I know that a previous signature of mine at GMG discussed abortion, however I couldn’t find the space to convey the majority of my thoughts concerning the issue. And while the issue is indeed a controversial one, I feel that getting my voice out about it will clear the air for less controversial opinions of mine to occupy this blog.

–

The root of all the fuss that is abortion, is that the life of an infant is terminated. While in today’s society, infants may die for a number of reasons, such as SIDS, birth defects etc., such deaths are natural ones. However in the case of abortion, such a death is not natural, nor unexpected.

Is abortion murder? Of course it is! I draw my conclusion on a matter of (what some would consider splitting hairs) identifying what is human. The word itself (derived from Latin) – homicide – is broken down to mean the act of killing a human. The important question is – Are fetuses human? - Thus, does terminating their life count as homicide?

Scientists identify existing species via a wide array of categorizing characteristics of the species, however the main body of difference that can be established between one species to another is their DNA. Commonly know is that humans and chimpanzees share upwards of 99% of the same DNA, yet such minor genetic differences are enough for scientists to consider the two animals different species. Although human sex cells are a part of the human body, individually, they only share half out DNA. In layman terms, sex cells themselves are not human.

Of course, when a sperm and egg sex cell conjoin to form a zygote, their DNA become one, thus forming a human DNA strand. “However, could it be considered that a zygote is human?â€? Yes. “A zygote is less developed than a grown adult. Is it still human regardless?â€? Yes, for the same reason that an infant, child or teenager is any more human than the adult. Although, it is argued that while a zygote can be considered human on account of its DNA, could it be considered alive? We shouldn’t say that one can kill anything that isn’t living.

As an individual cell, as well as further into development (to split hairs about the issue again), the developing infant is alive, because each cell is carrying out the various life processes (ingestion, digestion, respiration, etc.), yet to satisfy the question with the answer it wants (living = conscious or survivable on its own), it’s a matter of looking at what an abortion does to the infant, and how it relates to anyone else. Forced starvation or opening the hatch of a submarine are a few examples of forcibly taking away critical resources needed to continue living (food and air). An abortion is no different to the infant. Separating them from the environment they need to continue living until born starves and suffocates the infant, until as planned, it dies.

“What of the suffering of the mother?â€? it is argued. The socio-economic situation of the mother is indeed a significant reason for why many abortions are preformed. However, in many developed countries (as well as to mention the continuing efforts for third-world countries) the necessary services are available for a couple to continue their sex-life without unexpected children. For the most part, in most developed nations across the world, maintaining personal responsibility is important above all else.

“What of rape? Nothing consensual on the part of the woman, especially when it’s the woman who’s having the pregnancy.â€? I find it most important that a rape victim receive whatever help is available, as to allow them to heal from such traumatic events in their life. However an abortion isn’t the answer. An abortion isn’t a pill; something that solves everything in one action. Regardless of how much it may pain them to bear the product of a rape (mentally and physically), should it be in today’s society, or any, that killing that same child is better? Why should it be that punishing the infant is equally rewarding for a society? The mental and physcial pain that a woman receives from a rape should be no excuse for the killing if an innocent individual.

While I do not support abortion in most cases, I do however draw exceptions. Such exist under medical circumstances in which without an abortion, the mother will die. Such cases would include the circumstance of the fetus developing in the fallopian tubes, contrary to the uterus, where if settled, it will develop and grow, breaking the tube, causing internal bleeding, and the eventual death of the mother. I find that this is the only exception for abortion because when life must be weighed, the mother is above the infant in such a case.

For a society, to feel that the personal decision of one individual to kill the life of another, especially a completely indefensible individual such as an infant, neither in self-defense nor for the better of the society, is to mark such a society with the stain of putting such a personal freedom of choice above the value of life. The founding principles of the United States were written as to allow the government to respect the freedom of choice, if so it meant that it wouldn’t harm another, or not to infringe on the other individual’s personal rights without the protections of equal treatment under the due process of law and order.

Abortion gives no such due process to its victim.