Now Is A Good Time To Be Clear and Speak
- Posted by Manuel Manceli
- 0 Comments
In speaking to a Senate judicial committee, Dr. Hymie Gordon, Professor of Medical Genetics and physician at the Mayo Clinic, answered the question of “when does life begin” this way:
I think we can now also say that the question of the beginning of life —when life begins—is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute. It is an established scientific fact. Theologians and philosophers may go on to debate the meaning of life or the purpose of life, but it is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception. (1)
On what basis does he conclude that the “dispute” is “no longer a question” and that it’s a “scientific fact?”
SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
One reason Dr. Gordon testified the way he did was because of overwhelming agreement in medical, biological, and scientific writings. Here’s a few samples (2) :
“Zygote. This cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being. Development begins at fertilization, when a sperm unites with an oocyte to form a zygote (from the Greek zygotus, meaning “yoked together”). Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote.” – K. Moore, The Developing Human 1, 12 (2d ed. 1977).
“In this first pairing, the spermatozoon has contributed its 23 chromosomes, and the oocyte has contributed its 23 chromosomes, thus re-establishing the necessary total of 46 chromosomes. The result is the conception of a unique individual, unlike any that has been born before and unlike any that will ever be born again.” – M. Krieger, The Human Reproductive System 88 (1969).
“All organisms, however large and complex they may be when full grown, begin life as but a single cell. This is true of the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum” – I. Asimov, The Genetic Code 20 (1962).
“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoon and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.” – B. Patten, Human Embryology 43 (3d ed. 1968).
“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of new individual.” – L. Arey, Developmental Anatomy 55 (7th ed. 1974).
“A human being originates in the union of two gametes, the ovum and the spermatozoon.” – J. Roberts, An Introduction to Medical Genetics 1 (3d ed. 1963).
“The zygote thus formed [by the moving together of two sets of chromosomes represents the beginning of a new life.” – J. Greenhill & E. Friedman, Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics 23 (1974).
“Fertilization is significant in that new life is created, but specifically the cardinal features of fertilization are that (1) the diploid number of chromosomes [46] is reconstituted and (2) the sex of the conceptus is designated chromosomally.” – J. Thomas, Introduction to Human Embryology 52 (1968).
“The fertilized egg cell—or zygote —contains nuclear material from both parents. It marks the beginning of the life of a new human being and is a useful focal point for presenting all the diverse aspects of organic reproduction.” – G. Simpson & W. Beck, Life: An Introduction to Biology 139 (2d ed. 1965)
SCIENTIFIC TESTIMONY
Another reason Dr. Gordon concluded life begins at conception was because that view was consistent with many other expert witnesses (3) :
“[l]ife has a very, very long history, but each individual has a very neat beginning —the moment of its conception.” – Dr. Jerome Lejeune of the Universite Rene Descartes in Paris, discoverer of the chromosomal disease which causes mongolism
, “If we are talking, then, about the biological beginning of a human life or lives, as distinct from other human lives, the answer is most assuredly that it is at the time of conception—that is to say, the time at which a human ovum is fertilized by a human sperm … In conclusion, the beginning of a human life from a biological point of view is at the time of conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.” – Dr. Watson Bowes, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine
“So, therefore, it is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception, when egg and sperm join to form the zygote, and that this developing human always is a member of our species in all stages of its life.” – Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, a principal research associate in the Department of Medicine at the Harvard Medical School
The judicial report provides a telling quote from Planned Parenthood themselves (4):
As recently as 1963, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, now a strong proponent of legalized abortion in Con gress and before this subcommittee, published a pamphlet entitled Plan Your Children for Health and Happiness, which acknowl edged: “An abortion requires an operation. It kills the life of a baby after it has begun.”
Since the time of that report, experts within the scientific committee continue to testify in agreement with Dr. Gordon (v):
Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the prolife cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.
Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”
In his film, “The Silent Scream,” Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader. At the time Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.
Dr. Landrum Shettles was for twenty-seven years attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states,
I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest—that human life commences at the time of conception—and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.
In the end, Dr. Gordon summarized his view this way:
I have never ever seen in my own scientific reading, long before I became concerned with issues of life of this nature, that anyone has ever argued that life did not begin at the moment of conception and that it was a human conception if it resulted from the fertilization of the human egg by a human sperm. As far as I know, these have never been argued against.
A NEW BATTLE GROUND
Much of what I quoted above may be argued as dated. But the truth is, all these thoughts continue to be affirmed in studies, books, and journals. Scientific experts in majority continue to confess that human life begins at conception. Why then does over half a million abortion still happen in the United States? The answer in short is philosophical. The issue of abortion now predominantly turns on two issues
(1) does life denote personhood and
(2) does personhood of a new-born trump the right to choose for a woman?
One example of this is staff writer Mary Elizabeth Williams for Salon. In a 2013 article, Williams lays out the issue of abortion clearly :
Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.
When we on the pro-choice side get cagey around the life question, it makes us illogically contradictory. I have friends who have referred to their abortions in terms of “scraping out a bunch of cells” and then a few years later were exultant over the pregnancies that they unhesitatingly described in terms of “the baby” and “this kid.” I know women who have been relieved at their abortions and grieved over their miscarriages. Why can’t we agree that how they felt about their pregnancies was vastly different, but that it’s pretty silly to pretend that what was growing inside of them wasn’t the same? Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born.
When we try to act like a pregnancy doesn’t involve human life, we wind up drawing stupid semantic lines in the sand: first trimester abortion vs. second trimester vs. late term, dancing around the issue trying to decide if there’s a single magic moment when a fetus becomes a person. Are you human only when you’re born? Only when you’re viable outside of the womb? Are you less of a human life when you look like a tadpole than when you can suck on your thumb? (vi)
As shocking as those words are, Williams was only echoing what is increasingly being argued at the most fundamental level in this issue of abortion. For example, world famous Peter Singer has frequently argued that not all life is equal and therefore intentionally killing some life may be a morally accepted action (vii). Similarly, the Journal of Medical Ethics a few years back published a progressive article by two Italian philosophers who argued:
When circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … We propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. (viii)
Human life is increasingly not a marker high enough to ensure survival. The issue has now become an issue of worth and value.
SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE SUNDAY
Tomorrow is Sanctity of Human Life Sunday, and the changing landscape in the debate on abortion should not be missed by the church. More than ever the gospel has meaning in this topic. More than ever, the church has an opportunity to speak from scripture and answer the critical question – is every life, born or unborn, endowed with worth and value? May every follower of Jesus unwavering affirm YES!
I am convinced beyond a doubt that the bible fully and in no uncertain terms affirms the complete personhood of every conceived human being. From conception the imago dei guarantees worth and dignity and moves the issue into the realm of moral injustice against God and his creation.
May churches across the nation answer the question that is being begged. May we do it with humility, with courage, and with clarity.
FOOTNOTES
i. Report, page 9, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session April 23-24, 1981 (link: http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015018597867)
ii. Ibid., page 7-9
iii. Ibid., page 9-10
iv. Ibid., page 10
v. Alcorn, Randy, Scientists Attest To Life Beginning At Conception (link: http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-beginning-conception/)
vi. Williams, Mary Elizabeth, So What If Abortion Ends Life (link: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/)
vii. Singer, Peter on his Princeton FAQ page, in which he says “Newborn human babies have no sense of their own existence over time. So killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living. That doesn’t mean that it is not almost always a terrible thing to do. It is, but that is because most infants are loved and cherished by their parents, and to kill an infant is usually to do a great wrong to its parents. .. Sometimes, perhaps because the baby has a serious disability, parents think it better that their newborn infant should die. Many doctors will accept their wishes, to the extent of not giving the baby life-supporting medical treatment. That will often ensure that the baby dies. … My view is different from this, only to the extent that if a decision is taken, by the parents and doctors, that it is better that a baby should die, I believe it should be possible to carry out that decision, not only by withholding or withdrawing life support — which can lead to the baby dying slowly from dehydration or from an infection — but also by taking active steps to end the baby’s life swiftly and humanely.” (link: http://www.princeton.edu/~psinger/faq.html)
viii. Giubilini, Alberto and Minerva, Francesca, After-birth Abortion: why should the baby live?, J Med Ethics doi:10.1136/medethics-2011-100411 (link: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full)
0 Comments