Great question, @josueaparicio! I think you are hitting on one aspect that the church in America has been a bit weak in addressing - supporting mothers who are in a position where abortion feels like the right, or maybe even the only option. That isn’t to say there aren’t ministries and Christians out there who do precisely that, but it does seem like we can forget about the mothers in all the clamor to protect the life of the babies!
That said, the way I see the nature of this problem is first in identifying that there are two people involved in this situation: the mother and the child. Now, some would deny that the fetus is a “person” as yet, but, as I read your question, I believe you would agree with me that the conceived, but yet unborn child, is a person. As we approach this question, I think we have to ask the question, what is the best course forward for each person.
The strength of the position that you articulated is that you recognize that this mother is in a hugely vulnerable position! She is faced with a momentous decision, whatever it is that she chooses. And you have so clearly perceived that if we are shoving government mandates down her throat in the midst of this turmoil, that surely doesn’t seem to be the best way to love her. Wouldn’t it be better to come alongside her, support and love her, and through that point her away from abortion?
While I agree that it is certainly the more neighborly approach to come alongside a mother in this situation, I think that we risk losing sight of the person-hood of the child in the method that you have described. If the fetus is a person with all the rights endowed upon you, me, and the mother as a person, shouldn’t that fetus have the right to live a life? If that is the case, then it would make sense that the fetus requires an advocate to advocate for its life to continue past the womb, even if the mother doesn’t desire that to be the case.
In my mind, the best approach is to advocate a wholesome approach to every person involved. Not only do we need to advocate for the life and well-being of the fetus (whether through legislating against abortions, advocating for more robust and incentivized adoptions, and supporting single and/or disadvantaged parents), but we also need to come alongside mothers in this precarious position to love and support them, giving them the ability to make the best possible decision for both themselves and their baby, which, I think I can safely say, both you and I would say is the continued life of that baby.
A final thought along these lines is that I think that some people are better equipped for some tasks, more-so than others. So whereas one person may fit well into fighting for governmental protection of unborn babies but lack the necessary compassion to come alongside mothers and cherish and support them, there will certainly be another who is incredibly adept at loving these mothers incredibly well but would flounder excessively in attempting to entreat the government to change the laws. This is, I think, a picture of the well-functioning body of the church - each member able to individually pursue the tasks for which they have been uniquely qualified, gifted, and talented, but united together to collectively cultivate a work which brings glory to God.
What do you think? Does that seem a reasonable way to apply the scriptural dictates to this immensely difficult situation?