OK, I have had it with the abortion "debate." Aside from the pros and cons of unwanted population, women to exercise power over their own bodies, etc. I challenge the core belief of these so called activists. Is the fetus, from Zygote to birth canal, a "human" life deserving of moral or constitutional protections?
For 20 years the argument has gone:
1) "it feels pain, it responds to stimulus, it has a heart beat..." Yeah, so too does a cow fetus.
2) "But it looks like a human, It has little hands and little feet, just like on the billboards. Just look at these little plastic dolls I am handing out..." Yup, you got me there, nothing else looks like a human baby in the womb.. except for the great apes, monkeys and chimps...
3) "Well it can develop into a human life, it has that potential..." It also has the potential to die in the womb, to halt development before cognitive function, to kill the womb in which it gestates, etc. More importantly, the egg doesnt have the potential to do any of these things on its own. This means that it is not the egg's potential, but rather the potential of the mother + the egg, or the incubating scientist + egg. It is the potential of two separate and distinct processes. If you remove the egg from the other partner, the potential is removed. This doesnt morally bind one partner to the other because certainly one may not be a willing contractor with the other. I am not required to produce offspring by most religions.
4) "But we can sustain life outside of the womb now." And at that point the potential of that life producing process can fall to the community, but not before. There is a limit to how early one can realize the joint potential of the pair independently.
5) My belief system states that God doesnt place the Soul, or provide sentience in the developing fetus until this point. Only at this point is it a "human" life. Is yours different? "why yes, I believe that the egg is the will of God, even before it is fertilized. Therefore women have a sacred duty to provide their lives as tribute to my unique knowledge of God's intent. Anything less would be murdering a child."
You see fellow readers, it is step 5) I am having trouble with. Apparently God speaks to lots of us, and tells us different things. I should state here that I am most definitely christian in my belief system. So, it seems that either, God is mean and wants us all to fight among ourselves, or perhaps satan has slipped in and told one of us something contrary to the wishes of God while pretending to be Him. Alternatively, one of us could be lying. It is just so hard to know who is right here. And in the absence of stone tablets and burning bushes, I guess I just dont want to give up my beliefs.
Oh, if there was only some way to get around step 5)! Maybe a set of rules for making laws that had built into them protections against using religious arguments to set the laws. An agreement of sorts, in which lawmakers and governments will not choose one set of beliefs over another. Then, God's decisions would be enacted through the people whom He has chosen to carry the fetus. And, this agreement could be set forth by the people of our land and protected by its judges and lawmakers. We might even go so far as to enshrine it in some sort of document. Yup, if I were making a new system of government, thats what I would do.
If only we had thought of such protections earlier...