Abortion is a human rights issue, with around 200,000 thousand abortions occurring every day around the world (73 million per year according to the WHO). Having been around for millennia, it is one of the most important human rights issues in history. It has been a very divisive issue due to such strong opinions on each side of the debate. I believe that, at least at the popular level, there is a lot of misunderstanding about what the core issue is.
Based on many of the arguments and rhetoric thrown around in the abortion debate, the popular idea in the media is that abortion is solely about a woman’s choice, and those who oppose it are anti-choice, patriarchal, or something similar. But is that really the case? Is abortion solely about what a woman chooses to do with her own body? Are those who oppose abortion oppressing women and exerting male-dominant cultural norms?
Coming to terms
As with any discussion, particularly one as serious and polarizing as abortion, we must come to an understanding of the terms if there is going to be any chance of meaningful dialogue. I find the main terms used to define the opposing positions in the abortion debate to be problematic. Positively, the terms in both cases define what each side perceives is the core issue. The pro-choice side is arguing for women to have the choice of what happens to their bodies and the pro-life side is arguing for the right to life of the unborn.
Negatively, however, it is common to hear those who are pro-choice claim that those who oppose abortion are “anti-choice,” that they don’t want a woman to have a choice in what she does to her own body when pregnant. Indeed, the term pro-choice immediately defines those in opposition as anti-choice. But is that true and does it really matter? The truth will be discussed later, but it matters because it allows for easy demonizing of the opposition. The result, as often happens these days, is a quick dismissal of counterarguments without a fair hearing, if even hearing them at all. For instance, the claim of anti-choice allows for further claims such as opposing human rights or misogyny. If abortion truly is about a woman’s right to choose, then those are legitimate assertions. If not, such assertions are at best misleading.
On the other side of the issue, it could be claimed that those in favor of abortion are “anti-life” or “pro-death,” although I have yet to see anyone make that argument. But that is what the term pro-life implies of those who believe abortion is okay. Again, it must be asked if that is true. Are those in favour of abortion really “pro-death,” or is that also a way of erroneously demonizing the opposition?
It appears to me that both terms—pro-choice and pro-life—are essentially implicit straw men, although pro-life to a lesser extent, as I will explain later. This is why I prefer the straightforward terms “pro-abortion” and “anti-abortion,” as they clearly define the two opposing viewpoints. Notice that this doesn’t leave room for a middle ground and that is because there isn’t one. A person is either for or against abortion. Some have tried to sidestep this issue by saying they personally aren’t pro-abortion and wouldn’t personally have one (or encourage their partner to have one), but they support a woman’s right to make that choice. This misses the obvious point that one cannot claim to be against a certain act, implying a moral wrongness about it, while at the same time supporting another’s right to choose to do that act. That almost certainly undermines and contradicts the very reasons the person is personally against that act.
I may still use the terms pro-choice and pro-life, but I mean them only in the sense that they strictly mean pro-abortion and anti-abortion, respectively.
Abortion: What it is and isn’t about
Is abortion about a woman’s right to choose what she does to her own body? Or is it about the right to life of the unborn? Both questions point to the central issue: the nature of the unborn. To borrow from Scott Klusendorf, there is only one question that needs to be asked: What is the unborn? To answer that question is to settle the debate. If the unborn is no more than a mere clump of cells akin to any other cells in the human body, whether endogenous or foreign, then there is nothing wrong at all with removing it whenever and however often one desires. It would be like having a mole, tumor, or parasite removed, and women should have that choice.
However, if the unborn is truly human, then abortion is the intentional killing of an innocent human life. The law recognizes that the killing of an innocent human life is wrong and defines this as murder, and it is particularly heinous when done against the innocent and defenseless.
Why I am against abortion
I am pro-human rights and pro-justice, which form the basis of my position against abortion. As I will show and attempt to persuade, the view that the unborn are fully human from the moment of conception and deserving of the full protection afforded to all born human beings, is strongly supported by science and philosophy. This is a significant human rights issue, but not for the women as pro-abortionists claim.
Does this mean that I am an opposer of human rights, misogynistic, or patriarchal? No, on all counts. If the unborn are truly human persons, then I am standing up for their rights. This is especially important since they can’t stand up for themselves; they have no voice. Given that some abortions are based on sex selection, where females are typically aborted in favour of males, I am also standing up for the rights of unborn females. I will address these points and develop further at a later time when I discuss some of the common pro-abortion arguments.
What is worth noting is that even in recent history groups of people have been portrayed as less than human by another group. That status is then used to justify the most inhumane and evil treatment towards the “lesser.” One only has to look to the Atlantic slave trade and the view of Africans, or Jews and the Holocaust. Unspeakable evils were done to both, solely based on being labeled less than human. The pro-abortion position is no different.
So, why do I believe the term pro-life is less of an implicit straw man than pro-choice? Because it actually has to do with what the debate is about. Since the unborn are truly human, from the earliest stages of development, they are not a part of a woman’s body or a foreign invader that a woman can simply decide to have removed under the guise of “healthcare.” Biology tells us that the unborn are human persons distinct from the mother. This is why “my body, my choice” is fallacious; it’s emotionally appealing and assuages one’s conscience, but it is not based on fact or reality.
What of those who have had an abortion?
I don’t think that women who have had an abortion are evil or murderers and I have no hate towards them. Some women have found themselves in extraordinarily difficult circumstances, which, as a man, I cannot fully understand. But I do try as much as is possible to put myself in their shoes. Unfortunately, pro-abortion rhetoric has been highly influential in culture, especially when combined with the language of rights. This has deceptively led many women to believe that the unborn are less than human and that abortion is merely a medical procedure akin to removing a tumor. A lie repeated enough will eventually come to be believed as truth.
It is not the women procuring abortions that should necessarily be held accountable, at least not most of them. It is those who provide abortions, who deceive those inquiring about abortion, who need to be held to account. They know full well that abortion is the killing of the most defenseless, innocent human lives. Abortion is not healthcare; it cannot be since it is the killing of innocent human persons. Politicians must also be taken to task, since they have the power to change legislation for the better, but either make it increasingly pro-abortion or do nothing. They are just as culpable as those who provide abortion services.
For those women who have had an abortion and regret it, and feel a strong sense of guilt and shame, there is healing and forgiveness. I believe it is found only in Jesus Christ. For those who have no regrets or guilt, I hope that they will come to a knowledge of the truth and change their views.