Friday 7 February 2014

Does abortion = murder?




Abortion is a very emotive issue. And yet it is one that I often shy away from. But not today. I trust this will be a helpful discussion rather than a hindrance.
 
The World Health Organization estimates between 40 and 50 million abortions are carried out annually worldwide, approximately 125,000 every day.
 
If abortion is removing a clump of cells which belong to the pregnant mother (akin to removing a gallbladder or something similar), as perhaps many of you will think, then perhaps it is ok. And it certainly isn’t murder.

And perhaps you’ll decide right now not to read on.  

But if abortion is the removal of a human being, then it begs the question: is it murder? And if it is, then how should one respond to that?

There are 3 issues that spring to my mind when considering whether abortion is the killing of an unborn child.

 

1.     People seem to…well…they seem to know


I’ve been present at the ultrasound of my 3 children. 'Look, there’s the arms. There’s the head. Oh, it’s giving me the thumbs up!! 5 fingers, 5 toes, a heart, a stomach, a brain. It’s a…..It’s a….It’s a….baby!'
 
It’s a person.

The devastation when we went for our 12 week scan for our first baby. Again, fingers, toes, a head, 2 arms, 2 legs. But no heartbeat. “I’m so sorry, you baby died perhaps 2 weeks ago”. Despair. Horror. Why us? Why now? There’s still an empty place around my table. There should be another voice calling me. ‘Daddy’. ‘Daddy’. But my baby isn’t here.

In fact, most people who have scans who I meet talk about seeing their baby on their screen. But did you know that when women unsure of keeping a pregnancy go for a scan they are often advised not to look at the screen? ‘Are you sure you want to look?’ the sonographer will say.

Why do they say that? If it is only a clump of cells? Why the emotive language surrounding abortion if it were just another operation? It seems like something more is going on.

Last year we read here about the tragic case of John Andrew Welden who tricked his pregnant girlfriend Remee Lee into taking an abortion pill pretending it was antibiotics. The article uses the words “unborn baby,” “abortion pills,” and “murder.”

So, if a woman asks for an abortion pill signed for by a doctor it is called choice? But a man hits or tricks the pregnant woman then it is murder?

Confused? I certainly am.

 

2.     The evidence of science


Some facts. A foetus has human chromosomes derived from human gametes. It moves, breathes, grows, reproduces, excretes and feeds. Brain function, as measured by EEG, is present in the foetus about six weeks after conception. Responses to tactile sensation (e.g. fist forming) can be observed at seven to eight weeks' gestation. At nine to ten weeks the foetus squints and swallows; breathing movements begin at eleven to twelve weeks. By 16 weeks he will respond violently to stimuli that you or I would find painful. 4D imaging and amazing films like this one are amazing. Is that really a person? If not, what is it?

If medical science points to the foetus as a living being, then even if people disagree on the details, should the foetus be given the benefit of the doubt? And if it is a living human being, then would ‘killing’ it be considered murder as it would be in any other case?

 

3.     The evidence of the Bible


This will only hold if you consider the Bible to be the ultimate authority.

It seems that the Bible points to the conclusion that human life begins at conception and that, like other human life, a foetus is made in the image of God and worthy of the utmost respect, protection and empathy. Indeed the Bible makes many specific references to life before birth, for example:

God called Isaiah (Is 49:1) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) before birth and formed Job 'in the womb'. (Job 10:8-9, 18-19). God knitted us together in our mother’s womb (Psalm 139:3-4). Perhaps the most staggering claim it makes is that God became a baby in a mother’s womb and that he would grow up as a child as we do. By inference, therefore, Jesus identifies with the unborn and the preborn.

The biblical position is that an unborn child has dignity; they are made by God and known by God. The Bible also calls those who trust in Jesus to give special protection to the weak and the vulnerable in society.

 

Why are you even asking the question?


You might now say: “Why are you asking the question? Are you trying to shock? Are you trying to belittle and judge those who have made painful and difficult decisions to abort their child? Are you calling them murderers”?

I guess that I’m simply seeing where the logic takes us.


If you believe the above is rubbish, that abortion is not a problem and we should carry on as we are, then you will find my question irrelevant. The answer will be ‘no’ and I’m sure you can present many arguments to support your belief (which I haven’t got space to cover here).


But if you find that yes, you think it may well be murder, then the question of what to do with that belief is a valid one. Because if you truly believe something it will affect your actions.

 
If you believed that 189,000 people in the UK a year were being led quietly into clinics to their deaths you might raise your voice and say something. If you believed they were innocent and defenceless, you might raise your voice a little bit louder.

 

Why do they stay quiet?

 
So if people believe this, or even that it might at least be a possibility, then why do they stay quiet?

 
Is it because they fear a backlash?

Is it because pretending the issue isn’t there means they can get on with their daily lives and remain untouched and untroubled by what would by definition have to be termed a genocide?

Is it that they have been convinced by the argument that it would be a greater evil to deny women the equal right of reproductive freedom (a greater evil than murder!?)?

 

The noisy ones

 
But there is a small minority who do not stay quiet. Who are not browbeaten by the pro-choice lobby, but who see abortion as the human rights issue of our day.

They raise awareness.

They challenge our lawmakers, pointing out that by the letter of the law 96% of all abortions are illegal.

They seek to offer unbiased advice and support to women facing unbelievably hard decisions, providing an alternative to commercial organisations who have a financial interest in aborting their child.

They seek to address the root causes of the problem including:

Irresponsible young men who are as much involved as women.

The lack of potential adoptive parents.

The isolation of many women who feel pressured into abortion as they feel they have no other option.

Education in our schools which counts abstinence before marriage as a laughable impossibility

They bear the cost of their stand to their reputations, to their careers and to their comfort.

 


So is abortion murder? I would say that it is for you to carefully consider, read around, pray about, and decide for yourself.

 
But whatever your conclusion, the final question for all of us must be: will my beliefs affect the way I act and respond to such an important issue?
 
 
 

2 comments:

  1. I find it curious that your concern seems to be whether the foetus is human or not. Frankly, as an atheist, my only concern is whether it would suffer, whether it would feel any pain. Not whether, by some obtuse definition, it is "human" or not. What does being human even mean in that sense?
    If you believe that life begins at conception, then surely any refusal of sex on your part is effectively you denying a potential life a chance. Is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for reading and thank you for the comment. It seems you raise 3 points here. Firstly, we will all have a view of when life begins, whether at conception, or when we feel pain, or other. Legally, life begins when outside of the womb. I think my point is that this does not square up with what we know from medical science and even in many cases from conscience. My view is to give the benefit of the doubt. Science shows us that a human embryo is a whole living member of the species, in the early stage of his or her natural development. Unless severely damaged, or denied, or deprived of a suitable environment, a human being in the embryonic stage will develop himself or herself to the next more mature development stage, i.e., the fetal stage. So a human life is exactly this - created, growing. Dependent, yes (as are babies and children outside of the womb) but in and of itself a human being, vulnerable and worthy of protection. That is why whether it is human or not is important, because life is to be protected. If it's not human, if it's a growth of cells, then I don't think there would even be a debate here.
    Secondly, the pain issue I think is irrelevant. It's not ok if I anaesthetise someone before killing them. Why? Because they are a human being. I may allow my vet to do this to my suffering pet rat, but not with human beings, because deep down society recognises the sanctity of a human life.
    Thirdly, many people will disagree on when life begins. You could apply the 'denying a life a chance' argument whenever life starts surely? Some would say that if you are not willing to have a child, to bear that responsibility, then don't have sex. Sure, you may plan timing, you may use contraception, but you might still get pregnant. But if you can be convinced that life doesn't start until, say 12 weeks, then abortion is essentially retrospective contraception. If this is the case, then why is abortion under 12 weeks a difficult topic? If it's the same as the oral contraceptive or implant or condoms then why all the fuss? Sorry if I haven't fully answered your question.

    ReplyDelete

www.hypersmash.com