If you are pro-life and you spend any amount of time defending your pro-life beliefs, you will invariably be asked if you support a woman’s right to have an abortion in the case of rape. When asked, you must be able to speak with precision, clarity, and compassion on the issue because the question is almost always a trap.
This article is a few years old but the information contained in it is excellent.
When a rape results in a pregnancy, this means that we are now dealing with three people instead of two. Two of those three are innocent, and one of them is guilty. Take a case of violent rape. The pro-choice ghouls want to do two things—first, they want to go easy on the guilty one, refusing to execute him, while executing one of the innocent parties for something his father did, and secondly, they want to make out anyone who objects to this arrangement as the callused one.
In the future (as if any of these guys are taking my counsel), pro-life candidates for office need to answer the question in this way: “That is an excellent question, but we have to settle certain things first before we answer it. When a rape results in a pregnancy, are we dealing with three people or two?” And then he should refuse to answer the question until the reporter tells him “three or two,” along with the reasons why. This is how the Lord handled this sort of question.
And so is this one.
Host: So you also believe abortion ought to be outlawed in the case of rape?
Akin: Rape is a horrible crime, and a rapist ought to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I stand for human rights over against anyone who would violate the life of another – from the rapist to the abortionist.
Host: So you’d outlaw abortion in the case of rape?
Akin: Absolutely. As I said, I stand for human rights for all, including the unborn.
Host: But why should a woman who gets pregnant out of no fault of her own be forced to carry a pregnancy to term?
Akin: It is a tragic situation indeed. And my heart goes out to any woman in such circumstances. That’s why I could never recommend that she abort her child. Inflicting violence upon another innocent victim, in this case the baby, is not the way to move past the tragedy of her own innocence being taken.
Host: So you’d pass laws that would force her to carry on the pregnancy?
Akin: Like I said, I stand for the rights of all human beings. Even in a difficult situation like rape, the unborn child should have human rights. We must not let circumstances dictate to us when humans have rights. Otherwise, we could justify all sorts of atrocities in the name of “difficult circumstances.”
Host: But having a child as a result of rape would be a terrible reminder of the crime, wouldn’t it?
Akin: That’s possible. But let me ask you another question. If a woman chose to carry her child to term and then found that every time she looked at her infant she remembered the horror of the rape, would we allow her to smother the baby?
Host: Of course not!
Akin: You’re right. Because no matter how difficult her circumstances, we recognize the humanity of the infant. Unfortunately, many in our society refuse to recognize the humanity of the unborn.
Host: But your opinion on the humanity of the unborn shouldn’t be forced upon a woman who doesn’t hold that view.
Akin: Biology textbooks and scientists tell us the same thing we see when we look at a 4-D ultrasound: the fetus is human. Now, you can make the case that the unborn human should not have rights. And many do. That’s why unborn girls are aborted at a much higher rate than unborn boys, not only in places like China but in the United States as well. That’s why the number of children with Down Syndrome has plummeted. That’s why so many abortion clinics target inner-city areas with high minority populations. You see, once we begin to discriminate against some human beings, we are on the fast track to denying human rights for others.
Host: So you stand by your conviction that abortion should be outlawed even in the case of rape?
Akin: I believe that all innocent human life should be protected. So, yes. This difficult situation is about three people: the rapist, the mother, and the baby. Currently, there is no death penalty required for the rapist. I refuse to believe we ought to give an innocent victim a sentence more severe than the perpetrator of the crime.
Granted, the vast majority of people who are passionate enough about abortion to debate the pro-choice side are, more often than not, perpetually angry and not very deep thinkers so you may not change minds or score any points with them.
You can, however, avoid handing them a soundbite they WILL bludgeon you with.