Yesterday, Canada’s The Globe and Mail reported on a new trend: funerals for children who die in early miscarriages. And strangely, a number of women claiming to be pro-choice are among those holding funerals for their little ones.

Now, I say “strangely” because it does seem like a bizarre twist in pro-choice logic. If an unborn baby is not a person and is only “potential” life, then are you mourning the loss of the child or the anticipation of having a child? And if the child was only “potential” life, why cremate the remains or bury the tiny body? To what purpose does this signify?

The Globe and Mail reported:

A growing number of women and their advocates, many of them staunchly pro-choice, are pushing for the formal recognition of the miscarried fetus as a symbol of their grief and loss.

Publicly mourning the death of an unborn child by holding funerals or cremating the remains may have an impact on the abortion debate itself. It may also reflect a growing acceptance of post-abortion syndrome and whether the syndrome will one day be recognized as legitimate. If a woman who claims to be pro-choice feels like she can mourn the loss of her child, is it fair to tell a woman who has had an abortion that she is not allowed to be depressed, regret the abortion and mourn the loss of her child?

http://www.lauraechevarria.com