Modern than the combined causalities of the Revolutionary

Modern abortions have claimed the
lives of over 49,551,703 babies. That is thirty-eight times more than the
combined causalities of the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I,
World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Life is defined as the
existence of an individual human being. 
It was argued, and is still argued, back and forth whether an unborn
child is living from the point of conception. If Pro Life activists are asked,
they will argue unborn babies are living from the point of conception. While on
the other hand, Pro Choice activists will argue that the life of a person begins
at the point of viability. Neither source is valid because their answers are
based strictly on opinions. The only way to settle the debate and end the
conflict is to look at what science can prove. Unborn babies are very much living
from the point of conception due to advances in technology that have helped gain
evidence to support it.

Paragraph 2

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Mostly seen as a religious issue,
abortions are anything but that. Biology and science are the only deciding
factors when it comes down to it. Science is the only thing that can prove
whether an unborn child is living; no religion can do that. Through modern
science and technology, it has been proven and well documented that human life
does in fact begin at conception. The scientific evidence also contradicted the
court ruling in the Roe v. Wade case, where it was stated that the Court could
not decide on the subjective question and there was insufficient evidence to
prove otherwise. This decision in the court came two years after “a group of
220 distinguished physicians, scientists, and professors showed evidence to the
court that showed how modern science had established that human life is
continuum.” By that knowledge, an unborn child is well within the meanings of
the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. The mere fact that the court did not take
any of that scientific knowledge into account when making that ruling could
have thrown off anyone involved. Through modern science, it was learned that an
unborn baby had developed all that were present in a full-term baby. Abortion
advocates could not give one expert witness that could testify that a child’s
life does not begin at conception. Even scientists from a variety of religions
agree that life does begin at conception. Technology advances have taken the
evidence beyond anyone’s knowledge learned from scientific research.
Ultrasounds have been the real shift in seeing the unborn child. It is even
questioned by Pro Choice activists that the belief of life at conception is a
religious belief, even though there is sufficient evidence to back up the
scientists that have studied this question for years.

 

Paragraph 3

For most people, human life begins
at viability. Viability was defined by the Supreme Court as “the point when the
fetus is “potentially able to live outside the mother’s womb, albeit with
artificial aid.” Quoted from book Viability is inconclusive about
the time at which a child can live outside the womb. Viability has been on the
down slope since the 1960s. It had originally started at 32 weeks in 1960, then
24-28 weeks or less in 1973, and 19-23 weeks in 1989. Cite book It
was predicted that viability could even be as early as 12-15 weeks.
Abortionists could have a challenging time arguing about life at conception if
technology ever increases to support an unborn child from the embryonic stage. Cited
book It is argued that it is not life until the child is no longer
supported by some sort of support system. With that logic, anyone that is
dependent on a pacemaker, kidney dialysis, or is an insulin dependent diabetic
could be labeled as “non-viable.” Throughout medical research, there have been
different criteria that proved the presence of life. Brain waves, heartbeat,
implantation, birth, and social interaction have been used to prove life. The
only problem is that some of those signs could not be seen, but life can still
be there. By that logic, people that are comatose, the senile, and the retarded
would be clearly excluded from the category of being human. All humans begin
life as nonviable for at least the first five months of their very young life.
It is biologically viable, but there has not been a newborn child that is  autonomously viable for the simple fact that
the child is extremely dependent upon the mother to provide basic needs that
the child cannot provide for themselves: like eating, bathing, changing, and
the protection from the mother because a newborn baby can not defend
themselves.

 

Paragraph 4

An unborn child is not a part of the mother’s body because
scientifically there are two separate bodies. One key piece of evidence is that
the mother’s blood type is not the same as the baby’s. It is medically impossible
for a person to have two different blood types. If the woman is carrying a male
child, it can not be the same with the mother because a woman cannot be a male
and female at the same time. Babies are born with their own set of organs and
DNA structure, which cannot match the mother because a person cannot have two
sets of organs and DNA. The body of a woman would reject the baby if it was not
for the placenta because the woman’s body sees the child as a foreign body. The
fetus decides when labor should begin, not the woman. Abortionists only see a
fetus as a potential person. With that logic, the unborn child is not entitled
to the constitutional protection a person should get, and the mother is fully
within the limits of getting an abortion of the unborn child. Personhood on an
unborn child can only exist when the fetus is fully capable of existing outside
the womb. It was ruled that “‘the word ‘person’ as used in the Fourteenth
Amendment does not include the unborn’ and that ‘the unborn have never been
recognized in the laws as a person in the whole sense.” Quoted from book
Up to that point an unborn baby was not a human. Since the Supreme Court
ruling, abortions were allowed through the third trimester and all the way up
to birth. Although in Doe v. Bolton, the Court allowed a woman to have an
abortion to preserve her health and life. This also included having abortions
up to the point of birth to save the emotional well being of the mother. By the
abortionists refusing to allow personhood to a fetus is an example of prejudice.
Unborn babies are questioned to be only a potential person, not an actual
person from the point of conception. If that is true, then why is an unborn
primate a baby from moment of conception? There is no progressive development
from an unborn primate to a living primate, but there are progressive
developments in an unborn child which prohibits the ability for it to have a
life that begins at conception. A social ethics specialist would argue that a
person is defined by their natural capacity, not developed capacity nor social
capacity. From that stand point, a fetus is fully alive, and has the human
nature of a grown adult. No unborn child can change what it will become at
birth. Therefore, a person begins as an unborn child in the fetus from the
point of conception.

 

Paragraph 5

With the establishment of life from the point of conception,
carrying out the act of an abortion is murder of a young child. This is
challenged all the time. The facts make this a much simpler discussion. No
woman can ever have an abortion by accident. Abortion is an intentional act and
it always will be. It is a premeditated act planned by the mother and her
doctor. Abortions are commonly referred to as a termination of pregnancy, but
no one acknowledges the fact that is the killing of a human. It is questioned
whether the women and doctors are guilty of murdering the unborn child in legal
matter. The doctors are fully knowing of the facts of the development of the
baby and they choose to keep that information from the mother. In result, the
mothers do not think they are purposely killing their unborn child, which makes
them victims as well in these situations. On the reverse side of that, if a
knowing mother and father still choose to abort an unborn baby, they are in
violation of God’s command: “Thou shalt not kill.” They both would find
themselves guilty of taking the life of that child. A doctor that denies life
in unborn children could be compared to the Nazi doctors that determined Jews
were not people. It is now to the point where doctors are choosing not to
perform abortions for the simple fact that they are so well informed of the
life inside a mother, but also because of the physical and psychological risks
faced in the procedure. “The ethics of abortion, including its slogans, is in
principle an ethics of barbaric totalitarianism.” Quoted from book The
reality we find ourselves in today is that murder is legal because abortions
are legal. Then the question of how abortions are done come up. If an abortion
occurs within the first twelve weeks, the child can be easily vacuumed out of
the womb. The vacuums used have nearly twenty-five times the suction power of a
normal vacuum; the force tears the child apart. Often, the child’s head must be
crushed in order to pull it out. The procedure of dilation and evacuation is
usually performed between four and eight months. Forceps are used to twist and
pulls limbs from the tiny child instead of vacuuming. The head is removed in
the same way. Dilation and curettage procedures slice the child into pieces and
the pieces are vacuumed out. After these procedures are performed, the
mutilated baby must be put together to ensure every piece was removed or the
mother could get infected. Saline methods are used as well, and are typically
seen from four to seven months. During this process, amniotic fluid is
withdrawn, and a powerful salt solution is injected into the amniotic sac. The
child then breathes and swallows the solution which slowly poisons the defenseless
child and burning the skin covering the body. The mother ix put into labor and
has a dead and severely burned baby. In some cases, the child is not dead and
suffers painful complications. Chemical prostaglandin is injected and causes
circulatory damage to the child; this is another form of abortion. But it is
not one hundred percent lethal for unborn children, which results in live
births more commonly than saline poisoning. The babies that are still living
when delivered experience a tremendous amount of pain that is very hard for
doctors and mothers alike to watch. Those poor babies are left gasping for air,
but their struggles ultimately will never work. Some babies that are born alive
after abortions, are starved to death, strangled, or even killed. There are
even more options for aborting a child. But after knowing that the child
suffers so greatly after failed abortion and letting that child die and killing
it, is unexplainable. That is when things need to be changed. It cannot be
argued that the child does not feel pain during these abortions. They feel pain
just like a grown adult would. But unborn babies are defenseless. They cannot
defend themselves against dangers; they are dependent upon their mothers to
protect them from those dangers. Mothers fail to protect their child when
choosing to abort.

 

Paragraph 6

Pro Choice activists argue that abortions should be allowed
to stop the delivery of unwanted babies. Being wanted can only be described as
the emotions felt by one person. Allowing abortions to only allow wanted babies
into the world is not considering the actual value of a person’s life. There
are difficult cases where abortionists see very fitting to have abortions
conducted. Rape, incest, deformity, and life-threatening circumstances account
for only around five percent of all abortions. When a woman is raped, a piece
of her is taken from her by her attacker. The actions of that man are going to
change the life of the woman forever in the chance she gets pregnant. Only five
percent of rapes result in pregnancy, and abortions resulting from rape are
less than one percent. The other ninety-five percent of abortions do not come
as results of these severe cases. Threats to the mother’s life are far and few
between. Ectopic pregnancies and cancerous uteruses required treatment that can
terminate a pregnancy, but the termination of the pregnancy was not intended.
Women faced with health problems during pregnancies try their hardest to find a
way to save both their lives because problems are not usually seen in the early
stages of pregnancies, and some of the problems can be helped with medication
that is safe for the mother and the child. Ectopic pregnancies are the only
exception. If the baby is not aborted, then the risk of losing the mother and the
child is much greater than terminating a pregnancy in this dangerous situation.

 

Conclusion

 

 

 

x

Hi!
I'm Mack!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out