US

If we call unborn babies 'fetal refugees' would leftists care about them?

People demonstrate against US President Donald Trump's temporary ban on incoming refugees and travelers from seven Muslim countries, at the Los Angeles International Airport, California on January 30, 2017. Trump's executive order suspended the arrival of all refugees for at least 120 days, Syrian refugees indefinitely -- and bars citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. Protests are taking place at airports across the country in opposition to the ban. / AFP / Mark RALSTON (Photo credit should read MARK RALSTON/AFP/Getty Images)

It's striking that so many people on the left appear to have limitless compassion for refugees and illegal immigrants yet none at all for babies. I wonder if they might suddenly discover at least an ounce of humanity for the unborn if we started describing them as "fetal refugees" or perhaps "immigrants from the uterus." 

The contrast is even more remarkable when you consider that every argument they make in favor of unfettered immigration applies even more directly to the unborn. Their position on illegal aliens and refugees is, after all, a moral position. They appeal almost entirely to morality, dismissing with contempt practical concerns like national security and national sovereignty. They say that these people -- illegal aliens, refugees -- are human beings and as such they deserve to be treated with respect (which is true). They say that it is our responsibility as citizens to deal with whatever inconvenience or burden caused by their presence (which is not necessarily true). Their right to enter our country supersedes our own concerns (which is definitely not true). 

And yet. And yet the same people who make this argument will utterly reject the exact same argument as it pertains to children. They deny that parents have any moral obligation to their unborn children. They deny that children have any right whatsoever to enter the world. They proclaim that the inconvenience and burden caused by a child's presence supersedes his right to exist. In other words, they say that an American citizen has a GREATER responsibility to an immigrant from Mexico or a refugee from Syria than to her own child. They believe that screening someone at an airport is a far worse outrage than decapitating them in the womb. They believe that an adult has a right to illegally enter the country across the border, but not through the birth canal, as nature intended. They cry over dead refugee children (a terrible tragedy, to be sure) but in the next breath declare as sacred their right to kill their own children.

To all of this I say: WHAT?

See, this is what happens when you're pro-abortion. You suddenly lose the ability to coherently make a moral argument. Any moral argument. Because once you've argued that child murder is moral, you've forfeited morality completely. And you don't get to pick it up again when the conversation turns to refugees or immigrants.

To see more from Matt Walsh, visit his channel on TheBlaze.

To book Matt for a speaking event, send a request here.

To pre-order Matt's upcoming book, The Unholy Trinity, click here

One last thing…
Watch TheBlaze live and on demand on any device, anywhere, anytime.
try premium
Exclusive video
All Videos
Watch BlazeTV on your favorite device, anytime, anywhere.
Try BlazeTV for Free
Sponsored content
Daily News Highlights

Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.