Few words provoke such bitter debates in society as “abortion,” and I am certain that this subject, coupled with “chastity,” will trigger a cataclysm. Even mentioning the word “virtue” is considered offensive today! Yet, it is necessary to perform an exercise in sanity and common sense, because every human act carries consequences.

If a person continues to smoke, defying a doctor’s warning of a high risk to their life, they expose themselves to losing it; and anyone driving at high speed can presume what they and those who cross their path might face. Similarly, from sexual practice—and this is not merely a matter of morality—both desired and undesired effects are derived. The former is assumed because it involves something pleasurable, but the latter is also a reality. We all know that the perpetuity of the human species and that of other animals in creation would not occur without this act. We do not arrive in this world through spontaneous generation. Not even techniques that allow for the creation of life, such as assisted reproduction, can dispense with the basic elements: the egg and the sperm. What exists, as science confirms, is the modification of life that is already present.

But the important thing is to emphasize the core of the matter: an unwanted conception is often the result of irresponsible sex—that is, its cause. If there is no unplanned pregnancy, as it is commonly called, there is no abortion. In my view, the debate to justify the eradication of an unwanted life almost always centers on the consequences of the sexual act once it results in pregnancy. Of course, personal responsibility only exists when that act is chosen voluntarily (which is the general rule), not when it is exercised through violence. However, the fruit of that act—the child conceived in any situation—has a right to live, and that must be respected. Numerically, pregnancies resulting from rape are not significant; the others constitute the majority. But these others, while not being products of violence, contain other parameters that should be considered to avoid an unwanted conception. On this point, I join the numerous analyses and studies that exist on the subject.

Let us keep in mind that desire and immaturity go hand in hand. Therefore, in puberty—since slogans emphasize the hegemony of an almost limitless personal freedom—adolescents are the most vulnerable. It is not information they are given; it is an open door to the trivialization of sex, which causes numerous unwanted, high-risk pregnancies, in addition to exposure to sexually transmitted infections. Many formulas offered to them do not always work. Neither condoms nor intrauterine devices can certify with a total guarantee that the conception of a new life will not occur, aside from the fact that they are morally illicit. And so, with the connivance of authorities and even their own families in many cases, being little more than children themselves, they find themselves either cradling a baby when they should be maturely facing the stage of life they are in, or they go to abortion clinics that will leave them with grave psychological scars throughout their existence that will be impossible to erase.

It may seem blunt to say it this way, but if someone does not want to have a child because they cannot afford it, let them abstain. There are countless things we would like but must forgo in life. A human being is above everything else. That is to say, prevention is better than cure. There is no need to apply a patch where there is no wound. It is a matter of responsibility and, naturally, of morality. Can one live without eating and drinking? No. However, sex is dispensable. No one dies if they do not practice it, even if it is an act blessed by God, who determined that through it all human beings should come into this world. But it has its well-known moments and circumstances to be permissible and necessary, as indicated by the Gospel and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Though it is not surprising that what has been stated here may arouse ridicule in many people who, defending an equivocal freedom, will continue to deliberately violate this precept.

The truth is that if the risks faced by those who let themselves be carried away by their instincts are not explained from an early age—if we do not speak of the greatness of self-giving and respect for one’s own dignity and that of the beloved, but instead treat sex like a Kleenex to be used and thrown away—problems will not cease to exist. If sexuality is exercised in an active and irresponsible way, consequences are most likely to follow. For this reason, we must face formation without fear. We must not be guided by the dictates of a permissive and hedonistic society. In addition to technically explaining what responsible sexual health consists of, we must open other paths that inexorably pass through an education in values. Self-denial and prudence, along with the aforementioned respect, are fundamental. Afterwards, each person must face the consequences of their conduct, bearing on their conscience the decisions they make, whatever they may be.

It might seem that this reflection is aimed only at adolescents and young people who are in a period of formation and lack the necessary maturity to face what affects a new life. But abortion is also considered and occurs among couples already living together and those who have entered into civil or ecclesiastical marriage; and many, incidentally, have already experienced parenthood. Chastity is not synonymous with celibacy. When speaking of responsible fatherhood and motherhood, this virtue—which is presumed—is often ignored, and moral and ethical lines are widely crossed. There is a lack of concern for becoming informed, so many are unaware that there are natural contraceptive methods supported by science, such as the sympto-thermal method or basal body temperature, among others, which do not oppose life but regulate birth rates.

Furthermore, it must be clear that for those children conceived and not loved by their parents, if they are allowed to be born, they will not lack arms to cradle them. Some people are reluctant to give them up for adoption and prefer to dispose of them in abortion clinics. But if their mothers, for whatever reasons, do not want to raise them—just as happens with children procreated in other circumstances permitted by abortion law, which are practically all of them—there will be those who give them their affection. In Spain, at least, there are organizations that help pregnant women in risk situations, just as there is assistance for those who suffer after having undergone an abortion, and the placement of newborns is regulated.

Finally, let no one be deceived. Those who accept abortion and practice it without paying a single euro out of their own pocket, as happens in Spain, should be clear that it is not the government that takes care of it; we all pay for it, including those of us who are pro-life.