The Guttmacher Institute reports that 35 percent of all U.S. women will have had an abortion by age 45, and that 93 percent of all abortions occur for “social reasons” such as a mother’s decision that the child is unwanted or “inconvenient.”
Do you believe the embryo/fetus is not a human being? Do you believe the embryo-fetus is not a human being because …
… it is only potential human life?
But a potential human being must be an actual something else. An actual what? It clearly belongs to no other species than the human species. And what criteria are used for defining this magic time at which this undefined potentiality becomes reality? (See many of the alleged criteria below.) When does the change occur, and again, what is it before it reaches that point?
… it’s only now a mass of tissue and blood?
The heart starts to beat two to four weeks after conception. The tiny brain is already generating brain waves after 7 weeks. By the second month (when most abortions take place) the arms, legs, fingers, toes, ears, nose, mouth, muscles, organs, and bones are either formed or close to finish. It is clear to anyone who has ever seen one of the multitude of embryonic or fetal pictures available that this tiny entity is more than some nondescript “mass.”
… it isn’t fully developed?
Neither is a three-year-old. A human is not fully developed until the late teens to early twenties, and even afterwards matures in different ways. Can the stage of development really define what the being is? Is an adult more human than a child or merely more developed?
… it isn’t conscious?
Can consciousness be a universal human trait? If so, would a sleeping or anesthetized or comatose person be considered “non-human” because of his or her lack of consciousness?
… it isn’t big enough?
The location of an individual determines whether or not it is a human being? A baby the moment before birth is not human, but immediately after birth becomes human? How? Why? What is the child when it’s half-way out? Half-human?
… it might be imperfect?
Like you and me?
… it doesn’t look human?
One’s appearance determines humanness? Is an ape more human than an embryo because it looks more human? Isn’t the important question here, What is it?, rather than, What does it look like?
… it’s dependent on the mother?
A three-week-old baby is totally dependent on another human, too. It is not able to survive alone outside the womb, either. It needs comfort and care and protection and food, etc., or it will die. The total independence of anyone is a myth; we are all dependent on someone other than ourselves. How can the one physical condition called “dependence” (by which we are all stricken) determine humanness, let alone whether that human being has a right to Life or not?
… it’s not viable outside the womb?
The ability to survive outside the womb, viability, illogically calls upon time and place as the determining factors of humanness. A 6-month preborn fortunate enough to be near a medical center is viable, thus human; but a 6-month preborn in a rural town is not viable—it wouldn’t survive outside the womb—thus it is not human? Does the preborn become more human as its mother drives near a hospital but then recede back into a nebulous non-human state the farther they drive from the emergency room?
… it’s part of the woman’s body?
The hands are the mother’s? The heart? The brain? Taking that argument to its logical conclusion, (via the transitive relationship where if A is a part of B, and B is a part of C, then A is a part of C) a pregnant woman then has four hands, four feet, two brains, and, if the fetus is a boy, the woman has both male and female genitals. Perhaps you can see how illogical this argument is. Moreover, the fetus has its own unique genetic code in each of its cells; not the mother’s code, not the father’s code—its own human genetic code. The fetus is in the mother, attached to the mother, but not part of the mother.
… it’s only a bunch of cells?
So are we. We have trillions of cells, the unborn have from one to millions of cells. And their cells, like ours, all have purpose and function. The number of cells no more defines humanness than does size.
… it isn’t wanted?
There are people who believe that an embryo or fetus is not to be considered a human life until the mother wants it. The obvious implication here is that one’s feelings magically determine the identity of the object of those feelings. Therefore, if a father no longer wants his teenage son, the son suddenly becomes non-human. A dog, no longer wanted or loved by its owner, becomes non-dog. This argument is actually held by some “educated” abortionists.
… it isn’t alive?
It’s growing. It’s developing. It’s responding. It’s functioning. It’s burning food and oxygen. It’s giving off waste products. Its cells are reproducing. These are properties of a living being. It is a Life.
There are these three choices…
1) The embryo-fetus is a human being.
2) The embryo-fetus is not a human being.
3) We do not know…
IF IT IS HUMAN and we intentionally take the Life of this innocent human being, then we commit murder. Those are strong words but, nevertheless, they are true. We can water it down and ignore the issue by calling it “the termination of a pregnancy,” but it is still the taking of an innocent human life. This does not imply that a woman allowing an abortion has the heart of a murderer. But the action is murder.
IF IT IS NOT HUMAN, if it is not Homo sapiens, then to what species does it belong? If it is only potential human life, then what is it now? When does it suddenly become worth saving and why then?
IF WE DO NOT KNOW IF IT IS HUMAN, is it worth the risk? Is the possible taking of an innocent human Life ever worth the risk?
Please take time to reanalyze your opinion concerning abortion; it truly is a matter of Life and Death. There are over 4000 abortions a day in the U.S., over a million a year, and over 50 million a year world-wide. If it is true that the fetus is a human, perhaps you see why ProLife people see this as a modern day holocaust. Hitler had nothing on us. He convinced a blinded nation that there were individuals who were less than human, who were interfering and dispensable, and who did not have the right to live. He allowed them no defense and then slaughtered them by the millions. Could the same be said of organizations like the National Abortion Rights Action League, Planned Parenthood and dozens of others? Might they have blinded our nation by convincing us that there are people who are less than human, dispensable, and do not have the same rights to Life as you and I? Have they put the “rights” and privileges of a Master Race—those born—over the lives of a defenseless, “unwanted” race—the Unborn?
My concern is also for the woman—the other victim of abortion. My fear is that in closing her eyes to her child’s true nature and in bowing to the pressures put upon her by a society which cares little for Life, she may be snuffing out the Light in her own soul. Abortion, which many Pro-Abortion advocates see as a simple clinical operation, is to me both the losing of a Life and the hardening of a Heart; a hardening which may lead ultimately to the death of the Soul. To me this is of great concern.
Pro-choice, pro-abortion, pro-life, anti-abortion. There are a lot of names given to the two opposing factions warring over the issue of abortion. There is a lot of name-calling, too. But any group which calls itself “Pro-”something implies that their adversaries are “Anti-”something. The group which today is united under the banner called ProChoice says that they are standing up for a woman’s “right of reproductive freedom,” that a woman has a “right to choose” whether or not to “terminate a pregnancy.” Does this imply that those against the ProChoice ideals and against abortion are really anti-choice?
Let’s examine what choices a woman has today in the United States in dealing with or avoiding an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy…
Perhaps the most obvious choice that a pregnant woman has is motherhood. This does not imply that it is the best choice. There are undoubtedly times when being a mother may not seem to be desirable. The victim of rape or incest understandably may not covet the idea of giving birth to and raising what some may term as the “result” of an obviously abominable act. There may be other women who may not see themselves as “fit” to be mothers because of financial, emotional, or psychological reasons. On the other hand, a woman in an unplanned pregnancy may find the maternal instinct to be strong and overwhelming. She may be surprised at how good a mother she can be. One way or another, a woman in the United States in an unplanned pregnancy may choose to be a mother and raise her child.
One choice offered to a woman in an unplanned pregnancy is the giving up of her child for adoption. As mentioned above, there are times when a child may not be wanted by its parents. But all children are wanted by someone. The great problem in our country comes in uniting that child with new parents. There is a huge waiting list filled with couples waiting to adopt the child of a stranger. But bureaucracy, financial problems, and discriminatory policies greatly slow what ought to be a swift process. The phenomenon of the “unwanted child” is a myth.
From the mother’s standpoint, giving up the child after spending nine intimate months with it can be a desperate situation and certainly, for some women, it may be like losing a child. It seems, at times like this, the woman needs a lot of love, comfort, understanding, and hope from both her family and true friends. But whether giving up the child is easy or traumatic, it is a choice.
Sexual imagery surrounds us like a fog in our “advanced, civilized” society. Sex is used by the media to sell everything from gum to automobiles. So it comes as no surprise to find out that many people do not know what “abstinence” means. To abstain from sexual activity completely or at least until marriage is quite literally a joke to many people. It is true that abstaining from sex because of moral or religious beliefs can keep a person from some “important” social circles. It can also prevent a person from contracting AIDS, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, and a multitude of other sexually transmitted diseases. It goes without saying that unwanted pregnancies can be prevented by this method, as well. Abstinence is another constitutionally guaranteed right of the American woman.
Another legal right for Americans in preventing an unwanted pregnancy is birth control. It is well known that certain religious groups do not allow birth control, but it is, nevertheless, a legal option for both men and women.
As a result of Roe vs Wade in 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a woman has a constitutional right to take the life of her unborn child or “terminate her pregnancy.” Thus abortion is a way to deal with an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy.
Depending on the age of the fetus, there are several methods available, four of which are:
1) Suction abortion (used at about 10 weeks): This method accounts for most abortions. The fetus is sucked out of the uterus by a strong suction apparatus. The dismembered body parts are then checked to make sure all was removed.
2) D&C Abortions (used between 7 and 12 weeks): The fetus is cut into pieces from the walls of the uterus by a loop-shaped steel knife and removed.
3) D&E Abortions (used between 12 and 18 weeks): This method uses a sharp toothed pliers-like instrument to grasp parts of the body of the living fetus and tear them away, without anaesthetics. This is continued until all parts of the body and the placenta are removed. Bleeding is profuse.
4) Saline abortion (used after 16 weeks): A salt solution is injected into the fluid sac of the womb and the fetus is burned and poisoned to death. The fetus suffers for about an hour until it dies. Labor sets in within 24 hours and a dead child is delivered.
No matter the method–there are more–abortion is a legal option for women in our country, in many states up to the ninth month of pregnancy.
Are these choices to a ProLifer?
Birth Control Yes/No (some of our Roman Catholic friends don’t see birth control as an option)
Clearly a ProLifer is not “anti-choice.” More accurately he or she is ProChoice/AntiAbortion. One who is ProLife recognizes that all of these choices are undoubtedly difficult choices in the event of an unintentional pregnancy. Each one may involve a great deal of sacrifice of comfort for the woman—emotionally, spiritually, and financially.
But only one choice involves the taking of an innocent Life…
ProLifers contend that this life is a Human Life. They see the fetus consuming food and oxygen, giving off wastes, responding, growing, and developing. They see its cells as having specific functions which are directed by the uniquely human chromosomes in each cell. And they see all of these traits together as characteristically and universally human. To them, the embryo and fetus are tiny but crucial links in a developmental chain which lasts from conception to adulthood, and includes infancy, childhood, and adolescence.
ProAbortion people seem to avoid the issue of the fetus being human. They tend to dwell on the supposed “right” of a woman to reproductive freedom. But if the fetus is not human, why is this never brought up? Surely ProAbortion advocates can silence ProLifers once and for all if they would just prove the fetus is not human. But if it’s not human, what is it? If it’s becoming human, what is it now? Why is a baby born premature at 5 months worth saving, but an “unwanted” child aborted at 5 months allowed to die? If the fetus is only a mass of tissue and blood, why does an executive director of the National Abortion Rights Action League say, “Nobody likes abortion. It’s a difficult choice….” If the fetus is not human, why is it a difficult choice?
And if the unborn child is human, why is it legal to kill it?
It is my intention to help save the lives of those who have no legal choice of their own. I desire to defend those who cannot defend themselves. And I also desire to save the other victims of abortion—women. I fear that those women who allow abortions in their lives are being blinded to the Truth by denying the true nature of their child and allowing its killing. What frightens me the most is that this blinding could be a stepping stone to what many of us consider the ultimate horror, the death of the Soul. Please join me in my fight to save the lives of preborn children and possibly the souls of victimized women.
There are many choices allowed a woman but WHY ABORTION?
“By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems.” -Mother Teresa
Abortion is, in my opinion, the most serious moral issue we face. Too many people, for far too long, have conveniently ignored the facts – quickly changing the subject when the subject comes up – which it rarely does anymore. You can’t be lukewarm on this issue. Do your homework and then decide what you believe and why.