Kaitlyn Thornton Abbott
If the question of what you thought about slavery arose, your initial response would be, “It was, and still is, wrong.” But consider this: Slaves were only property, not humans. They weren’t a life, merely things; no conscience, no life, no breath. A slave was an “it.” They had no voice in court — they were used and seen as nothing. The masters, or, if you will, the ones who had the choice, were important. They were the ones who mattered.
Abominable thought process, yes? Now, listen to today’s argument: It’s my body, it’s not a human, and it’s not a life. It has no voice. They don’t have a voice in court; and women have the right to do what they want with their bodies, or property.
What difference do you see between the white man’s 1800s perspective and today’s perspective? The issues may be very different — in theory. Realistically, though, they’re the exact same. Back then, slaves were not seen as humans; neither are fetuses. They aren’t humans, they don’t have a voice in court, and they belong to their “owners.” They are allowed to be killed, and no one is stopping it.
If you were appalled at the thought process of Southerners, then you were very right in reacting that way. It was appalling: Man, God’s glorious creation, was being treated worse than a dog. They were being abused, mutilated, and thrown away like trash. Now, ask yourselves this question: How are the aborted fetuses any different than those slaves?
The answer to that question is simple: they aren’t. Let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about the subject. Psalm 51:5-6 says, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place” (NIV). What David is pointing out here is we are the same — we have the exact same identity from the moment we are conceived; we are sinful beings. He’s also pointing out God desires relationships with the unborn children as well. The Merriam Webster online dictionary defines relationship as “a state of affairs existing between people having relations or dealings.” Key word: people. Merriam Webster also defines people, or, persons, as human beings.
Now, let me guess. You’re thinking the verse from Psalms is an Old Testament verse, and therefore doesn’t apply to today because it’s not under the New Covenant. Well, you’re wrong. Luke 1:41 states, “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit” (NIV). Relevance? Hold on, hold on. I’m getting there. Luke 18:15 says, “People were also bringing babies to Jesus for him to place his hands on them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them” (NIV). The interesting thing here is the same word in Greek for “child” is βρέφος, meaning “infant.” Kind of interesting how babies and children are translated into the same word. The point is no matter whether they’ve been born or they’re still in the womb, they’re still considered children, who have a life.
One of the greatest commandments is “Do not murder.” Even if you don’t believe the Biblical reasoning, it’s one of our laws as a nation, which you can’t deny. And granted, to murder someone, he or she must be alive. The scientific evidence is quite overwhelming.
At the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human ovum, or egg, generally in the upper portion of the Fallopian tube, a new entity comes into existence. “Zygote” is the name of the first cell formed at conception, the earliest developmental stage of the human embryo, followed by the “Morula” and “Blastocyst” stages. The zygote is composed of human DNA and other human molecules, so its nature is undeniably human and not some other species. The new human zygote has a genetic composition absolutely unique to itself, different from any other human who has ever existed, including that of his or her mother (thus disproving the claim what is involved in abortion is merely “a woman and her body”). This DNA includes a complete “design,” guiding not only early development but also even hereditary attributes that will appear in childhood and adulthood, from hair and eye color to personality traits.
It’s also blatantly evident the earliest human embryo is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life: metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction.
Another question that frequently arises: is the human zygote merely a new kind of cell, or is it a human organism, a human being? Scientists define an organism as “a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependent organs.” The human zygote meets this definition easily. Once formed, it initiates a complex sequence of events to ready itself for continued development and growth.
The zygote acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program of development that will, unless uninterrupted by accident, disease, or external causes, proceed seamlessly through formation of the definitive body, birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, and aging, ending with death. This coordinated behavior is the very definition of an organism. In contrast, while a mere collection of human cells may carry on the activities of cellular life, it will not exhibit coordinated interactions directed toward a higher level of organization.
The science speaks for itself: at the moment of conception, a new entity comes into existence that is distinctly human, alive, and an individual person — a living, and fully human, being.
Some of the most influential pro-choice activists have dug their own grave on this subject too. For example, pro-choice feminist Naomi Wolfe argued in her article in 1996 the abortion-rights community should acknowledge the “fetus, in its full humanity” and abortion causes “a real death.” Another example is Kate Michelman, long-time president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, who said “technology has clearly helped to define how people think about a fetus as a full, breathing human being.”
Many pro-choice people will throw out arguments, regardless of the scientific evidence. For example, “It’s unfair to bring a child into a world where they’re not wanted.” No. Just stop. That is by far the stupidest argument ever to cross someone’s lips. Every child is wanted by someone — thousands of couples can’t conceive a child on their own and can’t afford the medical procedures to get pregnant. And on the adoption note: every hospital, police department, and fire houses fall under the Safe Haven statutes. These statutes ensure any child left there will become a ward of the state; no mother is ever required to raise a child on her own.
Oh, and my favorite, “if abortion is made illegal, tens of thousands of women will die from back alley abortions.” Please. Decades before its legalization, 90 percent of abortions were done by physicians in their offices. Even then, tens of thousands of women weren’t dying from illegal abortions. What people fail to realize, is that yes, women did die from back alley abortions, and yes, the procedures nowadays are a million times better than an old coat hanger; but, women still die today from abortions.
“Abortion is a safe medical procedure — safer than full-term pregnancy and childbirth.” Although the chances of a woman’s safe abortion are now greater, the number of suffering women is also greater because of the huge increase in abortions. Even if abortion were safer for the mother than childbirth, it would still remain fatal for the innocent child. Abortion can produce many serious medical problems, such as breast cancer, and tears in the reproductive system that prevent a woman from getting pregnant again in the future.
Something people don’t realize is the statistics on abortion complications and risks are often understated due to the inadequate means of gathering data. The true risks of abortion are rarely explained to women by those who perform abortions, a good majority of whom are in it for the money.
And what about the hard cases, like rape or incest? What is the difference between the child conceived by rape (which is extremely rare) and the child who was a planned baby? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. The child’s worth is not lessened because of the circumstances; as I have already proved, a child is a living human being at the moment of conception. The child can’t be blamed for simply existing! We all believe we have a destiny of some sort to fulfill, and that’s right. God had a plan laid out for us since before we were born: “Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast. From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God” (Psalm 22:9-10).
Now, I am strongly pro-choice … in the sense it’s your choice to have unprotected sex. If you consider yourself adult enough to be sexually active, then you need to be adult enough to handle the consequences. Having an abortion isn’t a consequence, it’s a quick fix. Life is a beautiful gift we have been given by the Creator of the universe. He created each “cluster of cells” that is a human being. Our own Declaration gives us the right to it: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” How dare we take anyone’s rights away from him or her? And on top of that, how dare we institute the God complexity into our society? What gives us the right to determine who should or shouldn’t live? All children conceived have a glorious path for their lives, and it’s not up to us to decide whether or not they should walk that path. We aren’t God, and we need to stop acting like it.
Bibliography
Kliff, Sarah. “Remember Roe!” Newsweek. 16 April 2010. http://www.news-week.com/2010/04/15/remember-roe.html.
Medline Plus. “Fetal Development.” 15 March 2011. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medline-plus/ency/article/002398.htm.
Wolf, Naomi. “Our Bodies, Our Souls.” The New Republic. 16 October 1995, 26-35.
Redeeming Pandora 