Some arguments for abortion center around the benefit of abortions to society as a whole. Others focus on rights of the women to have an abortion in order to protect her physical or physiological health. Both of these arguments, however, fail to get at the real issue. Sadly most opponents of abortion can't fathom the other sides' horrific views and therefore can't argue intelligently against them. I'm going to try.

First off, the real issue is weather the fetus is a real person with rights, or something less which can be disposed without any moralistic problems. Abortion proponents seldom delve into this question. Here is where I have a problem. When the child is inside the womb it is considered a fetus, and in rare cases, even when it is in the vaginal tract. When the child is outside of the mother and in the "real world" it is without dispute considered a real human being with rights and killing it would be considered infanticide and murder.

Somewhere, between being an egg merging with a sperm and when the child is born, something miraculous happens, it becomes a person. Unfortunately for abortion proponents this is not a clear cut or definitive line. It is a gradual process that takes place over approximately nine months. During this time the fetus develops in all respects of the word. A fetus, before it is ever out of the womb in a normal pregnancy can tell light from dark, can hear sounds, can feel pain, has a sense of touch, a beating heart and a working brain. I think bumper stickers that read "Abortion stops a beating heart" should be replaced with "Abortion stops a child's brainwave." A number of biological changes do usually happen when a child is born. He starts breathing on his own, he gains the need to be fed through his/her mouth instead of an umbilical cord, it gains the ability to make noise, and obviously it's physical environment changes. None of these changes seem to me to be a basis for instantly turning a non-person into a person. Based on this knowledge I can't see how one can justify a fetus as not being a person with rights simply because it isn't outside the womb.

A child can be legaly aborted before 'viability' that is if the fetus could survive outside the womb aborting it is illegal, If it could not survive outside the womb aborting it is legal. So using this logic, weather or not a fetus is a person or not is dependent upon advances in medical science, and a fetus who was not considered a person ten years ago, would be considered a person today. Seems a bit preposterous doesn't it?

Now, I admit that the child's life and the mother's are closely intertwined. And on rare and sad occasions taking one life to save another may be a very difficult decision that needs to be made, but it should be made keeping in mind that both the mother and the child are people with the right to live. As for legalizing abortions for the physiological health of the mother (Roe vs. Wade) I find it preposterous. For a moment I may think killing someone I don't want around will help my physiological health, but unless I'm a very sick person I think it would bother me more that I killed them. There are lots of people who are pushed into having abortions that they either immediately or sometimes later regret. Many of these people now dedicate their lives to stopping abortion. I have yet to hear of anyone who regretted the decision not to have an abortion, and yet, this is an argument I hear quite often "I would rather end my childs life, than to not know who is raising my child or where they are." If there is anyone out there who opted not to have an abortion and now whishes they had please write me.(I'm not holding my breath)

The majority of people who have abortions are young women who accidentally get pregnant and don't feel they are ready or are told they are not ready emotionally, financially or physiologically to be raising a child.

They usually end up in an establishment like Planned Parenthood. These establishments, to their credit, try to counsel their patients to the best of their ability and lay out their options. The pressure to get an abortion usually comes from outside these establishments weather it be the boyfriend parents, or friends. The establishments then provide the means. The sad reality is that by the time one is pregnant there is not enough time to make an informed or thought out decision regarding abortion. An adequate amount of follow up counseling is rarely provided which is probably far more important than counseling beforehand, at least for the mother.

Nearly all people agree that ideally the mother and father would raise the child together, and in the event that doesn't work out one of the parents take the responsibility of the child. Often this simply doesn't work out and when there aren't any willing Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles etc. the options come down to adoption or abortion.

Nowk, adoption is certainly not an easy answer, it can cause a lot of greif, heartache and sadness, anyone giving up a child for adoption should have access to adequate counseling and support. Adoption can also cause a lot of joy, happiness, and elation for the adoptive parrents and in many cases this happiness can be shared with the birthparents. A lack of understanding of how adoption can work I fear leads to many abortions that could have been avaoided. In the past ten years or so open adoptions have become the norm. Birthparents get to choose the adoptive parents, they can recive regular updates and pictures of how their son or daughter is doing and can even have regular visits with them. Unfortunately, in many states this is considered a 'gentelmens agreement' meaning there is no legal obligation to uphold any contact or visitation agreements on the part of the adoptive parents. This should change. But even so is most cases open adoption cases work out well. Untill recently outdated notions of shame, reputation, and morality have shaped the way adoption has worked, often to the detriment to both birthparents and adoptive children, this fortunately has started to change.

A word on stem cell research

This political debate is one that is being carried out by people in congress and their constituents who write them, and unfortunately I don't think any of them have a very good understanding of the science behind it. When sperm and egg meet a clump of stem cells begin to form. These are undifferentiated cells, meaning they cannot be classified as skin cells, brain cells, muscle, cells, bone cells, etc. They in fact have the ability to become any type of cell in the human body! This is why they are so promising in the field of medicine. There are two main sources for stem cells, one is abortion clinics, the other, ironically, are fertility clinics. In the case of abortion clinics fetus tissue from early stage abortions still contain stem cells. In the case of fertility clinics several eggs are generally taken from the woman, and all are fertilized with sperm in a petri dish. The most healthy looking fertilized eggs are then implanted back into the woman hoping to get pregnant. The leftover fertilized eggs grow stem cells.
tedhaubrich@hotmail.com