What’s your view on abortion?
The whole
question hinges upon what it is that is in the womb of a pregnant woman. Is it
a living human-being? Or is it something else? And this is not a difficult
question to answer…even though the president has said that it’s beyond his pay
grade.
Of course that which is in the womb of a
pregnant woman is a living human being. What else would it be?
It’s a
living human being at an early stage of
development. It’s a child, a baby.
It’s not
uncommon for those who call themselves pro-choice to refer to the pre-born
child by some other term such as “a product of conception,” or “a mass of
cells,” or (depending upon the stage of development) an “embryo” or a “fetus.”
But these
terms are often used simply to obfuscate the issue—to confuse and
mystify the subject. We are all “products of conception.” Everyone who has ever lived is a product
of conception. Last time I checked, that’s how a human being comes into
existence.
Likewise,
we are all a “mass of cells.” Our bodies are made up of tens of trillions of
cells.
And as
for the terms “embryo” and “fetus” these simply refer to developmental stages
of human growth in the womb.
So let’s
not be confused by the terminology and be led to think that what is in the womb
of a pregnant woman is anything other than a living human being.
Now I
should note that many have wished to change the terms of the debate. Instead of
arguing whether or not it’s a living human being in the womb—because they’ve
already lost that argument—they talk instead about “personhood.” Sure, it’s a
living human-being (they say now), but it’s not a person, and especially not a person protected under the
Constitution.
And how
do they define a “person”? Well, Peter Singer, professor of ethics at Princeton, argues that personhood involves
things like: “self-awareness,
self-control, a sense of the future, a sense of the past, the capacity to
relate to others, concern for others, communication, and curiosity.” In other words, he defines “person” not in
terms of what a person is, but in
terms of what a person can do—what
activity a human being is capable of. And since a pre-born child does not have
his rational powers developed and is not cognitively aware of himself, cannot meaningfully
relate to and communicate with others, does not have a sense of the past and
the future…well then…he’s not a person.
What does
this do for their argument? Well in addition to providing what they think is moral justification for abortion—a
rather dubious claim to be sure—they also think it provides a legal justification for it, because the
Constitution doesn’t guarantee rights to human beings, but only to persons,
which is to say, you don’t find the words “human being” in the Constitution.
Instead, you find the word “persons.”
So they
conveniently redefine “person” so as to exclude unborn children. Peter Singer,
by the way, would also exclude newborns, and has argued for the right of
parents to kill their children up to the age of one month, at which time he
thinks they may begin to take on at least some of the characteristics of
personhood.
We should
to ask ourselves the question, “What do the Scriptures teach about the unborn?”
Clearly the assumption is that the unborn child is a living human being, a person.
When
Isaac’s wife Rebekah was pregnant with twins, we’re told, “The children
struggled together within her” (Gen. 25:22). Notice that they are called
“children” while they are yet in the womb.
Job
speaks about how both rich and poor, both slave and master have been fashioned
by God in the womb (Job 31:15).
David
speaks of this also. He says to God, “You formed my inward parts; you knitted
me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and
wonderfully made” (Ps. 139:13-14a).
He also
says, “Upon you I have leaned from before my birth” (Ps. 71:6). This shows that
even unborn children may know God and have spiritual experiences.
Remember
what God told Jeremiah, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before
you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations”
(Jer. 1:5).
Consider
also that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb, and even leaped for joy at the
sound of Mary’s greeting (Lk. 1:15, 44).
The Scriptures
in many places and in many ways teach that it is a living human being, a
person, a child, a baby, that is in the womb. And this is why according to the
law which God revealed to Moses on Mt. Sinai, when a man strikes a
pregnant woman so that her child is born prematurely and suffers some harm, the
rule is: “life for life, eye for eye,
tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound,
stripe for stripe.” This means that if the child dies, the man who struck her
is to be put to death. The killing of an unborn child is treated as murder
under the law (Ex. 21:22-25). And this law ought to be the
basis for abortion law in the United States.