Home >> United States & Canada >> Abortion & Social Issues

     Email   Print 

Scientific Argument Against Abortion

Don Swayser - 2/4/2005

Locksmith Toronto (Sponsor ad)On December 17th 1973 the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision which effectively banned any laws limiting abortion during the first six months of pregnancy. This decision was based on a fallacious premise. The premise was that since a fetus less than six months old could not survive outside a uterus it could be destroyed at the whim of the carrier. This decision was based on the state of the art of medicine at the time. It considered no advancement of the state of the art. It certainly didn't consider the fact that at some future date human beings could be cloned. If a human being were created by cloning who would have the decision whether, at some point, the organism could be destroyed. This organism would never have existed in a human uterus. Who would have the power to destroy it? The initiator cell contributor? The laboratory in which the process was proceeding? The contracting parties paying for the process? Yet isn't this ownership of a human being?

What is a human being? Many pro abortion advocates justify their position by reciting the pro abortionists litany that an inutero fetus is not a human being. Yet recently a California man named Scott Peterson was convicted of murder for causing the death of his unborn son. The state of California allows this since the boy was considered a "viable" person at the stage of development he had reached. The entire concept that an organism only becomes a member of the species at a certain point in its lifetime development is fallacious, spurious and unscientific.

The Linnaean taxonomic system permits no such distinction. It classifies an organism by a system of a hierarchical tree. For instance a Felis catus is a common cat. A Pantera leo is a lion. The taxonomic does not distinguish stages of an organisms development. The genus and species of any mammal can be determined by DNA finger printing. A single cell can serve to identify from which species an organism descended. The scientific name for people are Homo sapiens, common name Human Beings. This is a scientific, taxonomic classification. It is a statement of scientific fact not an contrived sociological definition. The moment the 26 chromosomes from the human male gamete unites with those of the female the organism is scientifically a Homo sapiens, a Human Being. The examination of the single cell at that moment would prove from which species the organism was derived and therefore a member of that species. Aborting a human fetus at any stage of development is the destruction of!
a human life.

What of the so called privacy issue. Pro abortionists state that an unwanted fetus is a violation of a womans privacy. Let us ignore the fact that she, in effect, invited the intrusion and there is no explicit definition of a right to privacy in the Bill of Rights. A woman obtaining an abortion on these grounds is condemning the organism to the death penalty for intruding on her right to privacy. There isn't a court in the land that could sentence an individual to death for intruding on someones privacy. It is not a punishment which fits the "crime".

The decision to execute an individual human being by another is reserved for certain conditions. Self defense and defense of a third party are legal grounds. This is a rational justification to preserve innocent life. A fetus is an innocent life. It is a medical possibility that the fetus could present a danger to the continued existence of the carrier, but that is a medical determination which can only be made by fully qualified physicians, not an untrained individual.

An objective examination of medically unjustified abortion can only lead one to the conclusion it is a crime. It is the willful termination of a human life and, therefore, a crime. The abortion doctor is similarly guilty.

The measure of the state of a civilized societies advancement is the protection it affords individuals less able to defend themselves from the capricious, selfish acts of others. Abortion on demand is a descent into barbarity.