If life doesn’t begin at conception, then where do we draw the line?
It is a scientific fact that life begins at conception. Live Action has already covered this at length, with an abundance of statements from experts in the field. Pieces have also been written to further demonstrate the humanity of the unborn and the miracle that conception is.
If we accept that life begins at conception, which is indeed a fact, not just an opinion, then there should be no confusion as to if the unborn is a life worth saving. There should be no confusion as to if the unborn is a life that will be killed as a result of abortion.
For those who do not accept this fact, then, it must be confusing. Where is the line drawn? When the heartbeat forms? When the child can feel pain? When does the child become a life? When is it wrong to kill this life? There exists a wide range of opinions as to when abortion takes a life, and when it is wrong. But opinions are not fact, and they become pretty arbitrary pretty fast.
If science were not clear that life begins at conception, there would understandably be some confusion and disagreement. But that is not the case.
There are still some who will concede that life begins at conception, but that the child is not yet worth saving from abortion until a certain point of gestation. If one accepts the proof that science provides, then that should be it. There should be no more dispute. To believe that life begins at conception but still be in favor of abortion is contradictory.
Just like there may be confusion as to where we draw the line, then, if life does not begin at conception, it is equally confusing as to where we draw the line as to when the child becomes worth protecting.
Some may claim that the unborn are not worth protecting from abortion because they are not developed enough. The child in the womb is merely in a different state of development and place of residence from those of the child outside of the womb.
Some may also claim that the unborn are not worth protecting because they don’t possess enough humanity or sentience. But by that logic, those who are in comas or severely disabled are not worthy of life, either.
The unborn can do many things which may make those who do not believe in the humanity of the unborn think twice. For instance, at just 22 days, the heartbeat begins. One of the articles mentioned above explains that the children in the womb can hear language by the third trimester. Testimony for the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act states that by 8 weeks, the unborn feel and react to touch. Pain receptors are in place by 16 weeks, with the nerves linking them to the brain by 20 weeks. This means that the unborn child will not only feel pain, but feel so much more intensely. Children can also yawn in the womb at 10 weeks.
These are all amazing things which the unborn can do, but no specific one makes the unborn a human life, as he or she already is and has been one from the start.
Fortunately, most Americans oppose late-term abortion. That is all well and good to support saving a child at this stage from an agonizing death. But again, why is the child at this stage any more worthy of life than a newly conceived one? All unborn child have life to them – and a life worth protecting – not just the ones past a certain gestational age. To oppose late-term abortion but be in support of abortion up to a certain week is quite frankly inconsistent. If we are to truly stand up for life with compassion and humanity for the unborn, it must be for all life.
There is no question that life begins at conception. And since there is no question of this, there should be no question that every and all children in their mothers’ wombs, no matter their age or developmental stage, are worth protecting. Not only is it consistent – not only does it do away with confusion – but it is right.