The argument that a woman has a ‘right’ to abort her child because she has a right to control her body is a false argument — period! This is a violation of Natural Law on several points. It is past time we understand this, and understand that those who refuse to do so are lawless.
First, by definition, the un-born child is a separate person. The life being ended is not the mother, nor is it part of the mother’s body. It is a person all unto itself. The un-born child has it’s own DNA and its own free will. Therefore, it is a unique person which, by definition, makes abortion murder — period!
Furthermore, the claim that the mother has a ‘right’ to murder the un-born is a violation of Natural Law. No one has a ‘right’ to end a life — not even their own! The ending of a life is an attack on that person’s free will. Even if it is that person taking their own life, it is still an attack on their own will. Therefore, there can be no ‘right’ to murder another. It is a violation of Natural Law to even make such a claim.
Finally, under Natural Law, the mother has a duty to the un-born child. The moment she has sex, she has accepted any and all responsibility for the result. If she is not willing to accept the possibility of pregnancy, she should not have sex. This duty to any possible child is inherent in Natural Law. When we commit others to a course of action without their consent, we have a duty to them. Since the child has no ability to consent to its own creation, this imparts a duty to protect any child created to the mother who created it (father too).
This responsibility to the un-born supersedes the argument of abortion in case of the mother’s life being threatened. The willful engagement in the act of sex binds the mother to her duty to the un-born child. This extends to the point of — if possible — sacrificing one’s own life to preserve the un-born. The only time there is even a possibility of making a case for aborting an unborn is if the mother will certainly die before the un-born matures to a stage where it can survive outside the womb. Such conditions are extremely rare, and it still leaves us with the fact that we are trying to justify the killing of an innocent person and abandonment of personal responsibility.
The only possible exception to this is pregnancy as the result of rape. In this case, both the mother and child are innocent victims. However, no matter what argument we make to justify abortion of a child conceived out of rape, the un-born child remains an innocent party, in which case, abortion is murder.
There is one last aspect to this issue: the responsibility of the father. A father is equally as responsible for the care of the un-born as the mother. He accepts this responsibility when he willingly engages in the act of sex with the mother. There is no way to separate the parents from their duty to their child. It is inherent under Natural law in that they created a new life without its consent. Thus, they are responsible for the care of that child until such time as the child can totally care for itself.