August 16, 2008
Is Abortion Wrong - Part One
An interesting and important discussion is unfolding in the South Dakota blogsphere that needs to take place statewide prior to November 4. Various things I've written, things I frequently say and fervently believe have attracted the attention of those who disagree and we've been lobbing back and forth our views and admittedly a few cheap shots have gone each way.
I've been trying to get Cory Heidelberger at Madville Times to answer a simple question: Do you believe abortion is wrong? Cory has yet to answer the question but instead retorts;
Is abortion wrong?" — I know you'd rather have that discussion, but that's not the right question to take to the polls. The more relevant question when we mark our ballots is whether IM11 is good public policy. And IM11 is not good public policy.
But I continued to press him to no avail;
Answer the question - is abortion wrong? When you answer that fundamental question, and say, as I think you will, that abortion is wrong, then you have to ask yourself what is the right and most immediate way to stop the wrong. And that is what pro-life people debate and then you will start to see how IM11 is a masterful approach to stopping that which is wrong.
Cory is too quickly jumping ahead to the question "is IM11 good public policy?" How can we know if anything is good public policy if we are unwilling to determine what is good or bad, right or wrong regarding the very thing IM11 seeks to address in our state.
This is one of the fundamental problems of our day, implementing laws and public policy with no regard to any moral anchoring. This results in colossal legal inconsistencies like we have at present where killing an unborn child is legal but suddenly it's two homicides if someone kills a pregnant women. In New York City on Thursday, a pregnant lady was killed in a horrible automobile accident but doctors were able to save her 3-pound unborn son by doing an emergency Caesarean section. Everyone is celebrating that even calling the rescuers heroes. They are. But why aren't we asking, what if this mom had been hit while on her way to an abortion?
Another South Dakota blogger, Flying Tomato Farms, joined the conversation with a post earlier today called - Is Abortion Wrong? You can read that for yourself but I will warn you it's basically flawed and/or weak reasoning, revisionist history, and unsubstanciated claims such as this one - "outlawing abortion doesn't significantly reduce the number of abortions." Hello? Show me that study. It doesn't exist. Anti-lifers make this stuff up and good people in our state are accepting it as fact. The Co-founder of NARAL tells us today that the year before Roe v Wade they made up the number- "10,000 women a year die from back alley abortions." The number was actually 120 in pre-Roe v. Wade 1972. 2000 women told our state task force on abortion they wouldn't have sought an abortion if it weren't legal.
Even Barack Obama admits "our law is by definition a codification of morality." And therefore morality is something that is and can be legislated. When something is illegal people view it as wrong and don't do it. When it is legal they view it as right. The question of is abortion wrong is absolutely essential to determine prior to any attempts at legislating.
Reading the rationale at Flying Tomatoes, you may feel as if you are reading the Planned Parenthood talking points. The reason being, you are. Planned Parenthood frankly needs to be outed for what they are - hardly objective. They profit in the hundreds of millions from abortion and therefore, the populace of South Dakota needs to do their own homework and take into consideration that what Planned Parenthood and the Campaign for UNHealthy Families are espousing is merely and completely bias propaganda. Listening to them on the subject of abortion is like asking tobacco companies if smoking is harmful and if they are targeting kids.
If you have no time or interest in the following more philosophical paragraphs, at least skip ahead to consider the last paragraph which, to me, carries more weight than all the rest.
In answering this question, is abortion wrong, here in part-one, I'm not going to answer from within my usual framework of religious tradition or theological reasoning. Religion aside, reason alone is enough to lead reasonable people to this conclusion that abortion is wrong, very wrong. I'll bring religious tradition and theology back up in my part-two follow up post. I'll be as brief as possible explaining a couple of four key points. Those who desire to grapple with them more fully will find several hundred pages on each point where I found them, in Francis J. Beckwith's book, "Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice." Beckwith is an associate professor of philosophy and jurisprudence at Baylor University. He leaves religion and theology out of discussion arguing solely from a philosophical and legal stand point to bring forth these conclusions.
1. The unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community.
2. It is prima facie morally wrong to kill any member of that community.
3. Every successful abortion kills an unborn entity, a full-fledged member of the human community.
4. Therefore, every successful abortion is prima facie morally wrong.
1. The unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community. Only four things distinguish the unborn from the born; size, level of development, environment and degree of dependancy. At 6'3" Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps is a foot taller than Olympic gymnast Nastia Liukin who is 5'3". But it's absurd to think he has more more value than her. The unborn is smaller than some newborns, but not all. Reason follows, size is irrelevant to personhood. As is the level of development, my teenagers are, of course, "people" but not more so "people" than they were as toddlers. Some premature babies are less developed than some unborn children. Reason follows, the point of development is irrelevant to the personhood question. Additionally, where one is is irrelevant to who one is. Environment is a notable difference between the unborn and the born. However, where one is a geographical fact not a moral judgment. Finally, the degree of dependancy. A sudden change in ones degree of dependancy does not in any way change their standing as persons.
2. It is prima facie morally wrong to kill any member of that community. This does not mean it is always wrong in every circumstance to kill someone who is fully human. There are circumstances in which killing is justified as in the case of self-defense. In the case of abortion, the killing of an unborn human being is justified if the child's presence in the womb poses a real and significant threat to the life of the mother (since both the child and the mother would die otherwise). The child's death is an unfortunate consequence that is unavoidable unless one is willing to let both die, which is immoral when there is the option that one can be saved.
Beckwith's remaining two points follow the course of reason and logic. Since is it true that the unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community and, because it is prima facie morally wrong to kill any member of that community and, because every successful abortion kills an unborn entity, a full-fledged member of the human community, therefore, every successful abortion is prima facie morally wrong.
All this is merely Cliff Notes on the basic foundational empirical and reasonable philosophical and legal evidence that abortion is wrong. Others can add additional evidence from a variety of angles to support this foundational truth that abortion is wrong. For example, Bob Ellis at Dakota Voice has written at length these past few days from the angle that abortion hurts women. Reason would cause us to conclude that which hurts another human being is therefore wrong. Again, in the follow up post, I will add a religious and theological body of evidence atop the foundation laid here that abortion is wrong.
Hopefully, some will take the above to heart and perhaps some will even wrestle through the 300 pages of Beckwith's book. If so you are in for a baptism of sound reasoning. But come on, is this really that hard? Ask a child what they see when they look at sonogram picture. 100% of them will tell you it's a baby. Then ask them if it is okay to rip the baby's arms off. When you see the horrified look on their face know that you are seeing the verdict of natural law on the question - is abortion wrong?
Comments on Is Abortion Wrong - Part One »
Bob Ellis @ 5:10 pm
That is really what this question is about.
Whether abortion hurts women is, unfortunately and obviously, debatable. I think it's pretty obvious from the large amount of evidence that points toward things like mental and emotional problems, infertility, breast cancer and the like that it DOES hurt women, but when you have "respected" groups like the APA making political pronouncements, it muddies the water. And women get hurt in the process.
But the main and ultimate question is whether it is right or wrong, and whether it ends a human life. Loss of life is the ultimate offense against another human being.
Here, too, with the main question, I think the answer is pretty obviously "Yes, it ends a human life." I look forward to reading the rest of your series.
William @ 5:44 pm
Let me ask you a question then. If you feel that abortion is so wrong and ought to be criminalized, what should be the punishment for the woman who procures an abortion?
If it is, in fact, murder as you suggest, should she face the death penalty?
Is a Fetus a Full Fledged Member of the Human Community? « Flying Tomato Farms @ 7:42 pm
[…] Posted on August 16, 2008 by flyingtomato Here again, Pastor Hickey (at Voices Carry) and I will disagree, but as he's called my logic flawed, I'll call him back. I'm sorry if my […]
William Beal @ 12:43 am
William,
Due to Roe V Wade's (and Doe v Bolton's) twisted interpretation of the Consitution, I really don't think most women of child bearing age that choose to abort truly understand the consequences of their actions, at least until after the act.
Should they face the death penalty for choosing to abort? Not now certainly, but I think it's possible that in the not too distant future, as science continues to show that life truly begins at conception and that a developting child is not mear tissue that can be removed without consequences, legal sanctions and penalties may come into play. The death penalty? Extremely unlikely, even in the future.
I tend to view most women that have abortions as victims, not perpetrators. I've been around the block, more than once and I've never met a woman that was proud of her abortion. For most, it was a life altering event and one that had severe consequences.
As for the abortionists themselves, I find it difficult to believe that they are unaware of the consequences of their actions. Currently, they are performing a legal activity but if abortions are more tightly controlled, I would assume that there would be consequences for violating the law.
Flying Tomato Farms: "In order to be a full-fledged member of the human community, one must function and/or fulfill some role in that community"
I guess my mother wouldn't have met YOUR personal definition of personhood during the last year of her life. She was certainly limited in her abilities and really didn't fulfill a role in the "human community" (whatever THAT is…). I'll agree with Pastor Steve, your logic (what there is of it) is extremely flawed and by your own definition, you must see no difference between abortion or the extermination of any "undesirables" that don't fulfill a role in your "human community".
At least you're true to your roots. Margaret Sanger certainly had no use for minorities or other "undesirables" and thought forced sterilization and abortions were the "progressive" means to eliminate their propagation.
C @ 1:17 am
I'm still thankful for the safe, legal abortions I have had even more than ten years later. Thank God that we live in a country where religion does not determine public policy. If abortion were illegal at the time when I had them, I wouldn't have sought an illegal abortion, but I would have committed suicide before giving birth. Some pregnancies do cause that much desperation. I am more than an incubator and yes, my life is of more value than an embryo.
Steve @ 7:34 am
William- Fair question, though obviously you are baiting me.
One: In the US, the law has never put liability on the woman but on the people doing the killing.
Two: The womans judgment is impaired because she is in crisis.
Three: More importantly, many if not most abortions are the result of the woman being coerced by people or circumstances.
Four: The law, IM11, says the woman is immuned. Note Section 13- it states nothing in this act subjects the pregnant woman upon whom any abortion is performed or attempted to any criminal conviction and penalty for an unlawful abortion.
I'll quote that for you here so this fear is put to rest. (BTW, these are the false fears Planned Parenthood is espousing. They hope no one will actually read the law themselves. They hope people will only listen to what they are saying about it. Remember, they profit into the hundreds of millions of dollars from this so their undeniably bias words aren't welcome anymore in the conversation.
From Section 13 - "Nothing in this Act subjects the pregnant woman upon whom any abortion is performed or attempted to any criminal conviction or penalty for an unlawful abortion."
lexrex @ 8:40 am
abortion supporters, such as obama and kate looby, unwittingly admit that abortion is wrong when they say that it should be "safe, legal, and rare."
if there was nothing wrong with abortion, why would they want it to be "rare?"
they'll often say that want to reduce abortions by stressing adoption or birth control? but why? why try to reduce something if you don't think it's bad?
s layman @ 1:38 pm
if you have been reading flying tomato carefully for a few months, you realize this is one conflicted woman. she worries about running over baby frogs in a field. at the same time, she refers to her kindergarten aged son as coming to visit her during the summer. at another place, she talks about traveling to her son's kindergarten graduation. clearly, she does not have custody of her child. so she's arguing for the life of baby frogs, arguing against the life of the fetus, tossing her own unborn child into the trash, and giving up or losing custody of her living child. something is not quite right here.
No penalty for the mom who aborts does not mean the unborn are less human @ 3:29 pm
[…] big swing and a miss today at both SDWatch and Madville Times. In response to my recent post - Is Abortion Wrong - Part One, college student and new contributor at SD Watch William A. Anderson joined the conversation and […]
Amy @ 4:48 pm
C:
Apparently you are not up to speed on the recent 8th Circuit Court's decision regarding the SD informed consent law (or perhaps in denial). In this STRONGLY worded opinion, the justices of the 8th Circuit firmly scolded Planned Parenthood for trying to claim medical science (the child in the womb is a separate, living, unique, human being by MEDICAL definition) was a religious or philosophical argument. To be honest, your post kind of sounds fake, like a Planned Parenthood made up response.
I have to laugh when you say "Thank God that we live in a country where religion does not determine public policy." Really - and what country is that? BTW - I recognize that "Thank God!" technique from when Nancy Pelosi uses it to call evil good - which she does all the time and in fact did it again today.
I don't what god you all are thanking but it is not the one who is the Author of LIFE - including those lives which you "chose" to allow to be snuffed out - if what you said about having abortions is true.
I urge you to put down your defensive mode for a second and turn your heart to Him. He will forgive you if you ask him, and He will lead you to the Truth. HE has never given us the right to kill the gift of life He places within us. To throw away these lives is to steal from God the destinies He has created for these children. They are with Him in Heaven but their unique human destinies are unfulfilled here on earth.
s layman @ 10:32 pm
"Thank God we live in a country where religion does not determine public policy." The irony is too rich. You are thanking God that we still have abortion? You might want to rethink that one.
Is Abortion Wrong – Part Two @ 3:47 pm
[…] Part One, the question “Is Abortion Wrong?” was briefly answered reasoning only from empirical, […]
four @ 8:51 pm
C:
What about the women who do commit suicide after their abortion? Or, is that a wife's tale also?
I guess we should ask the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, they don't seem to think so. It also grieves me to think the world will never know the value of your "embryo(s)".
Joanne @ 9:34 pm
C: There is never need for suicide in the case of an unwanted pregnancy. there are many willing and competent people willing to help the distressed woman by providing medical help, baby clothes, a place to live if she needs it, financial help if that is needed, and help later on with raising her child or placing it for adoption. Many many women have been helped that way. It is a solution in keeping with one's human dignity, which abortion is not.