Life begins at conception. This should be the least controversial statement ever uttered. Less controversial than the sky is blue, as I cannot prove that we perceive colors equally. When death occurs is more controversial as there is brain death versus when the heart stops beating.
Despite the beginning of life being an uncontroversial subject, so many have spent so much to inject controversy into it. This is because the need to support abortion is so great. There are political reasons for it. Politicians raise money, and secure votes from that portion of their base that demand the right to murder their children. Politicians are never interested in truth, logic, or right and wrong. Money and votes are all they are interested in.
The Eugenics movement is also heavily invested in abortion. They wish to keep black, and other minorities races from growing. Killing their babies for profit fits right into their agenda. There certainly seems to be a great deal of money to be made in the secondary fetal body part market.
The first pro-choice argument I run into is that I oppose abortion for religious reasons. I’m not sure why that is seen as a winning argument, but it is one that I always avoid. Using religion is unnecessary and hardly the strongest argument for life.
I am a Biologist. With degrees in Biology and Microbiology, I am well versed in life both great and small. When we enter this realm the most common arguments are heartbeat, brain waves, and viability. Of the three, I get the biggest kick out of the viability argument.
The viability argument is that fetuses are not viable. When you point out that 6 month olds are not viable, the incredulous reaction is that they can live outside of the womb. No they can’t. The ancient practice of exposure demonstrates that babies cannot survive. They needs years of feeding and care, and even after that some still are not able to live on their own. If viability were the benchmark for living, there be a lot of people in trouble.
In reality, heartbeat, brain waves, and viability are all versions of the benchmark argument. The benchmark argument is based on picking a benchmark that says before this benchmark, the fetus is not alive and may be aborted, and after this benchmark abortion is not allowed. The purpose of the benchmark is to detract from the fallacious statement that life begins or ends at some benchmark which can be set or reset based on political fortunes. It sets a stake that allows abortions and then the argument shifts as to the placement of the stake and not the validity of the argument. This why I choose biology, as it defeats all benchmark arguments.
Before defeating the benchmark argument, I always note that the person making the argument always choses a benchmark that they have cleared, making their life safe, but the person they wish to murder has not yet achieved and are therefore still murderable. I like to suggest that we choose having a penis as the benchmark. No one has one until around week 16, so until a person has one, they should be allowed to be aborted. This is never accepted as a reasonable benchmark, and yet arguments will persist as to what are reasonable ones.
Finally, we get down to the only argument that there is which is when does life start. Let me remind you that this in uncontroversial. Sperm and egg are created through meiosis. Meiosis is different from mitosis. Mitosis creates a duplicate cell. Meiosis creates a cell that has half the regular number of chromosomes. This cell cannot reproduce through mitosis. It must combine with another cell or die. When a sperm and egg combine, that is fertilization. It produces a living human being. Living because unless it spontaneously aborts, an abortion is necessary if the desire is to end the pregnancy.
Once you have a living fertilized egg, you most definitely have a human being. We have never seen humans give birth to anything but humans. And a DNA test can answer the question as to whether the fetus is human as well as whether or not it is the mother’s body. As the mother has a unique genome, it is different than that of her baby, and therefore not her body that is being aborted. That’s why I support abortion via suicide. It is not murder if you kill yourself. That is also never accepted as a viable solution.
There you have it. A baby is a living human being, a distinct person whose life is to be protected from murder. It is so clear that no argument can be made to the contrary. That leaves one last try. Pro-lifers don’t personally take care of all the unwanted babies. They are cruel people who force others to have children. They don’t care about life, just birth. To this I say, don’t stand on a mountain of dead babies and act like you have the moral high ground. If murder was a viable solution to the ills of society, we’d have no poor. We’d have no sick. We’d have no deformed, or retarded, or handicapped, or any other individual who places any burden on society at all. If babies were conceived spontaneously, I would say the pro-choicers had a point, but as long as you have to do something to become pregnant, you can avoid becoming pregnant.
Charles Hagerman is married with two daughters. He spend a great deal of time listening to music, and watching tv and movies. Most conversations with him will feature many movie quotes, and him breaking out into song. Having taught himself to pay guitar using the internet, he plays guitar at his church. Additionally, Charles is a self taught programmer, studies economics and various languages using the internet. He is a tireless defender of liberty.