“It is immoral to unjustly take the life of a human”
Recently on our social media a user asked us, “I am pro-life, but can you tell me how I can debate with a pro-abort to prove that life starts at conception?”
So, this week we will do that and more!
As our commenter understands, when engaging with pro-abortion advocates it is important that we do so from a strong foundation.
If we dive headfirst into debates without the proper preparation, we are likely to do more harm than good, especially if said debates are public. Often, we have seen well intentioned pro-lifers take to social media in hopes of changing hearts and minds only to strike out.
For this reason, here we will provide you with a strong foundation by which to make the case for life.
First, let’s establish a definition of abortion: “The use of any drug, device, surgery, or any procedure or intervention with the purpose of ensuring the death of the living human being in utero before, during, or in the process of separating the mother and her embryo or fetus.” (definition per the American Association of Pro‑Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists)
It is important that we understand exactly what we are talking about when we discuss abortion. For the sake of the debate surrounding human abortions, this definition is essential. Some loose definitions like that from the Oxford dictionary which defines abortion as, “the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy” can muddy the waters of the conversation and cause us to talk past those we are conversing with.
For example, some pro-abortion debaters have leaned into the Oxford definition by claiming that a cesarean section is an abortion since to terminate is defined as “bring to an end” and technically a cesarean section does that. As bad faith as those semantical arguments are, it is best that we preempt them entirely by clearly defining our terms.
Now, let’s establish a few important facts. Following conception and regardless of its stage of development the unborn baby is:
- Alive. This can be understood as growing, developing, maturing, and replacing its own cells. There is a 96% consensus among biologists that life begins at the moment of conception.
- Human. This can be observed by the fact that the baby’s DNA belongs to the species Homo Sapiens.
- A distinct organism. This means that unlike a skin cell or a gamete, it is NOT a part of another organism. It is not the mother, it is not the father. It is complete and self-directed in its development.
When we refer to the unborn baby as a human, we do so understanding that it meets the above criteria, in the same way as when we refer to humans outside of the womb.
If any of the above conditions are not met, for example if the unborn baby is not alive, it is not an abortion to separate the mother and child.
Next, we must answer an important question. Do all humans have equal rights, or will we discriminate against certain groups of people?
Our answer: we reject the idea that human rights exist on a sliding scale. What you can do, where you are, how developed you are, what gender you are, etc. does not determine whether or not you have the right to life. To deny this is to embrace the most lethal form of discrimination.
We hold that you get human rights not as a result of what you can do, but as a result of what you are. As you will see from our other apologetics articles, any standard outside of that defends the killing of innocent people outside the womb as well as inside the womb.
Therefore, when a human comes into existence, human rights begin. This happens at the moment of conception.
It is crucial that we establish this as our foundation. If we attempt to set any other standard for life at a different point in life, our entire position will crumble. Take for example the position that life begins at the first heartbeat. If having a heartbeat is what grants us the right to life, what about those who are undergoing heart transplant surgery? There is a time during surgery where they do not have a heart at all.
In fact, there was once a man who survived 555 days without a heart and was kept alive with a special medical device! If a heartbeat is what grants us rights, then such individuals do not have the right to life, and thus it would not be immoral to kill them.
The same remains true for any other arbitrary stage of human development. If what makes us human is the presence of specific biological structures, there will always be a parallel outside the womb that would justify the killing of born people.
The pro-life position is the most consistent and scientifically grounded view of human rights and withstands every logical and biological challenge.
Now that you are equipped with a rock-solid foundation for your pro-life beliefs, you are ready to learn how to refute pro-abortion arguments. We encourage you to make use of our other pro-life apologetics resources which do just that. Soon we will have a webpage titled The Case for Life dedicated to pro-life apologetics which will include refutations of all pro-abortion arguments and talking points.
Making The Case for Life,
Victor Nieves,
President, Life Issues Institute
Leave a Reply