Presidential Issue - Abortion

The issue of abortion has divided this nation for well over 3 decades. While one can site the Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade, the debate over abortion preceded this ruling.

We can argue, as the Court did, over a "right to privacy". I will not. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a specific "right to privacy" outlined. When it comes down to it, any right to privacy that one can conjure up in the Constitution would never prevent a state from enacting drug laws, abuse laws, or any other laws due to a "right to privacy." There are a number of laws that restrict what citizens can do, even in their own home. For example, I cannot purchase a machine gun and keep it in my home. The "right to privacy" argument would just as logically apply to this example as to abortion.

However, I want to discuss the key issue: Who is a person? The Supreme Court reviews various beliefs and historical laws regarding abortion. What they fail to notice is that, as the understanding of what the thing growing inside the mother is changes, the laws change. The more those making the laws believe the thing inside the mother is alive, the more forcefully the laws are written. Some laws call it a capital crime to perform an abortion. (Murder). So, the question of life and personhood is critical. Nowhere in the history is there a discussion of privacy. This make complete sense if you look at the act of abortion as one that could be murder (depending upon your definition of person).

To quote from the Roe v. Wade decision:

"Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."

Translation: "No one knows, so we're not going to try to figure it out either." This thing inside the mother is, even by their arguments, POSSIBLY life. Estimates are that over 44 million abortions have happened in the United States since Roe v. Wade. Isn't it worth the effort to try to figure it out?

To see a graphical representation of the scale of abortions in this country, follow the following link: http://www.htmlbible.com/abortstats.htm

We enact laws to restrict freedom with the view to ensure safety. We restrict freedom of those we acknowledge to be people to help "protect" them from bad decisions. Our police can stop someone for not wearing a seat belt. We enact laws to protect animals, things that we acknowledge clearly are NOT people. A woman cannot legally kill a robin in the state of Michigan, but a woman can abort the thing inside of her that is possibly alive. I fail to see the logic in arguing that the government has more interest in a bird than in a possible human life.

We even have laws that speak to the "personhood" of the thing inside a woman. If a pregnant woman is murdered, and the thing inside her dies, the person charged with murdering the mother will also be charged with murdering the child. How can you murder a non-human "thing"? Answer: You can't. You can only murder a person. These laws, when analyzed, seem to offer a contradiction. When the mother wants it, it is a person. When the mother doesn't, it is a thing that can be disposed of more easily than a state bird. The actual thing inside the mother did not change one bit. The concept that the wishes of the mother somehow make the thing inside her a person is ridiculous.

So, is the "fetus" a person? We know "at this point in the development of man's knowledge" that a fetus has all of the necessary genetics to be a human being. We know that one clear differentiator between us and animals is genetic. One can clearly see genetically that the thing inside a mother will be a person, and not something else, such as a dog or rabbit. Unless someone unnaturally or something naturally terminates the pregnancy before delivery, the fetus will be born and be recognized by everyone as a person. While there may have been a question in the past on what that thing inside a mother is, that question can easily be answered today: That "thing" is a pre-born human being (person). Any other answer is a lie.

As I have said, I will not lie to you. That "thing" inside a woman is alive. It is a human being. Therefore, that "thing" is a person, entitled to any and all protection under the law. Any other philosophy exists simply to remove natural consequences for actions. At the cost of a human life, a tragically high cost to free one from responsibility.

Abortion should be as illegal as murder, as a person's life is ending against its will.

End.