In 1729, Jonathan Swift wrote an essay titled A Modest Proposal. The essay proposed that the people of Ireland sell their babies to be eaten. At first glance this suggestion seems barbaric, but with a few changes I believe, it will fit quite well into our civilized worldview. For starters, the principal that the wealth and health of the mother exceeds the importance of the baby is indispensable to our worldview. This principal is what Swift’s plan stems from. His plan (as does mine) gives mothers a way to produce good money every nine months, the only expense being the baby. 

The main difference between my modest proposal and Swift’s is the time that the baby would be killed. Swift proposed that the babies be nursed for a time before being sold, killed, and consumed, while I propose that unborn babies be aborted in the womb (as is the tradition in the civilized land of America), then extracted, sold, and eaten. Unfortunately, this method would provide less meat. However, if we wish to avoid murdering legally-protected babies, it cannot be helped.

Swift, in his essay, said that he could not see a single objection to his plan. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same. Even in this civilized society there will be objections to my proposal, but these objections I will now logically disprove. For if we are to have any consistency in our worldviews, or any consistency in the legislation of government, then you must see that my plan is the natural progression of events.

The first and most common objection that I expect is that eating unborn babies would be cannibalism. But I remind my civilized audience that babies in the womb are not human. Do not be deceived by the fact that they look like a human baby, and have a heartbeat like a human baby, and have independent thoughts like a human baby. They are not a human baby, for they are still inside their mother’s womb. You see, someone decided that as long as an unborn baby is separated from the outside world by a layer of skin, it is not a human and has no rights. Thus, in a civilized society with abortion, it must be admitted that eating fully formed unborn babies is not cannibalism, but perfectly acceptable.

Another objection that will be common is that it would be equivalent to cutting off a growth from the mother and eating it. This concept makes us queasy. However, eating unborn babies is fundamentally different. As we know, a fetus is a parasite. A parasite by definition is not part of its host. In other words, if a baby is a parasite, then it must have a body distinct from its mother’s. Therefore, the old saying must be amended to: its body, my choice.

The only other objection would come from animal rights activists, who would claim that it is cruel to kill something so helpless. However, unborn babies aren’t even on the level of animals. This is proven through government legislation. You see, the pain that an unborn child experiences during an abortion operation far exceeds the boundaries that our civilized government has put in place for animal cruelty. Yet our civilized government refuses to make abortion illegal. Therefore, it is better to view unborn babies as similar to plants, or better yet, rocks. This may seem absurd, but it is the only way that our civilized government’s legislation can be consistent.  

Conclusion

Perhaps it is time for this horrid joke to end. This essay was inspired by Jonathan Swift, who wrote A Modest Proposal as a work of satire. The purpose was to 1) show that the people of Ireland were valuing money and comfort over human life, and 2) to take that idea to the extreme in order to show how damaging and absurd it could be. Of course, Swift’s essay was hyperbolic in nature, and made a few logical leaps in order to make his point. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same. I truly believe that if pro-abortionists want to be consistent, then they cannot raise a valid argument against the consumption of unborn infants. But pro-abortionists do not support the eating of unborn children. This brings me to the point of this essay: to show that pro-abortionists will not take their arguments to their logical conclusion. The logical conclusion of being able to kill an unborn baby is that they are non-human, have no rights, and should not be protected. If these things are true, then there is no reason that they should not be eaten. Abortion is already evil, but both sides will agree that this concept, which is the natural progression of abortion, is beyond evil. That is why I am pro-life.