An Alien Biological Function
The more I read about the pro-life/pro-abortion standpoints, the more I realise that the beliefs which surround them will never find common ground. Each side is locked in its own certainty of holding the correct view.
Take a recent letter to the editor (The Dominion Post, February 23, 2018) under the heading “A Woman’s Decision” from one Blake Overs.
He wrote: “The decision to have an abortion should be made by the woman and by the woman alone.” He claims: “What a woman does with her vagina (presumably he means uterus)” should not be “somehow the business of other people supposedly advocating for human rights but conveniently forgetting hers.”
He dismisses an unborn child as “a collection of cells that cannot even be defined as human”.
This contrary opinion from Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D. of Princeton University:
“To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.”
Surely that is a more informed opinion about human life in the womb than the one trotted out by Mr Overs and many others who, in support of abortion as a so called “woman’s right”, tritely deny that humanity begins at conception.
What I would advocate is stopping the false belief that pregnancy is so onerous on women that men should have no say about a decision to kill their unborn child. That should be a “parental right”, shared equally.
Today some people make pregnancy sound like an alien biological function.
Take a recent letter to the editor (The Dominion Post, February 23, 2018) under the heading “A Woman’s Decision” from one Blake Overs.
He wrote: “The decision to have an abortion should be made by the woman and by the woman alone.” He claims: “What a woman does with her vagina (presumably he means uterus)” should not be “somehow the business of other people supposedly advocating for human rights but conveniently forgetting hers.”
He dismisses an unborn child as “a collection of cells that cannot even be defined as human”.
This contrary opinion from Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D. of Princeton University:
“To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.”
Surely that is a more informed opinion about human life in the womb than the one trotted out by Mr Overs and many others who, in support of abortion as a so called “woman’s right”, tritely deny that humanity begins at conception.
What I would advocate is stopping the false belief that pregnancy is so onerous on women that men should have no say about a decision to kill their unborn child. That should be a “parental right”, shared equally.
Today some people make pregnancy sound like an alien biological function.
No comments have been added yet.
