What are we to believe concerning the right to murder the unborn? If we are believe that murder of an infant is the same as the murder of an adult, why not the unborn? The Latin word fetus is commonly misunderstood by the abortion rights advocates. The word means unborn, but by unborn it never meant not alive. The truth of the matter is the fetus can in fact live without the shelter of the mother. Cases of premature births with infants as young as six months have existed. In fact, these babies survived by the sheer brilliance of doctors and their command of biology. Prior to the lungs fully developing, a child can in fact survive in water. Because oxygen can destroy the lungs if not fully developed, water provides a safety feature. Much like a fish, the lungs can extract the oxygen necessary for the survival of the young human.
For those who argue that the fetus lacks consciousness I have but one rebutle: what of those who are brain dead? Would we condone the murder of those who are brain dead? In fact they are not brain dead. Muscle spasms are not possible with the brain sending some electrical signal to the muscle in question. The fetus commonly has muscle spasms that are no different than that of a brain dead person.
Furthermore, the brain-stem is created within the first twenty-four hours. Without the this no human could live. Unlike other organs, the destruction of the brain-stem instantly kills all human beings. If this does not demonstrate that the fetus is in fact a living being what else can? Can one honestly argue that the need for total assistance ultimately means a lack of life? A one month old baby has to have constant care by the parents. The baby cannot feed itself, bath itself or use change their diapers. Would you argue that it is in fact not a living thing? What about the human that must use an oxygen tank to breath, is this no different than the fetus needing the safety of the mother or water? Clearly the difference between life and death is the brain-stem. Without this important organ we could not exist.
On more practical note, what about our need for citizens? Without proper amounts of citizens, the country could not exist. The defense of our nation would fall to the hands of one of our allies. We would also need to depend on other nations to provide us with food, clothing, and shelters. Clearly without a respectable increase of population we would be lost. The vast majority of our population are the elderly people who fought in World War II, Korea and Vietnam. As they die off we have no one to take their place in the work force. As the baby boomers enter retirement, the latch key generation takes the senior ranks in our work force. From there the children of the eighties become members of the professional career work force. Yet the nineties saw very few children being born compared to the previous four decades. There are fewer children born between 1990-1999 to take control of the jobs once held by those born between 1980-1989. Malls, restaurants , and other places that commonly rely on the teenage and early twenties population will have to down size greatly. If these places are forced to down size our economy will continue to dwindle. Then as the latch key generation enters retirement and the children of the eighties become senior, we have no one to take over the reigns of major businesses. If this is not enough reason to ban abortion, condoms, birth control and homosexual marriage I am unsure what might work.
Stumble It!
Hi,
Just a little point of contention. The Foetus represents the unborn human, after eight weeks of development in the womb. In fact, in Australia (where I come from) that is when the majority of abortions are performed. Your crux seems to rest upon this; thus, is the individual who aborts prior to the development of the foetus also do ‘the wrong thing’?
The population arguement is often used in the west by right wing politicians who are argueing against abortion. However, I find this argument incredibly lacking on a number of levels. Firstly, immigration is an option in regards to population: there are so many people living in underdeveloped, wartorn countries who are desparate to move to a westernised, developed country.
Further, one must also consider why people are not having children. It is a basic fact for many that having children is simply unviable. Lack of affordable childcare is an increasing problem – not to mention the economic strain of raising a family.
Indeed, you also fail to consider other motivations for abortion. Do you really want a bunch of teens raising unwanted children? … perhaps you had better start looking at renewing the foster care system if that is the case.