Concerning abortion, I’m the one that said “quality of life” was an elusive phrase. I would like now to shed some light on it.

Pro-choice advocates argue that the prospect of a poor economic or social situation for an unborn child is a valid reason to abort, so the child will not suffer from the “disease” of “poor quality of life.”

What they fail to see in this statement is that they are making a value-statement on life itself.

In fact, to talk about “quality” of life necessarily implies some statement of value.

When a woman decides to have an abortion because she “thinks” she can’t provide a quality life for her child, what she is in effect saying is that she does not feel that child is worthy enough to put out the extra effort it might take to provide a quality life.

If a woman really values life, that woman will find a way to make the best of an unplanned pregnancy without terminating the life of the unborn human fetus.

If life is not valued, there can be no quality of life.

This is not a Utopian ideal, because quality of life does not depend solely on economic conditions. Love, compassion, respect, trust, and discipline go much farther than the dollar in providing a quality atmosphere in which the child can grow.

These are easily provided by anyone who values life unselfishly.

By the way, if it’s money you’re concerned about, consider this: The more than four million abortions in the last three years means a loss of over ten billion dollars in Social Security revenues per year by 2020.

Whose quality of life will suffer then?

Scott Stocking

Campus Minister

Christian Campus Ministry