Challenge Response: You Don’t Really Believe Life Begins at Conception

Here's my response to this week's challenge:



0:04 I don't really believe that life begins at conception. If I did I would fight

0:11 just as hard to end miscarriages as I fight to end abortion. That's the

0:16 challenge that I've been recently presented this week and basically in

0:20 this particular challenge this person is arguing that me or other pro-lifers are

0:25 being inconsistent. If we really believe that life begins at conception, we would

0:29 fight just as hard to end miscarriages. Now in order to show why this claim is

0:35 mistaken, you have to understand that there is a huge difference between

0:39 miscarriage and abortion, and indeed there are two distinctions that need to

0:44 be made in order to demonstrate this. The first distinction that needs to be made

0:48 is the reason for death in the case of abortion and in miscarriage.

0:54 Now when it comes to abortion, the vast majority of reasons that women have

0:58 abortions

0:59 according to Planned Parenthood's own statistics, according to their own data,

1:02 is that they have them for socio-economic reasons, and it turns out

1:07 about eighty-six percent or more of the reasons women have for abortion are

1:12 things like having an abortion would help to prevent my educational plans from

1:18 being interrupted, or if I don't have an abortion

1:21 there'll be problems with my career, or I already have enough grown children and I

1:25 have other people depending upon me, or women are having relationship

1:29 problems, or other kinds of socio-economic reasons. These are the

1:33 vast majority of reasons that women site for why they have abortions. And again,

1:39 this is according to Planned Parenthood's own data. In other words, in

1:43 the vast majority of reasons that women have abortion, there is nothing wrong

1:46 with a child. The child is perfectly healthy and normal but rather, the child

1:51 is going to die for some sort of socio-economic reason that the woman or

1:56 the mother is facing. Now this is not the case with miscarriage. In the case of

2:01 miscarriage, which is basically a spontaneous abortion where the mother's

2:04 body rejects the unborn child for some reason, in the vast majority of cases of

2:10 miscarriage

2:11 there is some sort of chromosomal abnormality.

2:15 In other words, there's some sort of developmental problem that's occurring

2:18 in the life of the unborn, and for this reason, the child cannot survive because

2:22 the developmental situation is so severe that there is a massive problem with the

2:28 child's health. And so this is basically a system that the mother's body has of

2:34 expelling the unborn child because it knows it can't survive. That means that

2:38 there would be very little reason to try to stop a miscarriage because in the

2:44 case of a miscarriage, the child is going to die no matter what, and so wouldn't

2:48 make any sense to fight to stop or end miscarriages because we're already

2:52 dealing with a child that doesn't have a chance to live anyways. Now is it the case

2:57 that in some situations a mother's going to miscarry and the child is healthy?

3:02 Yes, it sometimes happens and in those cases, the medical team and the hospital

3:07 staff work feverishly to try to protect the life of the child by trying

3:13 to prevent a miscarriage. But that's a different situation. That's when the

3:16 child is perfectly fine and healthy. But again, in most cases of miscarriage, no,

3:20 the reason why the woman's body is going to miscarry the child is because there's

3:25 some sort of developmental problem with the child that is so severe, so grave, that the

3:29 child will not survive anyways. Now, the second distinction that needs to be made

3:33 is a distinction between the intent in abortion and that of a miscarriage.

3:39 Now, when it comes to abortion, the intent is to kill the unborn child,

3:44 ok, for whatever reason it is, but the intent is to kill an innocent human

3:47 being. Now, this is basically, and I know this is not politically correct to say,

3:52 but it's basically a form of murder. In 38 states around our country we have

3:58 what's called fetal homicide laws. And these homicide laws state that if you

4:02 kill an unborn child inside a mother, or you kill the mother and as a result also

4:07 kill the unborn child,

4:09 you can be tried for murder. And that's because the law sees the unborn child

4:13 as an innocent human being that deserves to be protected. In miscarriage, however,

4:17 there is no intent to kill. This is an amoral event, meaning it has no moral

4:23 quality. The mother's not trying to kill a child. In fact, I would say the opposite's the

4:27 case. The mother

4:28 is heartbroken if the child is going to die, and she would not want this at all.

4:33 her intent is to have the child to survive and to live. And that's why

4:37 there's no reason to fight to end miscarriage because there's no intent in

4:42 the case of a miscarriage to try to kill the child since the child is going to

4:45 die anyways. So, it turns out then that there is no inconsistency here. The

4:51 pro-lifer is perfectly justified in trying to fight to end abortion but not to

4:57 fight to end miscarriage because in the case of miscarriage, the child's going to

5:00 die anyways and again, there's no intent to kill.

video |
Alan Shlemon