(Charlie Rood Commentary)
 

On this day, Friday, January 25, as the 40th Annual March for Life takes place in Washington, I have thoughts.   

This is not commentary targeting women.   This is not about health care.   This is not meant to be political, though the issue has become that.   This is simply about life.


The debate and discussion about gun control has been around for years, but the tragic shooting in Newtown has brought it to a heightened level we haven't heard in years.
 
I'm sure every sane person would love to find the ultimate solution where we would never have any firearm murders again, let alone mass shootings.   What would be the ultimate solution?
 
Confiscating every single gun, outlawing manufacting of all guns, and stopping any guns from entering the country?   Make the USA a "gun free" nation?   We know that's not going to happen.
 
So we eventually make rules and regulations, we pass laws, and we do our best to keep aware of being safe and secure with reasonable gun ownership and use.
 
When the President spoke recently about his decisions on gun policies he had children present.    

 
Yes, the children.  
 
All this is done for the overall good of the country, especially the children.   The Newtown shooting tore our hearts apart with the deaths of 20 innocent children.
 
But beyond Newtown, each day in this country, there are children murdered with guns and other weapons, children that are killed by accidents, and children that die by disease.
 
We are horribly shaken, terribly confused, and often at a loss for words whenever innocent children end up dead.
 
President Obama said about his new gun initiatives "This is our first task as a society, keeping our children safe.   This is how we will be judged.   And their voices should compel us to change".
 
Yes, the children.
 
 
Yet, in the United States of America, the taking of human life has been legal since 1973.
 
Yes, the children.   Innocent children.
 

If the lives of the 20 children murdered by guns in Newtown had been ended years earlier by abortions, a certain segment of our population would not have cared.   A certain segment of our population would have defended the "right to choose".  
 
The “right to choose” what?
 
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), in 2009 there were 11,493 firearm homicides in the United States.   By comparison, in the same year, according to the CDC, “784,507 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC from 48 reporting areas.”
 
Trying to determine exact abortion figures can be difficult.   Most states gather data and make it available, other states report information on a delayed basis, and a few states do not provide any information at all, including California which is thought to have one of the highest abortion rates in the country.  
 
If well-meaning, responsible adults can make passionate pleas and produce laws intended to protect our children from gun violence, essentially being a "voice" for our children who don't really have a "voice" in this discussion, is it unreasonable to say well-meaning, responsible adults can make passionate pleas to repeal laws from the violence of abortion, essentially being a "voice" for children who don't have a "voice" in this discussion?
 
Sure, it’s true, individual states have passed restrictions making abortion less automatic than it used to be.   But that shouldn’t be surprising since support for abortions being legal in all circumstances has fallen from 34% in 1992 to 28% today.   However, no matter how many restrictions may pass, abortion is still legal in the United States of America.
 
Yes, the children.
 
What about the reasons why abortion is chosen?   Trying to determine that is as difficult as trying to determine the number of abortions referenced above.  It seems some of the most heart-wrenching reasons for choosing abortion (which many abortion opponents agree may be justified) such as rape, incest, health of mother, totals approximately 10%.   

That means 90% of abortions are “not ready for responsibility of baby”, “can’t afford baby”, “doesn’t want more children”, “baby would interfere with education/career”, etc.
 
Yes, the children.

No, says "right to choose", not children.   Just an "embryo or fetus".

 
And that's how abortion is legal and justified, even by many who must deny their own faith in order to believe in abortion.   It's not the life of children, it's just an embryo or fetus.
 
If you truly believe in life, you have to believe it begins at some point, and the honest answer is it begins at conception.  

From WebMD:   "Fertilization happens when a sperm meets and penetrates an egg. It's also called conception. At this moment, the genetic makeup is complete, including the sex of the baby."

That means, the honest answer about abortion is, it's taking the life of children.  
 
Yes, the children.

I go back to what President Obama said about his new gun initiatives "This is our first task as a society, keeping our children safe.   This is how we will be judged.   And their voices should compel us to change".

What if we substituted "abortion initiatives" in place of "gun initiatives?