There is a horrible story making waves in social media.  In Ireland, a woman died because she was denied an abortion, which in her case would have been life-saving.  The story calls for a response. 

Pro-choice advocates are screaming.  "See!  This is what we have been saying all along!  They are not really pro-life.  They are pro-fetus.  They do not care about women!"

If you took offense, be careful that indeed you do not fit into the mold. 

Pro-lifers have been arguing for years about what it means to be pro-life.  Pro-life like Romney, and most "pro-life" politicians means pro-life except in extreme, and extremely sympathetic cases.  Rape.  Incest.  Health or life of the mother. 

Then the extremists.  There cannot be exceptions.  If you admit exceptions, you admit that the fetus is not a child.  Abortion, all abortion, is evil all the time. 

Then there are grand view pro-lifers.  Pro-life cannot be limited to refer to abortion.  You cannot call yourself pro-life if you support the death penalty or unnecessary war.  You cannot call yourself pro-life if you do not support women in crisis.  You cannot call yourself pro-life if you ignore the poor and the immigrant. 

There are incrementalists, who think that any law restricting abortion is a good law.  Restrictions mean fewer abortions, and that is good.  There are purists, who reject the incremental laws, arguing that they condone some abortions, even as they prevent some.  There are common ground advocates, who hope to work with pro-choice advocates to protect women, thereby reducing abortion rates. 

And, there are lunatics.  (Some might argue that we all belong in that category.) There are people who believe that the assault on the unborn is a violence so great that it is justly and necessarily met by violence. 

Unity among pro-lifers is a myth.  But, as a single voice, we should be able condemn this violence. 

The story in Ireland reveals some of the undercurrents in the battle.  There is anger.  There are lies.  There are people on both sides who genuinely believe that the other side wants to hurt them.  There are people on both sides that genuinely want to hurt the other side.  Why can any political discussion be sidelined by raising the issue of abortion?  Because by its nature and history, it touches a hundred raw nerves.  It hurts to discuss it.  Anti-abortion advocates believe that children are being murdered for the sake of convenience!  Pro-abortion advocates believe that blobs of cells are being given priority over women!  Is it about male chauvinism so deeply rooted in a patriachal society that we still cannot shake its desire to keep women lower than men in fact and in law?  Is it about a societal acceptance of sexual immorality which elevates birth control not just to a right but to a right which supercedes the right to live? 

Are you angry yet?  Are you hurt?  Sad?  Scared?  Protective? 

And then there is Ireland. 

Sidestep:
In my last pregnancy, I found out reletively early that something was not normal.  The ultrasound showed abnormalities which were ultimately diagnosed with a prenatal genetic test.  In the middle of all the wondering about what was wrong, and how we were going to face it, there was one possibility which was particularly frightening.  Without too many details, there was a chance that upon birth my daughter would need a surgery which was dangerous to both her and me.  For a terrifying month, my family had to consider what we would do if  we had to risk my life for a chance to save hers.  We met with our pastor.  We prayed.  It did not come to that.  Her birth was relatively normal, with relatively normal risks to me.  She was complicated, and required immediate intervention, but that is another story.  People who knew all had ideas.  I got stories about a Saint who gave up her life for her child.  I got accused of being selfish for considering putting my unborn child's life above my own.  All I can say is, I praise God that it did not come to that and Back off!  The most difficult weeks of my life were not made easier by the well intending judgments coming my way. 

The Church does not require mothers to give up their lives for their children.  The Church requires only that she carry the pregnancy as long as it is safe.  If that is three weeks, then the baby has no chance, but the mother did what she could.  If it is twenty weeks, the baby has a chance, though difficult, but the mother did what she could.

Can she get an abortion if her life is at risk?  The simple answer is no, but it is not simple.  If she delivers a baby so premature that he cannot survive, is that different from an abortion?  It is.  It is the difference between killing and letting someone die. 

So what happened in Ireland?  The story, as I read it, is that a pregnant woman came to a Catholic hospital because with what was suspected to be a miscarriage.  During the next few days, she went into labor, but did not give birth.  The baby died.  It was not until after the baby died that the hospital intervened in any real way.  They removed the body.  They treated the woman for a severe infection, caused by the ordeal.  There are hundreds of obvious questions.  Why didn't they deliver the baby earlier?  Why didn't they treat her infection earlier?  If they knew the baby was going to die, as they seem to have known, why didn't they remove the baby to try and save it?  Why didn't they remove the baby to try and save her?  Is it true that there was nothing that the doctors who worked in that hospital could do without breaking regulation?  She requested and abortion, and it was denied- thus the outcry.

I have only read one article, and the article I read wanted to make the point that abortion access should never be restricted.  In the opinion of the article, the tragedy is not that the woman died, but that she was denied abortion.  That is not just an overreaching manipulation of fact to support a premise, it is degrading to women.  She did not want an abortion until she believed that her baby was past saving.  To hold her death as a totem for the tribe of pro-abortion-on-demand, is to belittle her tragedy.

I do not have the answers.  I hope that some answers come out.  If it is true that the doctors hands were tied, I hope that the hospital has the sense to give the damning regulations another look.  I hope that just this once, the pro-lifers can unify, to cry out against this tragedy.  The pro-choice and pro-abortion crowds have already begun to claim the tragedy.  It is an arrow pointed at us.  We must answer and answer with love and quite possibly contrition.  Is an extreme position on the subject of protecting pregnancy, a policy of absolute non-intervention at fault?  If so, even if the intent was to prohibit abortion, the tragedy is ours.

We cannot place the life of a child over the life of a mother, at least not if we hope to claim shelter under the pro-life mantle.