No Abortions, Except …

Hand of a 21-week old fetus that fell out of the womb. The doctor is placing the hand back in the womb.
The fetus underwent an operation for spina bifida

Fetus now a  person

The fetus became Samuel Alexander Armas.
He wasn’t, but suppose little Samuel had been conceived due to a rape?

In this essay, I’m using the word “abortion” to refer to surgery to remove an embryo or fetus that, if left within the woman, would be born as a child. I am not referring to surgery to remove dead tissue that can not, under any condition, be born as a child.

Even though they oppose abortions, many people make exceptions for situations in which the pregnancies occurred due to incest or rape or impose a danger to the life of the mother. In doing this, they are saying that abortions are acceptable in some situations but not in other situations. This attitude toward exceptions concerns me.

I’ve heard people who oppose abortions give three reasons why abortions should not be performed. Some people believe that embryos and fetuses are human beings and that abortions are murder. Other people say that abortions are not murder, but abortions should not be performed because the embryos or fetuses contain unique patterns of DNA and are thus unique themselves; these unique growths should not be killed. A third group says that abortions should not be performed, because the embryos and fetuses are future homes of God’s spirit children. If abortions occur, the spirits will have to occupy different bodies than they would have occupied, and the plans of God will be thwarted.

In the case of unique DNA patterns or future homes for spirits, I don’t see a conflict with allowing abortions in cases of incest or rape or danger to the mother. However, in the case of murder, I am concerned about any exceptions for abortions. If it is wrong to perform abortions that commit murder when incest and rape are not involved and the abortions do not present a danger to the mother, why is it OK to perform abortions that commit murder when incest or rape is involved or the abortions present a danger to the mother? Surely, we are not saying that murder is permissible in some situations but not in other situations! If abortions are murder, then the woman faces a difficult question that, I believe, only the woman can answer  — should murder be committed to save her life, or is she willing to give up her life to save the life of her baby. The woman’s dilemma, our dilemma, of course, is that we do not know if those embryos and fetuses are human beings. We do not know when a spirit child of God enters a body and becomes a soul. I oppose abortions because I believe we should not take risks that abortions might be murder. If we make errors in judgment about abortions, I want those errors to favor human life.


One Response to No Abortions, Except …

  1. Ally says:

    I’m sorry, but your logic is flawed in the sense that you seem to think an abortion to save the life of the mother is still a problem. Babies are not viable until approx 24 weeks gestation. That means they cannot survive outside the womb before then. So you are saying that the mother should sacrifice herself to save the baby when they baby is going to die anyway because the baby cannot live outside her yet. If the pregnancy is going to result in a dead baby and a dead mother then who did it benefit?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s