Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Case for Life

From Case for Life website....

Only One Issue

What is the Unborn?

Pro-life advocates contend that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. This simplifies the abortion controversy by focusing on just one question: Is the unborn a member of the human family? If so, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong. It treats the distinct human being, with his or her own intrinsic worth, as nothing more than a disposable instrument. Conversely, if the unborn are not human, elective abortion requires no more justification than having a tooth pulled. As Gregory Koukl points out, "If the unborn are not human, no justification for elective abortion in necessary. But if the unborn are human, no justification for elective abortion is adequate."

Some argue that abortion is a complex moral issue. However, there is only one question to resolve, not many: What is the unborn? Everything comes back to that one question. This is not to say that abortion is easy for most women. To the contrary, a decision to have one may be psychologically complex and perhaps even agonizing for some. But the topic today is not psychology, but morality. Everyone in the abortion debate agrees that abortion kills somthing. But whether it's right to take the life of any living being depends entirely on the question, What is it?

Common justifications for abortion are only valid if it is already assumed that the unborn are not human beings. Ask yourself if a justification for abortion also works as a justification for killing toddlers or other humans. If not, the argument assumes the unborn are not fully human, like toddlers.

" Women have a right to make their own private decisions."

Imagine that a woman has a two-year-old in front of her. May she kill him or her as long as the killing is done in the privacy of the bedroom? Of course not. Why not? Because the child is a human being. If the unborn is also human, they should not be killed in the name of privacy any more than a toddler.

Abortion advocates respond that killing a toddler and killing a fetus are two different things, like comparing apples with oranges. But that's the issue isn't it? Toddlers are human beings. Are the unborn also human beings? That's the one issue that matters.

"But many poor women cannot afford to raise another child."

When human beings get expensive, may we kill them? Bring out a toddler. Suppose a large family collectively decides to quietly dispose of its three youngest children to help ease the family budget. Would this be okay?

The answer from abortion advocates is the same. They agree that it would not be right to kill the children, but come back saying that aborting a fetus is not the same as killing children. So, once again, the issue is the same. What is the unborn?

"A woman should not be forced to bring an unwanted child into the world."

Abortion advocates argue that it's not fair to the child to be brought into a family where he is not wanted. He's better off not being born. So the fetus is aborted for the sake of the child.

Bring out the toddler again. Suppose that he is unwanted. In fact, by the time he's five-years-old, let's say that he's also abused and neglected. Should we kill him now to spare him future trouble?

The answer is obvious, but it brings us back to the one issue that matters. What is the unborn?

"No woman should be forced to raise a child with physical disabilities."

Suppose that you have in front of you a small boy with mental problems. He's not very bright, cannot speak or understand much of what is said, and has a strange look from head to toe. Would it be morally permissible to kill him because of his condition.

Abortion advocates would agree that we cannot destroy him. He should be treated with care as we do for all human beings that have injuries or cannot speak for themselves. Again, this brings us back to the toddler. If the disabled unborn are human, like the disabled toddler, we shouldn't kill them for not meeting our standard of perfection. This brings us back to the one issue. What is the unborn?

"Every woman has a right to decide what is right and wrong for herself."

Would you force your morality on an abusive mother who was physically mistreating her two-year-old? You better. No human being should be abused.You see the issue is not about forcing morality; it's not about privacy; it's not about economic hardship; it's not about physical disabilities; it's not about unwantedness.

The issue is reduced to one question: What is the unborn?


Wadical said...

It seems strange (or perhaps not) that the Federal Government has exercised double standards on this particular issue:

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a "child in utero" as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.

Many states have their own version of this statute. It seems that this fetus is only considered a "human being" if the mother "wants it to be". If you kill it when she wants to keep it, it's a HUMAN, with all rights intact and you are a murderer. However, if you kill it because she doesn't want it, then it's "an unborn fetus" and you're just a doctor performing a service to a woman who was dealt an unfair hand.

Yeah, something's broken, alright!

Badbeans said...


Feminists bent on keeping women childless and in the workforce, so as not to compromise the cause, have a tendency to refer to a "fetus" as a "parasite".

Fetus is the Greek word for "baby". Pro-abortionists began using it to sanitize the connotations of the practice. They very well could not let it be perceived as infanticide.

But if they were honest with themselves, they could not escape the FACT that a fetus is a baby, a human being.

Anonymous said...


Wadical said...

That was deep, anonymous...very deep. You should be a poet.

Hannah J said...

Ditto, wadical. Makes ya think and be invigorated with fresh zeal to go out and share this with anti-lifers the world around.