Can Harris pitch unrestricted abortion as 'debt reduction?'

Jesus asked, “what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? What will a man (or woman) give in exchange for their soul?” (Mark 8:37) Put another way, What’s the going price for a human life? Kamala Harris has an answer — about $600.

US News reported that raising a child to adulthood now costs $312,202. By comparison, exterminating a life via DIY abortion pills (the most common method) costs $600. A mobile abortion clinic parked at the DNC convention offered abortions for free. Does that make human life worthless in Kamala’s America?

We’ve had 63 million abortions since 1973; multiplied times $312,000, those sacrificed human lives “saved” American women $19.6 trillion. Can Harris pitch unrestricted abortion as “debt reduction?” I’m only half joking, but I fear the joke is on us.

The goal of this group seems to be killing as many babies as possible. What if their philosophy were applied to other areas where things I don’t want to deal with are realities? Can we just kill our way out of inconvenience, stress, or expense? If it applies to the pre-born, why not everyone?

Early in my marriage, I bought a Mazda Miata sports car. I financed a $389/month “dream” that became a regret before the first payment. Prioritizing feelings over reason, I easily found a dealer whose vested financial interest helped me rationalize my delusion. If I had used Harris’s solution, a couple of pills could have killed the car dealer and canceled my debt.

Harris’s philosophy is “One reckless behavior deserves another.”  Erase your bad decisions in the back seat of a car by killing the resulting child. Too young to parent? Kill it. Having regrets about the guy you had sex with? Kill him, too. Alex, how do you get there? I watched the presidential debate.

President Trump pushed nominee Harris about abortion, on which he asserted that she and her vice presidential nominee Tim Walz “… are radical …”.  Her vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine. Trump continued, “… it’s execution, no longer abortion because the baby is born ... that’s not okay with me.”

Harris rolled her eyes at the assertion that she supports abortion through all nine months. ABC’s Linsey Davis erroneously interjected: “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born.”

The truth is abortion is already legal through all nine months in 7 U.S. states and the District of Columbia with zero restrictions. It is allowed “to protect a mother’s life or health” in 26 states. Fourteen states fail to define what “health” means.

In Harris’s world, could it include financial health? She said in the debate that she “would not force a woman to give birth to a child she cannot afford to raise.” So, does poverty justify killing?

In over 30 States, you can already kill an inconvenient baby if you say, “It would be bad for my health...” In Harris’s America, it would be all 50. Trump referenced Virginia’s then-governor Northam, who said a baby delivered alive because of a botched abortion can legally be left to die. Imagine dying babies shivering, crying, and alone. 

Harris reiterated her pro-death stance in the debate. “I pledge to you when Congress passes a bill to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade, as President of the United States, I will proudly sign it into law.”

John Stonestreet said, “Ideas have consequences … bad ideas have victims.” Taking Harris’s ideas to their logical conclusions identifies the victims, but does it open the door to more victims using the same arguments?

If convenience justifies killing, can I legally kill my way out of any commitment? If student loans from my useless leisure studies degree are burdensome, can I blow up ABC Financial to erase my debt?

What about temporary stupidity? In Harris’s America, if the Vegas drive-thru wedding fails, Bob can just dismember Maggie like a suction abortion, can’t he? “She was too needy.”

Age is no factor; so if the 35-year-old pothead still lives at home playing video games, by Kama-logic, his mom should drown him in saline solution. “He was affecting my mental health!”

If a woman’s “mental health” might be risked because she was imposed upon by a pregnancy she participated in, what about other types of health? If the monotony of motherhood might cramp her sex life, is killing the baby protecting her “sexual health?”

“Alex, what about the physical dangers if women cannot get abortions?” One hundred years ago, pregnancy was dangerous, but so was chicken pox. One obstetrician told me, “I’ve been practicing 30 years, and I’ve never seen a pregnancy truly endanger a mother’s life.”

“What about rape or incest?” The (not pro-life) Guttmacher Institute says those cases comprise 1.5% of all abortions. The other 98.5% are elective — a child was inconvenient, imperfect, or complicated someone’s life. Would you be alive if your mother had applied that logic?

My late friend, atheist Christopher Hitchens, was pro-life, not for the reasons I am, but because he recognized human life is an American value: “The Bill of Rights recognizes the right to life for all human beings.” He was right, and there is no price tag or convenience amendment.

Planned Parenthood is the largest producer of sex-ed curriculum, the largest distributor of contraceptives, and the largest abortion provider in the world. They exist to grow the business of abortion by promoting sexual promiscuity and then profiting from erasing the results. If Al’s Deep-fried Chicken sold weight loss drugs, people would ask questions. Kamala’s America would make the US Government more complicit in abortion than the $554 million they already pay Planned Parenthood.

I’m a preacher who tells people about Jesus. Why such concern about abortion? I know that without moral guardrails, America will crash. Abortion is accelerating us toward a cliff. I believe human life is priceless and logical, and Kamala’s ideas are not.