Is that your final answer?

Today in Philosophy class, abortion was brought up. We were discussing whether or not it was right to put animals to sleep when they’re no longer useful or sick. Once abortion was mentioned, a nervous chill came over the class and once one student talked about “killing babies”, the professor quickly jumped in to say, “It’s not a baby it’s a zygote, an embryo, a fetus.”

I’m glad that my relativist Philosophy teacher has actually taken a stand on something. Yes, Ms. I-don’t-know-what-truth-is has come to the conclusion that the unborn are not in fact “babies” and therefore it’s perfectly okay and morally acceptable to “terminate” them. Is that her final answer?

She also falsely assumed that zygotes (single cell we all begin as) are aborted when she said, “It’s smaller than the tip of this pin, it’s just a cell” – women don’t usually find out there pregnant until around the 5th or 6th week after conception, at which point the zygote is an embryo, developing eyes, a brain, and other organs (Most abortions take place between the 6th and 12th weeks when the unborn has a rapidly developing brain and recognizable skeletal system). And the zygote is far from just another common cell – it’s the largest cell in the woman’s body with a genetically unique identity. Everything, from hair color to the personality type is predetermined at conception, when the 23 chromosomes from the father’s sperm meet the 23 chromosomes from the mother’s egg. There’s not doubt about it, we begin at conception.

But for the sake of argument, let’s assume abortions take place a week after conception. Her argument of simplifying the growing life as nothing more than a small cell evades the real issue. Pro-aborts typically cite the small size as justification. This presents an interesting dilemma: If our humanity and personhood are solely based on our level of development, what else can be justified? Children lack mature sex organs and infants’ bones aren’t fully fused together. Since they are less developed than an adult, is it morally right to eliminate them? We are constantly developing throughout our lifetime, the start of which is conception.

It’s always interesting to hear someone well-versed in moral arguments make the claim that the unborn aren’t people. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, human life has been cheapened and devalued. Instead of referring to the most helpless members of our society as people, we coldly label them “fetuses” and “embryos.” Yes, it’s true that these labels do apply to the unborn, but the way in which they are used is done with indifference to the life of a unique human individual: “It’s just a stomach… It’s just a foot… It’s just a fetus.”  So I ask, to someone who is intimately familiar with various philosophical concepts and arguments and virtually refuses to take a position, is that your final answer?

6 week old unborn

10 week old unborn

• Vanessa Anne Hudgens