Abortion

This should be a fun one.  I perused the list of posts on this blog seeing if I had talked about this question before, and was somewhat surprised that I hadn't.  To me it is a very interesting question.  It's a question that involves morality and the definition of terms.  It's a question that is framed in different ways to support one's own arguments and attack another's.

The reasons for abortion are pretty simple.  They are based on quality of life and the ability to choose for yourself what counts as quality of life, particularly with regard to their own bodies.  People generally have abortions because they don't want either themselves to have a worse life or the potential child to have a bad life.  Essentially if more misery is created through the birth and life of a child then it's a good idea not to have that child.  I think this counts in the cases of rape and medical problems with the child.  People who support the choice to have an abortion think such a momentous choice should come down to the individual.  Medical risks to the mother are simply health issues for those who are OK with abortion, like cancer, which is also an unwanted growth in your body that affects your health.

The reasons against abortion are also pretty simple.  A fetus is an innocent human life and therefore killing it is murder.  There are many people who believe that there is religious support for this position and therefore that is what they feel is right.  The second group worry far more than the first group (and of course, there are many in both groups).

The difficulty with me comes in the definitions.  What is it to be human?  What is the difference between "life" and "a life"? What is the difference between killing and murder?  What is potential?  What are religious instructions and do they apply, and to whom?

What is it to be human?  Is it the correct DNA?  Does that mean that a few cells that fall from your body are human?  Does it mean that people after they die and before they rot are human?  Does being a human require consciousness, or the ability to understand other humans, or even the ability to understand that you are human.  Is it the 1.8% of difference in DNA between chimpanzees and humans that makes us human, or is an intelligent chimpanzee more human than a person with an irreversible coma?  I think these questions do not have objective, concrete answers.  The idea of "human" encompasses these ideas, not always for all people, and not in the same amounts.  The concept of "human" is a bit like the concept of "blue", we all know what blue is when it's in the middle of the blue spectrum (a living, self aware, adult member of the species homo sapiens sapiens) but we disagree when something changes from blue to just a bit not blue.

What is life?  The dictionary definition gives five definitions but there's a general agreement.  I don't think anyone would disagree that sperm and ova to an infant are all living, but a spleen is not a life but something living that is simply part of a life.  A spleen cannot survive without the environment and food from the mother, and neither can a fetus.  A fetus has only half of the genetic inheritance of the mother, but then so does an ovum.  Is an ovum "a life" or "life?"

What is the difference between killing and murder?  Some would say there is no difference.  Some would say that you cannot murder something that isn't human.  Some would say the difference is a matter of legality.  Some would say that murder is the unjustified killing of innocent people.  Again, the difference between the two is a matter of opinion, where does killing end and murder start?

For those who agree that a fetus is life, not a life, but has the potential to be a life the question of potential comes into play.  A fetus could, under the right conditions, become a person that we would all agree would be subject to the concept of murder.  On the other hand so could each and every sperm (170 million new ones a day per man, on average.)  Without the care of a mother (or surrogate(s)) an infant has no potential to be a living adult.

What are religious instructions, do they apply, and to whom?  Religious instructions are simply instructions given under a religious aegis, a religious text or person tells you to do something.  Do they apply?  Well, it depends if you think they do, and this often relies on the authority behind the instruction.  Most Christians who are against abortion say they do so because the Bible condemns it.    Islam maintains (generally) that a fetus gains a soul at four months but abortion is not subject to criminal or civil penalty.  Buddhists are against killing, and traditionally against abortion, but the Dalai Lama thinks it should be left to each individual situation.  Hinduism has everything from a utilitarian perspective (overall good being increased), to a soul arriving at 3 months, to it being condemned as being against a non-violence principal, to hindu women killing female offspring because sons are preferred.  Religious instruction against abortion reaches from the most permissive to the least permissive (capital punishment).

Here's a good example of the messiness of religious authority on the question.  Here are the most commonly cited verses in the Bible both for and against abortion.

At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. (NIV, Luke 1:39-44)  

Now the word of the LORD came to me saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations." (NAS, Jeremiah 1:4-5) 

I will say to God: ... "Your hands shaped me and made me. Will you now turn and destroy me? Remember that you molded me like clay. Will you now turn me to dust again? (NIV, Job 10:2, 8-9)

 The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. (NIV, Genesis 2:7)

 And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. "But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (NAS, Exodus 21:22-24)

 At no point in the Bible is abortion specifically mentioned.  From these verses above you can have two different perspectives depending on how you have answered the questions about what is the authority of the verses or person translating them for you, what is life, etc..  What I do feel confident in saying is that there are no religions that believe they are subject to the authority of other religions.  If the Bible says abortion is wrong that doesn't mean much to a Hindu.

When it comes down to it the answers to these questions is largely arbitrary.  You are not an idiot or psychopathic if you believe anything between life begins at conception and the potential of that fetus makes killing it murder, to the killing of inferior infants.  Everything is on a scale, from finding a bit that separates us from our parents, to religious belief, to how much the legal system should intrude into the choices we make, to what even makes someone human.

My personal opinion is that I would like the maximum amount of choice over my life as possible, and the same for everyone.  I think fetuses are living, but not independent life until their food and oxygen supply is cut off and they can still live.  I think the consciousness of fetuses in the whom does not rise above that of a cow, and I eat them.  I also think that I will never carry a fetus in my womb and so I will never be the primary person for making a decision, although I don't think it right for a man to not be a part of the choice and yet be required to help raise the child.  I personally don't think abortion is murder and I support the right for people to choose things as much as they can.

However, I want to make it abundantly clear that I don't think those who disagree are idiots.  I don't think the position of other people on the issue is stupid.  For example, I don't think those who wish to make abortions illegal do so because they wish the right to intrude on women's bodies.  I think they are trying to stop the mass murder of thousands upon thousands of babies.  If you think a fetus is a baby then trying to do almost anything to stop abortion is reasonable.  It is reasonable to think fetuses are babies at some point.  I don't think that calling women who have abortions murderers is right either.  Women who have abortions are not deliberately killing their own babies, and they are not deliberately flouting the word of God.  They don't think the fetus is a child, and they don't think any particular religion is right in commanding them not to have an abortion.

I just wish the abortion debate would rise to the level of a debate.  It is reasonable for a society to discuss the questions of murder, choice, life, death, and it is reasonable for people to have different views on the subject.  In a democracy there are going to be serious issues on which you vehemently disagree with society at large and the laws established by the government.  Personally I think my government is murdering people in Pakistan but I know that most people disagree and the government says it is legal, and therefore not murder.  Are all the people in favor of drone attacks psychopathic morons?  Of course not.

So, I want to close with a useless appeal that will sound familiar to those who read this (and watch The Daily Show).  Can we stop using all or nothing thinking?  Can we stop demonizing those who disagree with us?  Can we understand that even on serious issues we might not get what we want?  This is the situation in the USA right now according to recent poll, there are more people who consider themselves pro-life (50%) than pro-choice (42%), but 77% of those polled think abortion should be legal sometimes over 20% who think it should always be illegal.  It's a complicated issue with a great amount of nuance in it.  Let's get above "You will be consigned to the fires of Hell" and "Religious zealots want to control my womb."