TR EMERITUS

For pregnant women. Whether that fortuity is the work of God or random natural chance, that 'little life' inside you is all you ever have, and how you recognize that reality for yourselves must be at the center of any morality, secular or religious, which guides your relationship with your own species fellows. But also to infer that there is a point in time at which the RIGHTS of a woman - by simply being a pregnant female facing a life-and-death medical crisis - become less than absolute regarding her own life and bodily autonomy, is also a cruel, misogynistic, specious argument.

The abortion rights movement is a continuation of the historic movement for women throughout the past century that produced a woman's right to own property/asset, to vote, to divorce and in recent years the fight for equality in the workforce. One may want to make the argument that any moral right to life that may be attributed to a fetus is trumped by the mother's right to control her own body, but let's not pretend that the mother's freedom to choose is the only moral question. The attempt to suggest that no individual moral responsibility exists with regard to the life of the fetus is an implicit admission by those making the suggestion that they are not confident in defending the moral implications of such a decision.

Abortion is by definition ending the life of a human fetus. Notice, I have not used the term "baby," intentionally avoiding the emotions associated with the term, but we cannot honestly avoid the fact that every abortion kills a human fetus. Yes, you are terminating a pregnancy, but in the process one is also killing a human.

The real problem is that society does not, and seemingly cannot, reach a consensus on the humanity of the fetus or even on the grounds by which that question could or should be determined or decided. Some are convinced that the answer is provided by their religion; others believe that ample evidence is found in science -- that the findings of genetics and embryology have failed to reveal a single moment at which the developing individual crosses some kind of line that demarcates Human from Non-Human. Leaving aside arguments about souls and personhood, a fetus is a human entity at every stage of its development. What can be more flummoxing than suggestions that a *pro-life* argument is just a simple extension of faith/religion? Secular society and most atheists also believe in the protection of innocent life (and even not so innocent). I understand that there are many non-religious, pro-life societies. BTW Christians are almost 100% united against murder of any kind.

This is an esoteric academi, philosophical and even religious debate, which will never reach consensus. I believe real stories put things into perspective and can bring clarity to this dilemma. To discharge its primordial responsibility, a society must be clear about and articulate who its members are and when they become its members. No society can pretend to be ignorant of that question--or reduce it to a matter of individual "choice"--without forfeiting its raison d'etre as a society.

An overriding irony of the whole abortion debate is that all the people who are taking one position or another are here to argue because, for whatever reason, their own forbears, whether it be the mother only or both parents, decided not to abort their progeny. In other words, the "person" whose opinion it matters most is not here to give witness, and they are those whose potential life was cut short by abortion.

Sjorne Shen

11 Responses to “Thou Shalt Not Kill II”