Saturday, January 19, 2013
The other day I was reading a mother’s thoughts on gun control. I can’t place a link because it was on another’s FB page. The lady was concise, thorough and stated very well her case for protecting society’s children – without a sense of argument or rancor. I was impressed, until about two-thirds down when she mentioned rights.
She understood gun owners would be giving up rights and she mentioned that she would not be willing to give up her right to an abortion. She spoke of a woman’s control of her body.
Oh, we agree on that. All women should have control over their own bodies – especially to the extent of preventing pregnancy. After that has passed, we argue over semantics - zygotes, fetus, pre-born, new-born.
In compiling my thoughts, I determined not to use Biblical references. Abortion supporters do not believe the Bible applies, therefore they will not respond to God’s word. Let me, instead, discuss the reality of science. It begins with DNA.
The creation of a zygote, the earliest developmental state of a fetus, requires DNA from two sources – half from the female (mother), half from the male (father.) Science does away with the words in parentheses and cloning may change the equation, but (as Wikipedia puts it): “A zygote is always synthesized from the union of two gametes, and constitutes the first stage in a unique organism's development.” Please, remember that ‘unique’ part.
Once that DNA combination is established as human, the (zygote, fetus, pre-born, new born) becomes the most defenseless part of the human race. It will not change species as it develops, it will remain human. And it will remain unique.
Except for in vitro fertilization, the zygote is totally dependent upon the mother’s womb for nourishment and protection. Surrounded by and connected to a woman, this new human DNA is not hers. She may come to love and cherish it, but it is a unique life separate and apart from her own. It is created in combination with another.
The womb’s ability to feed and protect the zygote is matched by its ability to enlarge as this unique human grows. Its ability is matched by other species, but humanity is the only species that has developed methodologies to remove that unique individual, that most helpless of humans.
You see, the woman who wrote of her right to an abortion differs with me. She does not see this most helpless (zygote, fetus, pre-born, new born) as human. She – and half of America – sees only a mass of cells, synonymous with a mass of cancer cells that should be removed for the well-being of her body. It is not. It is surrounded and protected by her body, but the DNA defines it as unique, connected to but not part of her body.
Through recent years I’ve seen a society grow that divides humans into segments. Some of those segments may be tossed aside for the convenience of others. I see a society who segregates humans into “people who provide something I need” who can be kept, and those “non-humans who provide nothing for me” which can be destroyed. Previous societies made a different segregation, with similar results.
Bottom line – a large portion of our society no longer cares for these most helpless of humans. I grieve for that lost caring.
Yes, I also have scriptural and spiritual reasons for my grief – but isn’t it sufficient that an existing human society no longer protect humans?