CivilLiberty
Active Member
Abortion. Mere mention of the word is invitation for a heated argument. And as the extremists of both sides fling hate filled comments at the other, reason seems to take a back seat.
Ultimately, there is really one question that needs to be answered, and every argument outside of this question is tangential and essentially irrelevant.
The question that we have to answer is: At what point does a fertilized egg become a person; a person with rights that exceed the rights of the mother?
The most radical of the anti-abortionists claim that even the few cells of the zygote constitutes a human being. The absurdity of this argument goes beyond reason. The cells of the zygote are not differentiated in any way, and while the genetic information is there to create a human being, this is certainly not a human being yet. No organs, no appendages - not even the formation of the brain stem, much less a mind capable of any kind of thought.
There can be not doubt that this early mass of cells is not human being, and as "not a human being", it certainly cannot be construed to have the rights of a human being, much less rights that exceed that of the mother.
But what status do we assign to the following stages of development? As the mass of cells begin to differentiate, and organs form, when, exactly, do we call this a human being?
At the other end of the spectrum are those that believe that it's not a human being until it is born, and free of it's dependency on the mother. Indeed, there is much legal emphasis placed on when and where a person is born, and none on when or where conceived. The 14th amendment of the constitution grants citizenship to those born in the United States - conception and gestation are irrelevant, at least legally.
However, a month or two before birth, a fetus is generally viable, and can be successfully delivered. This viability is where some of the deepest controversy is derived. Certainly this presents the argument that if this late term the pregnancy must be terminated due to complications that significantly threaten the health or life of the woman, that an attempt to deliver the fetus prematurely be made.
The answer to the question posed above then is somewhere between the two black and white extremes just described. Like most things in life, the answer is some shade of gray.
I recently had the opportunity to see a remarkable exhibit at the Museum of Science and Industry here in Los Angeles. The exhibit is called Body Worlds and is now touring other museums. The exhibit is of plasticized and dissected cadavers, showing the details of human anatomy is amazing detail. Among the specimens were preserved embryos and fetuses of various stages of development. This was most edifying, as it really illustrated some points that so many people argue over.
The first (chronologically) was a 4 week old embryo. It was so insignificant it was barely visible - smaller that a common house fly and with no visible distinction that this could even be a potential human.
At eight weeks the embryo was barely the size of my thumbnail. At three months it was no bigger than a mouse, and the brain was the size of a hazlenut. While studies show primitive brain waves at this stage, the brain is so undeveloped that it still lacks the functionality that will eventually make it a thinking human being.
As the fetus develops over the next several months, its potential for becoming a human being becomes more pronounced. But still the question is, when - at what point do we go from small mass of flesh to individual?
Brain development is probably the best, if not only, place to look. It is our brain that makes us uniquely human. And it is the size of our brain that has allowed us to develop language, society, and other advancements. It is our brain that allows us to record history, invent new technologies, and express our thoughts and feelings. But it is our brain developed that allows for these things. Undeveloped and primitive, the embryonic brain is capable of none of this.
In fact, cerebellar development doesn't begin until the sixth month, near the end of the second trimester. Cerebellar development continues for two years after birth. That our thoughts and consciousness occupy the cerebellum is well understood. Then we can also understand that a fetus cannot possibly be called a human being before this important area of the brain even begins to develop.
And if not a human being, then it cant be said to have the rights of a human being. Certainly not when the inalienable rights of the woman are to be considered. It is, after all her body, and the embryo is residing their with her permission.
Thus we can dismiss the extreme anti-abortionists ludicrous notion that the few cells of the zygote are a human being. And with moral impunity we can say the embryo is not a person until its higher brain at least begins to develop, and thats in the 6th month.
The gray area then is from the sixth month till birth. Certainly, in the gray area one cannot be capricious in their choice regarding termination of the pregnancy. But there is still the issue of the womans health and life, and the issue of complications and serious defects in the fetus. This gray area then represents an area of case by case determination due to medical need.
This basis for determining the availability of the abortion procedure to women is not only sensible, and based on sensible science, its also virtually identical to the Supreme Courts ruling in Roe vs Wade. Attempts by radicals to undermine the law and find ways to outlaw abortion are without merit, and have no place in a free society.
-Andrew Somers
Ultimately, there is really one question that needs to be answered, and every argument outside of this question is tangential and essentially irrelevant.
The question that we have to answer is: At what point does a fertilized egg become a person; a person with rights that exceed the rights of the mother?
The most radical of the anti-abortionists claim that even the few cells of the zygote constitutes a human being. The absurdity of this argument goes beyond reason. The cells of the zygote are not differentiated in any way, and while the genetic information is there to create a human being, this is certainly not a human being yet. No organs, no appendages - not even the formation of the brain stem, much less a mind capable of any kind of thought.
There can be not doubt that this early mass of cells is not human being, and as "not a human being", it certainly cannot be construed to have the rights of a human being, much less rights that exceed that of the mother.
But what status do we assign to the following stages of development? As the mass of cells begin to differentiate, and organs form, when, exactly, do we call this a human being?
At the other end of the spectrum are those that believe that it's not a human being until it is born, and free of it's dependency on the mother. Indeed, there is much legal emphasis placed on when and where a person is born, and none on when or where conceived. The 14th amendment of the constitution grants citizenship to those born in the United States - conception and gestation are irrelevant, at least legally.
However, a month or two before birth, a fetus is generally viable, and can be successfully delivered. This viability is where some of the deepest controversy is derived. Certainly this presents the argument that if this late term the pregnancy must be terminated due to complications that significantly threaten the health or life of the woman, that an attempt to deliver the fetus prematurely be made.
The answer to the question posed above then is somewhere between the two black and white extremes just described. Like most things in life, the answer is some shade of gray.
I recently had the opportunity to see a remarkable exhibit at the Museum of Science and Industry here in Los Angeles. The exhibit is called Body Worlds and is now touring other museums. The exhibit is of plasticized and dissected cadavers, showing the details of human anatomy is amazing detail. Among the specimens were preserved embryos and fetuses of various stages of development. This was most edifying, as it really illustrated some points that so many people argue over.
The first (chronologically) was a 4 week old embryo. It was so insignificant it was barely visible - smaller that a common house fly and with no visible distinction that this could even be a potential human.
At eight weeks the embryo was barely the size of my thumbnail. At three months it was no bigger than a mouse, and the brain was the size of a hazlenut. While studies show primitive brain waves at this stage, the brain is so undeveloped that it still lacks the functionality that will eventually make it a thinking human being.
As the fetus develops over the next several months, its potential for becoming a human being becomes more pronounced. But still the question is, when - at what point do we go from small mass of flesh to individual?
Brain development is probably the best, if not only, place to look. It is our brain that makes us uniquely human. And it is the size of our brain that has allowed us to develop language, society, and other advancements. It is our brain that allows us to record history, invent new technologies, and express our thoughts and feelings. But it is our brain developed that allows for these things. Undeveloped and primitive, the embryonic brain is capable of none of this.
In fact, cerebellar development doesn't begin until the sixth month, near the end of the second trimester. Cerebellar development continues for two years after birth. That our thoughts and consciousness occupy the cerebellum is well understood. Then we can also understand that a fetus cannot possibly be called a human being before this important area of the brain even begins to develop.
And if not a human being, then it cant be said to have the rights of a human being. Certainly not when the inalienable rights of the woman are to be considered. It is, after all her body, and the embryo is residing their with her permission.
Thus we can dismiss the extreme anti-abortionists ludicrous notion that the few cells of the zygote are a human being. And with moral impunity we can say the embryo is not a person until its higher brain at least begins to develop, and thats in the 6th month.
The gray area then is from the sixth month till birth. Certainly, in the gray area one cannot be capricious in their choice regarding termination of the pregnancy. But there is still the issue of the womans health and life, and the issue of complications and serious defects in the fetus. This gray area then represents an area of case by case determination due to medical need.
This basis for determining the availability of the abortion procedure to women is not only sensible, and based on sensible science, its also virtually identical to the Supreme Courts ruling in Roe vs Wade. Attempts by radicals to undermine the law and find ways to outlaw abortion are without merit, and have no place in a free society.
-Andrew Somers
