Abortion 1

ABORTION 1

To listen to this in mp3 format click here

The more I consider them, the more the arguments in favor of legalized abortion seem wilder and wilder and less capable of rational or scientific defense. One such argument is to deny that a conceived child is actually a human being. Before modern embryology, such an argument might have been more easily forgiven, but not today. We now know that once the process of human conception has been completed, there exists a genetically human organism with 46 chromosomes and the capacity to grow into something that looks just like you or me. It needs only food and time. No one can deny that this new creature genetically belongs to the human species and that it’s a distinct organism from its mother and father. But what else do you call an organism belonging to the human species other than a human being?

Most people in scientific and philosophical communities, fortunately, have realized this. But those still bent on defending the practice of abortion have found another, equally absurd, argument. As they argue, the unborn organism is indeed a human being (at least in the genetic or biological sense), but it’s not a person. To be a human, one only needs a certain DNA, but to be a person one needs to exhibit certain person-like qualities, most specifically consciousness, basic reasoning skills, free choice, and self-awareness.

Does this argument make sense? What would it say about infants? Anyone can see that there is no significant cognitive difference between a 10-day-old infant and an 8-week-old fetus. Is the infant, then, not a person? Should we allow parents to destroy their infants with impunity as we allow them to destroy their fetuses, embryos, or zygotes? The logic of the pro-abortion argument says yes, even if the people making it say no.