When Does Life Begin: Conception or Birth?
I increasingly find this question absurd, very nearly to a comic extent. Here is the irony. The liberal pro-abortion crowd (let's drop the misleading and euphemistic "pro-choice" and "pro-life" titles for now, shall we?) takes the non-scientific, traditional, almost faith-based viewpoint. The anti-abortion crowd has the cold, logical, and scientific viewpoint. Here's why:
The idea that life begins upon exiting the womb is the conclusion an unscientific and ignorant mind would make. It is the conclusion drawn from surface appearances, not underlying scientific fact. Rapidly advancing medical science has put forth a great deal of evidence showing that life is not "switched on" when the baby is pushed more than 50% out of the womb. The baby develops an independent heartbeat, an independent brain that becomes quite active in the womb, and it has distinct DNA. I've used this trite example time and time again...but when a woman is carrying a male foetus (if you will) in her womb, that foetus carries a unique DNA and for that matter, a Y chromosome that the woman does not have ANYWHERE else in her body. So "get your laws off my body" doesn't apply! As I recall from middle school biology a woman's body doesn't have a Y chromosome so logically that IS NOT her body. In her body? Yes, it is...but it is not her body.
Besides that, what of Siamese twins? Are they not two independent beings? Why can't one terminate the other if he or she feels inconvenienced? Surely that would make life easier...and possibly make survival of the first more likely. Why is a Siamese twin denied freedom of choice in that matter?
The supposition that life does not begin until birth is illogical, unsupported by any evidence, and unscientific. The Left is usually enamoured of the world of science, but in this case it is counterproductive and they cling to an outdated and disproven assumption. Remember...as George Will said in a column I linked below, "That a life begins at conception is a biological fact, not a theological tenet". It is not a matter of religion or personal morality. It is science. Examine the question solely from that perspective. Once you reach a conclusion (which I personally am convinced is conception), then is when you can examine questions of morality. Is it moral to end another's life without consent? If so, under what circumstances? Is it moral to kill a baby outside the womb for convenience? Is it moral to kill a foetus/baby inside the womb for convenience?
It is harshly sobering to see the efforts of the pro-abortion lobby to dehumanize the unborn. They are foetuses, or even just tissue to them. Does that bring to mind anything else? Those who justified slavery often felt that the Africans were less than human, like animals, or livestock. The Nazis considered Jews subhuman. See a pattern?