Part 2 ABORTION: Woman’s Choice or Modern Holocaust?

Part 2 ABORTION

Is abortion simply “a woman exercising her rights over her body”—or something much more grave? Since the legalization of abortion in 1973, America has been dealing—in part—with its social, economic and moral problems through the disposing of the unborn. It can be said that each child born in the U.S. since 1973 is not only an American citizen—but is also a survivor of its laws.

Part 1 ABORTION: Woman's Choice or Modern Holocaust?

With over two decades since Roe v. Wade, and as the world descends further into the fog of “the new morality” (which began taking shape in the mid-twentieth century), society still cannot even agree on the simplest of issues concerning abortion. Many, claiming that abortion is a woman’s God-given right over her body, continue this practice blissfully unaware—not wanting to know the truth behind such unresolved issues as: Have millions of human lives been aborted, or were they merely fetal tissue? And, what exactly is the value of a fetus?

According to today’s standards, it is not worth much. In the October 2003 issue of Reader’s Digest, Dr. Eric Keroack, an ob-gyn in Boston, stated, “A fetus is considered so precious that we spare no expense to save its life; yet it’s also so worthless that it can be legally disposed of.”

Why is it that after thirty years, the most monumental issues surrounding abortion still remain in debate? How can it be that, while millions of either human beings or “blobs of organic matter” are being aborted, so many questions concerning this procedure remain unanswered?

Why can science send men to the moon, discover amazing complexities of the human cell, and create the most intricate, technological innovations, yet cannot even answer the crux of the abortion debate: WHEN does life begin?—and—WHO has the right to take it away?

According to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Blackmun, such difficult questions need not be resolved. But is this true? Should we dismiss such an all-encompassing decision, simply because those trained in the fields of medicine, philosophy and theology are unable to come to a unanimous consensus? Can one dare risk the lives of millions while waiting for such a universal decision—coming from a mankind who cannot even agree on the simplest of matters?

In this part of the series, we will analyze these questions. We will also examine the global effects of abortion and how it has affected the marriage and family institutions, and learn why the media has presented such a one-sided view of “abortion on demand” to the now not-so-trusting public. We will also see, after examining the facts, the true implications of abortion.

Global Scope of Abortion

In Part One, we saw how legalized abortion has affected America. But what effects has it had on society as a whole? Although abortion does not seem to be as controversial in the rest of world as it is in America, this is not because the procedure rarely occurs.

Notice: While nearly 50 million abortions have taken place in America alone since 1973, an estimated 46 million abortions take place around the world each year—over 126,000 a day. According to a United Nations Population Newsletter, 20 million of these are performed illegally.

According to “Abortion Policies: A Global Review,” by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, of 192 countries and territories analyzed, 55 provide abortion on demand. Of these, 27 restrict abortion on demand only to the first trimester (weeks 1 through 13).

Of these same 192 countries and territories, all but four offer legal abortions to save the mother’s life. Also, 135 offer abortions to mothers who may suffer from a health or mental “risk” (and this is open to interpretation), if the pregnancy is the result of rape, the unborn has a birth defect, or simply upon demand.

In countries (mainly Catholic) where abortions are prohibited, mothers who self-induce abortions—and this is becoming more common each day—are charged with infanticide and imprisoned. Yet, in a bordering country, the procedure may be legally available, and all a mother needs to do is visit a clinic.

Illegal abortions are commonly performed in unsanitary conditions, with unsafe surgical procedures and by untrained people, and account for an estimated 78,000 deaths of pregnant women worldwide each year.

On the worldwide scale, the abortion rate (the number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44) can range from a low of 6.5 in the Netherlands, to a high of 77.7 in Cuba. The U.S. abortion rate is 21.3, comparable to other developed nations, such as an 18.7 rate in Sweden and a 22.2 rate in Australia.

In Poland—where abortion was declared illegal nearly ten years ago—a Dutch “abortion boat,” consisting of a tugboat with a women’s clinic, is reported to have been stationed in international waters to offer Polish women pregnancy counselling, birth control and the abortion pill known as RU486 and, if asked, to perform abortions. This group of abortionists, called “Women on Waves,” is hoping that Poland will ease its stance on abortion once it is part of the EU. These “abortion tours” are becoming more common, and frequently visit international waters near nations that restrict abortions.

Ironically, while abortion is prolific around the world, it is most controversial in America. Why? In an article, “The war that never ends,” The Economist explains that although other countries (mainly in Europe) have legalized abortion, it is not such a debated issue as it is in America. This is mainly due to how it was legalized in the U.S. European nations legalized abortion through legislation, occasionally through referenda. This open-forum discussion allowed opponents’ objections to help mold the laws to suit both sides as much as possible. This gained the support of both sides, who felt that their opinion was voiced. Also, Europe provides abortions free, with slightly stricter time limits for when the procedure can be performed, stating that it is available for the health of the woman—not her right.

On the other hand, America placed abortion rights on par with freedom of speech and religion—stating that it is a part of one’s right to privacy. Placing abortion rights under the banner of the American Constitution is what has caused the firestorm among so many.

The Economist further attributes the battle over abortion to America’s supposed high regard for “Christian values and morals,” and for an American fondness for “arguing about fundamentals.” The article continues, “Europeans routinely turn moral issues into technical ones—and then hand them over to technocratic elites. America is a country of fundamentalists, thanks to its constitutional tradition, its legal culture and perhaps its Puritan heritage. For Americans, abortion can never be just about health. It has to be a clash of absolutes: the right to choose versus the right to life. Add to that the openness of the American political system, which makes it impossible to hand controversial questions over to technocratic elites, and you have the making of an endless argument about fundamentals.”

In effect, abortion has become a battle of “rights.” On one side of the trench are those standing up for the “right” of a mother to decide whether her unborn child lives or dies. On the other side are those defending their “right” to uphold life and to practice what they believe to be “Christian” morals and ethics. But there is an additional right that many have overlooked. This right is found on a document signed on July 2, 1776—called the Declaration of Independence—which states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

According to the technocrats, this right to life, however, hinges on the exact moment when human life begins. Some believe it to be at conception—when the sperm and the ovum meet. Others claim that life does not begin until the fetus takes in its first breath, similar to when life entered Adam in the Garden of Eden.

Since brain waves are one of the legal criteria in determining whether someone is alive, and are measurable in the unborn child by week seven, it has been said that, legally, life begins at that time. However, the exact moment that life begins must be determined. After all, millions of lives hang in the balance. What Science Reveals

For over two decades, some in the medical profession—whom the world has “knighted” with the responsibility to discover when human life begins—have claimed that they still do not have the irrefutable proof needed to determine when life begins. But there are many others in medicinal science who plainly state that this proof has been found—yet it continues to be dismissed by the sceptics.

Notice: “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and any interruption at any point constitutes a termination of a human life” (Dr. Jerome LeJeune, genetics professor, University of Descartes in Paris).

“Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception” (Prof. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School).

“The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter—the beginning is conception” (Dr. Landrum Shettles, discovered male-and female-producing sperm). “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception” (Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman of the Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic).

“The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception” (Dr. McCarthy de Mere, medical doctor and law professor, University of Tennessee).

“The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life” (Willke & Willke, Handbook on Abortion, 1971, 1975, 1979 Edit., ch. 3).

“Scientifically there is absolutely no question whatsoever that the immediate product of fertilization is a newly existing human being. A human zygote is a human being. It is not a ‘potential’ or a ‘possible’ human being. It is an actual human being—with the potential to grow bigger and develop its capacities” (Dr. Dianne Irving, “When Does Life Begin? Scientific Myths and Scientific Facts,” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 1999).

When asked in an interview, “When does life begin?,” Hadley Arkes, author of “Natural Rights and the Right to Choose,” replies, “The leading textbooks on embryology say it’s the union of two gametes, a male gamete or spermatozoon and a female gamete or mature ovum. You can phrase it different ways, but on the medical side there is no dissident on this matter. What we find is that people are not arguing over the science, they’re arguing over the social definition of a human being. People throw in all these other attributes—it has to be alert, and articulate. Well, many of those things aren’t manifest in a newborn child. He’s not snapping off witty sentences...But we know the capacity for it is there” (Newsweek, “The War Over Fetal Rights,” June 9, 2003).

The mountain of proof that life begins at conception is so great, Dr. William Harrison, an ob-gyn in Fayetteville, Arkansas, stated, “The real issue in the abortion debate is not when life begins, but is it morally meaningful life? Well, I don’t know.”

With every passing year, the fundamental views regarding the beginning of human life are changing. Medical science is discovering that they are able to save premature babies at earlier stages. With state-of-the-art innovations, allowing mothers to see their unborn child develop, smile, blink and move within the womb, assumptions on when human life begins are in question. In fact, it is reported that many women seeking an abortion have a change of heart once they see the baby through ultrasound images.

As technology continues to evolve, those who ignore the above statements are presented with a tragic dilemma: As society descends deeper into the modern “new morality,” how long can millions of potential lives be disposed of until medical science unanimously agrees to some irrefutable proof of when human life is worth saving? How long will it be until the public becomes so accustomed to this “constitutionally-protected right,” that it simply refuses to know the answer?

Science has clearly proven that life begins at CONCEPTION—when the sperm and the ovum meet. It is then only a matter of time for the physical human features to develop.

Why do so many people continue to debate nonsensical questions such as “When is the fetus’s life worth the value of a human life?” According to the facts presented by science—it is at conception! At that moment, to take the life of the human fetus is morally and ethically wrong—it is outright MURDER!

Next Part Family and Marriage

Back to By David C. Pack