"Human life:" Any living cell or group of cells containing human DNA. A
spermatozoa, ovum, pre-embryo, embryo, fetus, newborn, and infant are
different forms of human life. However, they are not all considered to
have equal value.
"Human person" This is a form of human life which is
considered to be a person whose life and health should be
protected. No consensus exists about when this state begins.
Many pro-lifers say it happens at or very shortly after
conception, when a human life with a unique DNA is formed. Many pro-choicers say
that it happens later in gestation; some believe that personhood only
begins after birth when the newborn is breathing on its own.
What is the question?: There are really two, different, very
controversial abortion questions:
What is the best (or least awful) option in a specific situation? If a woman finds herself pregnant, and does not want to be, what is the best (or least
worst) solution for
her, the potential newborn that she is carrying, and all the other
people involved -- including her boyfriend or husband and their
families?
1) To take no action, have the baby, and raise it herself (hopefully
with support from others).
2) To take no action, give birth, and give the baby up for adoption.
3) To have an abortion and terminate the pregnancy.
Should the state overrule the woman's or couple's decision? If a woman finds herself pregnant, discusses her options with
her physician, perhaps her spiritual counselor, and other
people involved, and decides to have an abortion,
under what conditions (if any) should the state override her decision? That is, should the state have a policy of
enforced parenthood for all or most pregnant women?
The first decision is a personal one, between the woman, her
physician and/or counselor. The second decision was answered by
the U.S. Supreme Court in its Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Since that ruling,
women have had the right to obtain an
early abortion. She also has the right to have a later abortion if it is needed
for health reasons. It is
in this area of abortion access that there is a great deal of political activity,
at least in the U.S. Many states are passing laws which would criminalize almost
all abortions. Their apparent motivation is to force the U.S. Supreme Court to
reconsider Roe v. Wade and perhaps reverse their decision.
How often are abortions performed: In the United States, women choose to end about 25% of their pregnancies through
abortion. 1 This number has been gradually declining since
1979. This is similar to the Canadian figure of 21%, 2 but is
much lower than that of the former Soviet Union (60%) and Romania (78%) where
contraceptives remain in short supply. 3
Opposing beliefs about when human personhood starts: Many, but
not all, pro-lifers
and pro-choicers believe that once human
personhood starts -- i.e. when human life becomes a human person -- the person's
life must be protected. Many religions, organizations and individuals have
passionately held conflicting beliefs about when this happens. This
naturally leads to opposing beliefs about when and under what conditions the
state should intrude and deny a woman access to abortion.
To many, if not most, pro-lifers, human personhood
begins at the instant
of conception. Thus, they view each abortion as a form of murder. They often
support this argument by noting that, at conception, a human life with its own unique DNA comes into being.
The platform of the Constitution Party expresses this clearly. It "....is the only national political party that
advocates a 100%, no-exceptions pro-life position in its platform. The
Constitution Party platform states, 'The pre-born child, whose life
begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God's image. The
first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It
is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments to secure and to
safeguard the lives of the pre-born'." 8,9 Many pro-lifers generally view an abortion
clinic as a place where babies are murdered. Some pro-life groups and
individuals have considered abortion clinics the ethical equivalent of a
Nazi death camp.
To many pro-choicers, human personhood begins later in gestation or at birth.
They note that a pre-embryo -- a just-fertilized ovum -- consists of
a simple grouping of undifferentiated cells. The pre-embryo has no human
shape, skin, brain, or other organs; it cannot sense the environment; it
has no brain; it is not sentient; it is not conscious. Carl Sagan wrote an essay supporting this position.
4
Sponsored link:
The pro-life and pro-choice movements: These two groups differ
about abortion access. Generally speaking:
Pro-lifers feel that abortion access should be restricted to special
cases, or prohibited completely. Many are motivated by a belief that
human personhood begins at conception. Thus, an abortion murders a baby.
Pro-choicers believe that each woman should be relatively free to
follow their own ethical beliefs concerning the termination or
continuation of a pregnancy. Many recognize that there is a diversity of
beliefs about abortion access, and that the state should not attempt to
enforce a common belief system on all pregnant women. Many pro-choicers
believe that human personhood begins later in pregnancy.
Both groups would like to see a reduction in the number of abortions
performed. Many pro-lifers promote support services for women in crisis
pregnancies and/or seek legal restrictions on abortion access. Many
pro-choicers promote better comprehensive birth control education in schools
and greater access to contraceptives.
The groups find it difficult to cooperate. They expend enormous energy fighting each other. If they were able to collaborate, they could make major reductions in the abortion rate,
perhaps lowering it below the rate of most other developed countries.
Within each movement there is a range of beliefs concerning restrictions on
abortion, as described below.
Conflicting beliefs about abortion access: In spite of
what the media might imply, there are not just two conflicting positions on
abortion access -- pro-life and pro-choice. A spectrum of beliefs exists.
A minority of the public believes that a woman should be free
to terminate her pregnancy at any stage and for any reason that she
feels to be valid. A series of national polls by
CBS, Los Angeles Times, CNN, USA Today and the Gallup Organization
during 2005 reported between 23 and 41% of American adults hold this
position. The actual poll result tends to heavily influenced by the
precise wording of the question, and what prior questions were asked.
Some feel that she should be able to choose to terminate the life of
the pre-embryo, embryo or fetus for any reason up to a certain point in
gestation, but not afterwards. This might be before:
About 26 weeks gestation -- the point when higher functions of the the
fetus' brain are first activated and the fetus becomes a sentient
being and is able to sense its surroundings, or
At quickening, when the woman first feels the fetus move, or
It begins to look human, or
It loses its tail and gill slits, or
Its heart begins beating, or
The pre-embryo becomes attached to the inner lining of the
woman's uterus.
Unfortunately, few if any polls ask questions with this degree of
detail.
Some would only allow legal abortions in one or more of the
following situations:
If an abortion is needed to save the life of the woman, or
To prevent the woman from experiencing permanent disability, or
To prevent the woman having serious health problems.
When the fetus is so malformed that it will only live a matter
of hours after birth.
When the fetus has a chromosome abnormality -- e.g. those that
cause Down Syndrome.
Where the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.
Again, few if any polls ask these questions.
A small minority believe that all abortions should be banned, even
if needed to save the life of the mother. According to
the same polls, between 12% and 25% of American adults hold this
position.
We feel that it is naive for the media to imply that there is a unity of
belief within the pro-life and within the pro-choice movements.
Status:
In the U.S., the pro-life and pro-choice movements are both powerful and active. Pro-life groups are particularly active at
the state level and have successfully influenced legislators and governors into creating many laws that restrict abortion. Many of the
laws have been ineffectual; they are so broadly worded that court injunctions suspend them shortly after having been signed into law.
Courts often find that these laws are so vaguely worded that physicians are unable to determine whether a specific act is allowed or
prohibited. Those laws which survive court challenges are not particularly effective; they often merely have the effect of deflecting
abortion seekers to nearby states. Approval of the drug RU-486
has forever change abortion in America. Doctors are now able to
prescribe the pills and women may be able to take the pill at their
homes. Rural women will not have to drive long distances to abortion
clinics; women will not have to run the gauntlet of abortion protestors.
In Canada, the pro-life movement has lost most of its funding after some groups started to harass abortion providers in the
vicinity of their homes. This also terrorized the families and neighbors of the providers. During the late 1990's, two Canadian pro-life groups lost
their charitable status with Revenue Canada because of excessive political activity. Abortion protests now fail to attract large
numbers of supporters. The groups now do little more than conduct candlelight vigils, and issue press releases. With the exception of
news about attacks by a lone, anti-abortion, "November 11th"
assassin, abortion rarely is discussed in the media. The country does
not even have a law to regulate abortions.
Bob Enyart is an extremely conservative talk show host. He has a "Bob
Enyart Live Abortion Clock" on his web site. It lists the total number of
legal abortions that have been performed since 1973. See: http://www.enyart.com/
S. Boyd, "Give us liberty: The approval of RU-486 isn't about
morals, it's about options," Salon.com at: http://www.salon.com/
(This may be a temporary posting)
A.T. Hyman, "The 'A' Word." This is an essay on the legal
aspects of the abortion debate. See: http://members.aol.com/
Nellie Gray, president of March for Life, at the 28th annual March
for Life, 2001-JAN-22.
