Giving rights to the unborn

Well, the social and political atmosphere has suddenly become very electric — abortion, embryos, “reproductive rights,” etc.

All complicated by the fact that the U.S. Constitution never defined “personhood” to include unborn persons, but many states did (and do). And, abortion and personhood are, as a result, left to individual states to decide.

But, few really look to the science to determine their position. They look to religious ideas (which, as it happens, usually agree with science) and then to feelings about their “personal rights.” Maybe some of the pundits should talk with a mother who has brought a new human into life, or, sadly, one who has lost an unborn child. Talk to a woman years later after she has had an abortion. See what they say.

But, the science (biology) is clear. A fertilized ovum becomes an embryo a new human being, with separate DNA, ready to be developed inside the mother in a natural, defined process. That new person must live within the mother for nine months, cannot live outside her (be “viable”). By the way, that “viability” argument is totally false, a distraction or deflection from the real personhood issue.

So, much discussion will be following for a long time. But in Alabama at least, an unborn child has rights.

David Borck

Arlington Heights