suffering, and awaiting a slow death, then too, the respect for life is so great that they cannot allow the person to die. Both of these are inhumane, and therefore morally wrong, though not enough people appear to realize this.

There exists a claim that abortion is wrong. This claim is based on the fact that all children should be embraced. Though what if the biological parents are not emotionally mature enough to be parents?

If a child is born into a household that does not want it, this fact would seem to tend to leak through to the child, no matter how well hidden. This is the same problem that you notice when you can just tell someone does not like you. No matter how well they are an actor, eventually you will get the message. I would posit that it would take less than a year, usually, to decide that someone did not like you. They might put on a good face, and be very convincing, but eventually, they would do something, or say something that would tip you off. Perhaps children are not very smart, they would not even realize this fact for a long time? Children typically have at least 18 years to figure it out.

What usually happens when someone learns that they are betrayed? At least, they are emotionally hurt. I would posit that they would trust people less than normal. After all, how true is the old saying, “Once bitten twice shy?” In the case of the child that learns that his parents did not actually want him, these are the people that the child had to trust the most, people who he or she had to rely on for their very survival, and now they learn that their parents did not want to keep him or her. How devastating this would be to such a human being.

Though perhaps there is the fact that the parents will learn to like the child… Even if this happens 9 out of 10 times, look at the one out of those ten. There are over 250 million people in the United States alone, 5 to 6 billion worldwide, if only 1 percent of those people have children, that is 60 million children, then think of one out of ten… That is still 6 million children that are being condemned to realize that their parents did not want them. All of this is because of the “lack of options” if not for something like abortion.

Although, we must consider that there is adoption. How do children respond to realizing that they were adopted? Why do parents hide this fact from so many of them? What about the children that go seeking the parents that gave them away? For these poor children it is much the same as the case where the parents did not want them, but held on to them. Though there are all the happy adopted children… Then why is one of the most feared topics that I have heard is the stories about orphanages? If one checks statistics, there are an estimated 120,000 adoptions, and 1 millions households that have adopted children in them. Though for each of the adoptions, how many remain in foster care? There are too many questions here to make people comfortable… Respect for life is truly a grand idea, but is it worth the degradation of so many small humans?

NAIC – National Adoption Information Clearing House

Even with the above, consider the children that are born into poverty. The stories of children born to poverty include those who have to endure poor nutrition, abusive parents, poor living conditions, and other such. Yet more children condemned. Even of these some make it through, but even though there is hope, why do we subject the rest to this existence?

Above is only one part of the story, just the children. These are individuals are humans that will have to endure their entire lives with problems. The reason for this is the fact that their parents, because of religious constraints, or legal constraints, could not abort such children. Though in truth, as my next section will also point out, we are notoriously a society that believes in and firmly enforces cruel and unusual punishment for all. Why exclude children from such? After all if they are to maintain the cycle of cruelty, they must be exposed to it at an early age.

Some would ask about the one genius child or other such wünderkinder. What if one of these unwanted children is truly an amazing individual on par with Einstein, Da Vinci, or so many others. To this I can respond firstly, not all geniuses were good… One must consider Machiavelli, Hitler, Lenin, Marx, or so many others. The better response is one that most people shy away from; how many individuals are being sacrificed for one amazing individual? Are you willing to condemn ten children to find one that will change the world? If that sounds palatable, do you think that one in ten are truly geniuses? How about one in one hundred? One hundred humans sacrificed to find one that could possibly change the world? That is probably a much better situation, but then again, how many geniuses do you know, personally? Out of how many people that you know? What if that is not enough, what if one thousand children must be condemned for every one that could be so amazing as to contribute something truly awesome to the world? Most people seem, from my observation to cringe at one in ten, to become flabbergasted at the thought of the sacrifice of one hundred for one, and nearly everyone that I have talked with would consider one thousand an atrocity, but that is what is happening. Though who are “pro-life” are condemning these children on the off chance that they might find someone that is truly awesome.

They often times mock the “pro-choice” faction by saying “be glad your mother was pro-life!” Though is this really true? How many pro-choice people do you know that say they believe in the choice, but would not have one themselves? Then does a parent have to be pro-life? The pro-life faction would say that it must be the case, but it is only through ignorance that they do, they do not realize that pro-choice does not mean anti-life. They would like people to believe that this dichotomy existed, but these small minds believe that things may only be black and white. After all, all things considered, a child of a pro-life parent is a child that could potentially be one that was unwanted, but constrained by beliefs, the parents realized that it was their duty to bring this child into the world, whether they really wanted it or not. Thinking of this reminds me of my argument above. To say that one’s parents were pro-choice would mean that your parents truly wanted you, not just had you because they had to.

In the above I did not mention the other problem with the respect for life argument. There is always the fact that to force someone to behave in a manner is to limit their choices, and in this case to take away their freedom of choice. After all, in addition to the above argument, what right do we have to say what rights another person has, to their own body? I heard an interesting condition not too long ago. There is a relatively rare condition where a potential twin embryo does not fully split, and in fact, it does not split correctly at all. This potential twin actually survives, inside the body of the other. According to the current respect for life arguments, we should allow the twin to continue to grow in these rare cases. After all, to remove it is to kill another living being.

Which brings up another interesting topic. Children are the hot topic in the media right now, mostly because the people who are so blinded by respect for life that they show their lack of respect for a good life, try to play on the sympathies of others. Who does not like kids? Though another equal topic is that of the inhumane treatment of people with terminal diseases, or other conditions where their conditions of life are so abominable as to be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Our society has a history of letting people live with terminal illnesses. Consider life sentences in prison, without parole. These individuals are terminal, they may not return to society, and must live out their entire existence in confinement. They may not have normal lives due to an illness (in this case imprisonment), further, it will not abate until their death. Though this euthanasia is just one of many. There are also those who are no longer cognizant of their surroundings and who cannot live without machines. These individuals have no chance at any type of normal life, if what they have is what can be considered a life at all. At least in many of these extreme situations we do not force them to live anymore, allowing relatives to “pull the plug.” Though in related situations, where a person is doomed by illness to misery for the rest of their lives, we do not allow them to terminate the misery by ending their lives.

Life is too important after all. We tell them, paraphrased a bit, they must endure their misery so that we can continue to believe that life is sacred and the greatest thing that we have. Even when that life is purely pain from waking to sleep. When we have to wake up ever day with the realization that we have only a little longer to live, and that nothing can be done to change it. These cases, Cancer, so many rare illnesses that to mention any is to drop one drop into a lake, we force people to live. The individuals that lobby for euthanasia are demonized by society, or called death-peddlers. Further, the term death-peddlers is given such a negative connotation that these individuals are considered evil itself. Sometimes death is mercy. We understand that for animals, not leaving an animal that is injured beyond hope to die on its own, but instead giving it a death which will end a life of suffering. Though people are another matter. Even soldiers of previous ages knew enough to give a man the mercy of death who was wounded beyond hope of living without pain in their every waking moment. Though in this age we have forgotten such mercy. To force a creature to live when their life is misery is not only a respect for life, but also one for torture. That is after all what we are doing to them; inflicting pain.

This is something that not many like to think about, but denying a release of pain when such exists is the exact same as inflicting the pain onto the person yourself. It is funny how a respect for life, taken too far, becomes a wish for sadism.

That is the key point though. When a respect for life becomes not a respect for life but a wish to force life onto anything and everything, it takes the key component, choice, away from the object. It is different to have such respect for life that you do not kill creatures, but to keep those alive that will only endure a life of suffering ever after is something entirely different. That is an evil way of life, that of sadism. That is, to enjoy causing pain on another living creature.