Why oppose abortion?
Well, yesterday Blaise critiqued an opinion piece written in the Messenger regarding pro-lifers on campus. In that article, Blaise mentioned that the writer of the article, Samantha Dellapina, asked for our opinion on the arrests of the pro-life students at Carleton University. In addition, she asked the question, “why do you oppose abortion?”. I’m no Blaise but I will answer this question on the record for the club.
Why do you oppose abortion?
There are two premises and a conclusion to the pro-life argument. First, it is wrong to kill an innocent human being. Second, abortion results in the killing of a human being. Therefore, abortion is wrong. Pretty simple, but let’s elaborate a little bit on this.
I read the comments section yesterday and Samantha stated:
I believe a living breathing human is more important, legally, than “the unborn.”
Now, I’m not sure why “the unborn” has quotation marks but that’s not important to the point I’m making. An unborn child IS a living, breathing (though he breathes through another mechanism) human. Embryology helps pro-lifers in this case because at the moment of fertilization a new organism comes into existence, separate from the mother and father. If the two parents are human, then the zygote is human. This is just basic biology. Therefore, we cannot take away the unborn’s humanity because he is human. This is what science tells us.
Now, what science cannot tell us is whether this human being is worthy of rights under the law. This is where ethics and philosophy steps in. Is this human being, the unborn child, a human person worthy of rights or not? Most people, when arguing for abortion, attack the statement that the unborn child is a person. They can admit that the unborn child is human but not a human person. However, looking back through history, making the distinction between human beings and persons gives you the perfect foundation for human rights abuses.
Samantha tried to make abortion into a personal choice. However, abortion is objectively wrong because it denies a person the right to life. It is the killing of an innocent human being and that is why there are pro-life students on campuses, protesting, educating and engaging with other students. It is not an anti-woman movement as pro-lifers do a lot to help out those women who find themselves in unexpected pregnancies so that they can care for their child both inside and outside of the womb. Abortion is not the compassionate way to care for a woman in need.
Therefore, abortion is wrong because an innocent human life is ended. It is not about choice, but about the rights of all human persons, including the unborn. This is why pro-lifers make a stand and this is why we are not afraid to make our voices heard.
What makes a cluster of cells inside a woman’s fetus any more “human” than say, a grouping of skin cells that was just scratched off my back? What makes this argument a fallacy is that a zygote does not have the ability to feel pain, suffering, or especially consciousness. What makes killing a human fetus anymore “evil” than a protist. Neither can think, and in fact I would argue that in order for a body to really be considered living it has to be able to live on its own.
The reasons that people come up with to support the non-choice of abortion are almost always based in religion. From a completely unbiased and non-religious view, abortion is no more wrong than squishing an ant (I would argue it’s MUCH less wrong). It would be like suggesting that no sperm or egg should ever go wasted and that it should be illegal NOT to have kids every chance you get (eg. no masterbating).
Your argument is completely fallous and deeply rooted in (very wrong) religion. There is absolutely no reason to suggest killing a fetus is evil. I personally think that it is immortal to deny a woman any choice in the matter.