Why I’m Pro-Life and You Should Be, Too (Part 2)

In our prior lesson, we took a brief look at some objections often offered in favor of intentional abortion and how to expose inconsistency with the use of other questions. I believe it is wise to keep this subject centered on the key issue: What is the unborn? If the unborn is not a human being, then no justification is needed for the practice of abortion. However, if the unborn is a human being, then no justification for intentional abortion is adequate. At this time I'd like to answer this foundational question with science, philosophy, & the Bible to prove why it is the case that intentional abortion unjustly takes the life of a human being--a life that is defenseless, pure, and innocent.

It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception. This is the case because a conceived embryo is an individual, living, human being. Let us define our terms:

At conception, the fertilized egg must be human because it possesses everything necessary to proceed through all stages of human development over time. No other single human cell has this inherent capacity. All the fertilized egg needs is proper nurture and a proper environment to continue developing, which is no different from any human being outside the womb either. Science cannot be properly used to justify intentional abortion. The more we understand about life inside the womb, the more clearly we understand that intentional abortion unjustly takes the life of an innocent human being.

Some are willing to concede that a fertilized egg is a human being only to dig their heels in and claim that the fertilized egg is not a person. I would kindly ask: What is the difference? And what are the implications if we accept this notion that a human being can exist but it not necessarily be a person? Haven't we been down this road before historically and committed heinous crimes again African Americans, Jews, women, etc. under the guise that they don't really count as people?

Philosophically, there are only 4 differences between the unborn and a newborn, and none of these differences matter morally. They are not reasons to deny a human being full personhood and the implicit protection that demands.

These questions should be answered in the negative for both the born and the unborn. The unborn is just as much of a person as you are. None of the differences matter morally. None of them justify the taking of an innocent human life!

And finally, let us consider some of the Biblical evidence. Although this will not persuade an unbeliever, those who claim to follow Christ should consider these passages carefully:

Friends, I'm pro-life and you should be, too. Intentional abortion unjustly takes the life of a human being--a life that is defenseless, pure, and innocent. This conclusion is inescapable. Tens of millions have been slaughtered in America via intentional abortion. It is right for Christians to speak against this atrocity, correct flawed reasoning that is used to justify it, and defend our beliefs. May we always do so with a spirit of meekness and fear, showing real love for the souls of the born and the unborn.