Answers to Pro-Life
Questions
What about abortion in
cases of rape?
Rape is a horrible crime, and a pregnancy resulting from rape
must be a horrible burden to any woman. However, does this give her the right
tokill the child? How is a child concieved by rape any different than an child
concieved through loving, consentual sex? Obviously, it is no different, and
the balance of rights involved in the pregnancy is no different. The child is
not responsible for his or her father's crimes, and should not be punished for
them.
Abortion is a safe
medical procedure, safer than full-term pregnancy and childbirth.
Abortion is not safer than full term pregnancy and childbirth.
Less than one in 10,000 pregnancies results in the mother’s death.
Government statistics indicate the chances of death by abortion are even less –
however, deaths from childbirth are accurately reported, while many deaths by
legal abortion are not – completely skewing the statistics. Abortion actually
increases the chance of maternal death in later pregnancies. Women face
injuries to the uterus, cervix, urinary tract, infection, hemorrhage, heart
failure, embolism, sterilizations, ruptured intestines & bowels, coma, and
even death. In addition, there are countless cases of abortionists sexually
abusing their clients while under anesthesia. In fact, you're four times more
likely to die in the year following your abortion*. Further, woman who have
abortions suffer mental health declines, while those who deliver their
child actually have improved mental health.
What about a woman
whose life is threatened by pregnancy or childbirth?
American Life League's (www.all.org) medical advisors say the
answer is a simple, unequivocal "no"— and any claim to the contrary
is bogus. And many other doctors across the country agree. American Life
League circulated a statement (3/00) concerning this position to a select
number of doctors around the country. More than 100 physicians have signed the
statement — including former abortionists Bernard Nathanson and Beverly
McMillan. The statement reads, "I agree that there is never a
situation in the law or in the ethical practice of medicine where a preborn
[unborn] child's life need be intentionally destroyed by procured abortion for
the purpose of saving the life of the mother. A physician must do everything
possible to save the lives of both of his patients, mother and child. He must
never intend the death of either.
While he was the United States Surgeon General, Dr. C. Everett Koop stated
publicly that in his thirty-eight years as a pediatric surgeon, he was never
aware of a single situation in which a preborn child’s life had to be taken in
order to save the life of the mother. He said that the use of this argument to
justify abortion in general was a "smoke screen."
The fetus may be
alive, but so are eggs and sperm. The fetus is a potential human being, not an
actual one.
Something non-human does not become human by getting older
and bigger -- whatever is human must be human from the beginning.
When the egg and sperm are joined, a new, dynamic, and genetically distinct
human life begins. This life is neither sperm nor egg, nor a simple combination
of both. It is independent, with a life of its own, on a rapid pace of
self-directed development.
A fetus isn’t a
"person" until viability.
Viability (the point when an unborn baby could survive outside
of the womb) is an arbitrary concept. Why isn’t personhood associated with
heartbeat (begins just 21 days after conception), or brainwaves (43 days after
conception), or something else? The actual point of viability constantly
changes because it depends on technology, not on the unborn baby.
Based on the same viability logic, many "born" people are not viable
because they cannot survive on their own without the aid of others. Should we
abort them too?
The unborn is an
embryo or a fetus not a baby. Abortion is simply terminating a pregnancy, not
killing a child.
Like toddler and adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not
refer to non-humans, but humans in a particular stage of development. Fetus is
a Latin word meaning "young one" or "little child." Is
stage of development related to a person ’s worth? Is a two-year old worth less
than a 6-year-old, etc?
From the moment of conception the unborn is not simple, but very complex. The
newly fertilized egg contains a staggering genetic information, sufficient to
control the individual’s growth and development for an entire lifetime.
Prior to the earliest first-trimester abortions, the unborn already has every
body part she will ever have. At 18 days, after conception, the heart is
forming and the eyes start to develop. By 30 days, she has multiplied in size
ten thousand times. She has a brain and blood flows through her veins. By 42
days, the skeleton is formed and the brain is controlling the movement of the
muscles and organs. After the first trimester, nothing new develops or begins
functioning. The child only grows and matures.
Every person has the
right to choose. It would be unfair to restrict a woman’s choice by prohibiting
abortion.
All civilize societies restrict individual freedoms when that
"choice" would harm an innocent person. Do men have the freedom of
choice to rape a woman if that is his choice? After all, it’s his body, why do
we have a right to tell him what to do with it? Why do we have a right to
impose our morals on him? By emphasizing a rapist’s right to choose, we clearly
are completely ignoring the rights of the woman.
We have laws that restrict false advertising, and others that protect us from
tainted foods or bad products. We have laws against discrimination and
violence. When other’s rights are at stake – particularly when their lives are
at stake – society is expected to, and must restrict the individual’s freedoms
of choice. The fact is that people who are pro-choice about abortion, are often
not prochoice about other issues with less at stake.
Throughout history, nearly all violations of human rights have been defended on
the grounds of the right to choose, e.g. "you don’t have to own slaves if
you don’t want to, but don’t tell us we can’t choose to. It’s our right."
The civil rights movement fought to take away this "slavery choice,"
while the woman’s movement fought to take away an employer’s free choice to
discriminate against women. The pro-choice position always overlooks the
victim’s right to choose. Women don’t choose rape. African Americans
didn’t choose slavery. The Jews didn’t choose to be killed in ovens….and babies
don’t choose abortion.
Every woman should
have control over her own body. Reproductive freedom is a basic right.
Abortion insures that 750,000 females each year do not have
control over their bodies. Why? Because they’re killed. About ½ of the total
babies aborted each year in the United States are female – killed before they
are even born, not even able to enjoy the basic right to life.
We don’t have absolute control over our bodies. A man is not permitted to
expose himself in public. In most areas of the country, women are not allowed
to sell their bodies through prostitution. We’re also not permitted to take
illegal drugs.
Too often, the "right to control my life," becomes a right to hurt an
oppress others. Whites used blacks to enhance their own quality of life, but
did so at the expense of blacks. Men have often used women to live their lives
as they wanted, but at the expense of women.
It is uncertain when
human life begins, therefore it’s a religious question, not a scientific one.
Even though this argument is hardly used by the majority of
pro-choice anymore, there are still a few who think it is a relevant
argument. Bottom line is the question can be answered one of three
ways. One could answer it in a religious theory; however, not everyone is
of the same religion and some just plain don't believe in religion. So
answering the question of when does human life begin in a religious theory
makes it open to much debate. Another way the question could be answered
is in a philosophic theory. Again not everyone's philosophy on a subject
is the same and again the theory is left open to much debate. There is
finally another theory which can answer the question of when does life
begin. It is the biological theory. Biological human life is
defined by studying the scientific facts of human development. This field
of study has no disagreements and no controversy. Bottom line is that
there is truly only one set of facts. The more knowledge that has been
learned about human development, the more science confirms that life,
biologically speaking, begins at conception. This means that at
conception there is a human who is very much alive, human, complete and
growing.
The biological fact is not a spiritual belief, nor is it a philosophical
theory. The biological fact is not debatable, not questionable. It
is a universally accepted scientific fact.
Isn't the Fetus just
part of the pregnant woman’s body?
A body part is defined by the common genetic code it shares with
the rest of it’s body; the unborn’s genetic code differs entirely from
the mother’s. Being "inside something" is not the same as being part
of something. A car is not part of a garage because it is parked there. Human
beings should not be discriminated against because of their "place of
residence."