QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT ABORTION:
ARGUMENTS FOR THE RIGHT TO LIFE
Michael T. Griffith
2008
Third Edition
1.
"At what point of pregnancy does the fetus become human? In other words,
when does life begin?"
Answer: In a
1975 brief for the Illinois Supreme Court, an affidavit was introduced
detailing 19 textbooks on the subject of embryology, all of which agreed that
human life begins at conception (1:6-7). During the growing debate over
abortion in 1970, the editors of CALIFORNIA MEDICINE noted that abortion
advocates were avoiding "the scientific fact, which everyone really knows:
that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or
extra-uterine until death" (2:67). Dr. Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., Ph.D., a
leading authority on embryology, has said that the zygote (a fertilized egg)
"is human life" (3:40).
When the
U.S. Senate held hearings on the "Human Life Bill," 56 of the 57
medical experts who testified agreed that life begins at conception (5:24;
1:9). The Senate report concluded:
Physicians,
biologists, and other scientists agree conception marks the beginning of the
life of a human being--a being that is alive and is a member of the human
species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical,
biological, and scientific writings. (4:7)
By the third
week of the unborn child's life, his heart muscle pulsates, and his head, arms,
and legs begin to appear.
After about
seven weeks, brain waves can be detected, the child's heart beats and blood of
his own type starts to flow, and his nose, eyes, ears, and toes can be seen
with an ultrasonic scanner. At this same stage, the child has his own
fingerprints. In addition, he is sensitive to touch on his lips and has reflexes,
and all his bodily systems are present and functioning.
In the third
month, i.e., after about twelve weeks, the unborn baby swallows, squints, and
swims. He grasps with his hands, moves his tongue, and can even suck his thumb.
He can also feel organic pain.
During the
fourth month, the child's weight increases six times and grows up to eight to
ten inches long. And, he can hear his mother's voice.
In the fifth
month, the unborn baby's skin, hair, and nails develop. He dreams and has REM
sleep. If air is present, he can cry. At this point, the child can live outside
the womb, with proper care of course.
2.
"Doesn't a woman have a right to control her own body? Therefore,
shouldn't she have a right to have an abortion if, for whatever reason, she
does not want the pregnancy to run its course?"
Answer: But
we are not just talking about the woman's body. There is also the unborn
child's body, and, technically and scientifically speaking, that tiny body,
even as a zygote, is NOT part of the woman's body. From the moment of
conception, the fetus has its own DNA structure, and all of his or her basic
human characteristics are already present. Dr. Thomas L. Johnson, a professor
of biology and embryology, points out that the zygote "cannot be a part of
the mother . . . it has an entirely different set of chromosomes . . . it is a
separate and unique life" (7:168).
Furthermore,
except in the case of rape or incest, the mother has already exercised control
over her body by deciding to have sexual intercourse. Having made that
decision, she does not have the right to terminate the life of her child simply
because she does not want him or her to be born.
3.
"What if a woman has intercourse and uses contraceptive means to try to
avoid pregnancy but still gets pregnant?"
Answer: That
is one of the risks that every woman takes when she decides to engage in intercourse.
One can sympathize with the mother's predicament, but that still does not give
her the right to kill her own child. In such cases it is not the unborn baby's
fault that the contraceptive measures fail.
4.
"Since an unborn baby is not viable until around the fifth month of
pregnancy, what is wrong with aborting it during the first trimester?"
Answer:
Frankly, I find such an idea a little disturbing. Just because the unborn boy
or girl can't yet survive outside the womb, how does this justify terminating
his or her life? I can understand the need to do this in cases where the
mother's life would be legitimately endangered by continuing the pregnancy, but
if there is no genuine threat to the mother then the unborn child has every
right to live.
Some elderly
people are not really "viable." They are hooked up to various
machines and require nursing care, or else they would die. What would we think
of a doctor or nurse who unplugged the life support systems of these people and
then denied them nursing care, simply because they were no longer "viable"?
5.
"What about pregnancies that result from rape and incest? Doesn't a woman
have the right to have an abortion in these circumstances?"
Answer: My
gut reaction is to reply that two wrongs don't make a right. There are
literally thousands of young married couples who can't have children of their
own but who want to adopt. Most of these couples have to wait anywhere from six
months to five years, depending on where they live and on their life situation.
Why? Because there is a paucity of newborn babies available for adoption.
It's
important to remember that abortions done because of rape, incest, or life of
the mother constitute a very, very small percentage of the total number of
abortions. The vast majority of abortions are for the convenience of the mother
and/or the father.
Some
pro-abortionists say that we should allow women who have been raped to abort
their babies out of sympathy for them. I agree that a woman who has been raped
or otherwise sexually violated certainly is deserving
our sympathy and compassion. We should do all we can
to help her overcome this brutal and disgusting experience. But, many would
argue that we shouldn’t compound the injury by killing the unborn child. The
child has done nothing to deserve death. That baby is an innocent victim of
circumstance and still has the right to life guaranteed to all people in the
U.S. Constitution. I like what John Ankerberg and John Weldon have said on this
point:
If sympathy and concern are due the [raped] woman as they
clearly are, are not sympathy and concern due also to the human life inside the
woman? Why kill the innocent child? Doesn't that child have its own right to
live? (1:117)
President
Ronald Reagan spoke eloquently when he made these comments:
As we continue to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, we must also
continue to lay the groundwork for a society in which abortion is not the
accepted answer to unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life people have already taken
heroic steps, often at great personal sacrifice, to provide for unwed mothers.
I recently spoke about a young pregnant woman named
Personally,
if it were the only way to outlaw convenience abortions, I would support a bill
that allowed abortion in cases of rape and incest (and also in cases where the
baby’s birth would endanger the mother’s life).
6.
"Shouldn't abortion be kept legal to ensure that it is safe? Don't you
have any compassion for those women who, if abortion were illegal, would resort
to back-alley abortions?"
Answer:
There is no such thing as a safe abortion. Thousands of women can sadly testify
to this fact. Moreover, abortion is positively lethal for the unborn child.
As for
compassion, where is the compassion for the child being killed? I agree with
what the late Senator Jesse Helms of
I am often struck by the accusation from pro-abortionists that
their opponents are unfeeling and devoid of compassion when they object to
"safe, legal abortions." It seems never to occur to these people that
although a handful of black-robed justices can indeed abortion legal, according
to their rights, not even the most expert surgeons can ever make it safe. Any
abortion is fraught with danger for the mother, and it is 100 percent lethal to
the baby. Indeed, that lethality is the purpose of an abortion. And it is a
strange kind of compassion that exudes sympathy for the mother who wants to
kill her child, and looks upon the helpless child as something to be
exterminated. (6:67-68)
7.
"Don't you believe in a woman's right to choose?"
Answer: I
strongly believe in the freedom of choice. But, I do not believe a mother has
the right to choose to terminate the life of her unborn child simply because
the pregnancy was unexpected or because she and/or the father no longer wants to have a baby.
And what about the unborn child? Does not he or she also have a right
to choose? Who is going to stand up for the defenseless unborn baby, who cannot
yet speak or express his or her feelings on the subject?
Furthermore,
since roughly half the babies that are aborted each year are girls,
pro-abortionists are not being consistent when they say they support a woman's
right to choose. Not only does the pro-choice lobby not speak for all adult
women, but it defends the legality of a practice that results in the deaths of
thousands of unborn "women" each year.
For those
who would like more information on the abortion debate, I would recommend that
they obtain a copy of Mrs. Shari Richard's video Ultrasound: A Window To The Womb. Mrs. Richard, an ultrasonographer,
presents powerful scientific evidence and persuasive moral arguments for the
unborn child's right to life. Other
good videos on this issue include:
Sound Wave Images of the Unborn
SOURCES
1. John
Ankerberg and John Weldon, WHEN DOES LIFE BEGIN?,
2.
3. Landrum
B. Shettles, RITES OF LIFE: THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR LIFE BEFORE BIRTH,
4.
Subcommittee on Separation of Powers, REPORT TO SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981.
5. Ronald
Reagan, ABORTION AND THE CONSCIENCE OF THE NATION,
6. Jesse
Helms, WHEN FREE MEN SHALL STAND,
7. Jerry
Falwell, LISTEN
---------------------------------
About the Author: Michael T. Griffith holds a
Master’s degree in Theology, a Graduate Certificate in Ancient and Classical
History, a Bachelor of Science degree in Liberal Arts, and two Associate in
Applied Science degrees. He also holds
an Advanced Certificate in Civil War Studies and a Certificate in Civil War
Studies. He’s a two-time graduate of the
Defense Language Institute in