Abortion · Apologetics · Image of God · Logic · My Body My Choice · Pro-Life

A Discussion of Abortion for the Non-Christian Part II

In a previous post I discussed the idea of abortion being a sin from a Christian perspective (link here). This week my goal is to talk about abortion to the non-Christian. Christians plant their foundation of truth in Scripture, and it is the authority in their lives. For justice to be done on the earth concerning this subject, I believe everyone must be convinced of the injustice that is abortion.

To avoid talking about an issue as a Christian without Scripture is not Biblical. I will not talk lengthy about that premise. However,  or me to be able to convince my non-Christian friends about the sin of abortion while using Scripture is a moot point. Now, I will attempt to convince them that Scripture is true, God is real, and that Jesus is the only way to salvation.

At the same time, for those who are not at that place, I can speak logically to them about this issue. Because God created logic , I believe that Scripture and God are logical, and that I can have a logical discussion with someone who is not a Christian about this subject.

For the non-Christian, I hope that you would take time to settle your emotions about the issue, and logically think through it. As for Christians, I hope this article will give you tools to speak to your non-Christian friends about abortion.

Like a previous article I have written on this I want to give a disclaimer. I want to remind my readers that there is grace, mercy, love, and forgiveness from God for those who have repented of this sin.

We must realize that the discussion we are having must define what is or is not human. Often, when I get into a rational discussion with someone who does not believe Scripture, I ask them to define the word “human” for me. Many times I am met with silence, or a definition which actually favors my point of view. R.C. Sproul says, “Pro-choice activist are not denying that life is sacred; they are only saying that a developing fetus is not human life.”

I am going to make five points here. There are some which, as stand-alone points, may seem debatable. You must be able to cross-analyze them with each other, and I won’t waste cyberspace doing so.  This is a short article, not a book, and if you are reading this through, I believe you will be able to do so intellectually.

How can someone logically think about the issue of abortion without using a religious point of view? First, location does not negate humanity. In other words, whether a human is inside or outside of the womb does not negate them being human. In no other discussion, other than abortion, does someone say that the location of a human negates their humanity. If they are human, they are human regardless of their location.

While some would say that a fetus is not a human because of their position, which is a prenatal one, there is no logical reasoning to state that someones humanness is negated because of their location. The burden of proof is on the person who would negate the idea of a fetus being non-human because of location.

Second, the word fetus has been politicized, but it’s definition still is consistent. The word fetus is “an unborn offspring of a mammal.” Now there can be somewhat tinkered with as it has been bastardized. But just because we are not calling a baby a baby and instead calling it a fetus, does not mean that it negates to be human.

Third, dependence doesn’t negate humanity. If this were true, the person who has severe cerebral palsy, or the person in the nursing home who is unable to care for themself would also cease to be human. In fact, if dependency negates humanity, how many years would we say that a child is not a human after birth?

Fourth, there is an argument of potentiality. One of the arguments we often hear of the unborn is “this is not a person yet.” Here I would state the argument of potentiality. What is this fetus going to become? Maybe it will be a cow, how about an orange, or some hot wings. I know I am being sarcastic, but the only potential thing that a human fetus will become is a human. Science has not proven otherwise to us. Because it is going to become something, which is a human, means that it will not have been anything but human previously to that.

Lastly, addressing the idea of it “being a woman’s body, so she is able to choose.” The phrase that is often repeated in recent years is “my body, my choice.” I would like to logically and scientifically question that statement. The reality is that the DNA of the child is different from the DNA of the mother. Therefore, it is not her body. She is a host to the child, but that does not negate the fact that the child is not its own person –  or we might say its own human.

Scientifically this is the child’s body. I have written on what justice is “defending justice from the social warriors (link here)” Justice is being able to own yourself  and your possessions. Because an unborn child is not scientifically the woman’s body, but someone else’s body (the child), through a scientific understanding of DNA, we realize that the “my body, my choice” argument falls apart logically.

I hate to waste space even bringing this up, but it is something that someone addressed to me once. They stated that sometimes tumors can have different DNA than the person who has the tumor, and made the preposterous statement claiming that by my definition, we can not get rid of a tumor.

The simple answer to this:  a tumor is not a human. There is no potential for a tumor to turn into a human. It does not have human brain. I think this is a shallow moot point.

You may question things like unsafe births, ectopic pregnancies, and what if a mother would die if a child is not aborted in a distressed pregnancy? These are side issues and often are only a fraction of a percent of abortions committed. If someone is not willing to claim that the high percentage of abortions is for what one would call convenience sake, there is no reason to talk about these fringe subjects on the matter because they cannot be convinced of the  simple definition of human.

Please note: Affiliate links follow. You won’t pay a penny more, but I may receive a small commission which helps to cover the monthly expenses of this site. Your support is appreciated!

While there is Scripture in this book, let me recommend a book to my non-Christian friends. It is  Abortion: A Rational Look at an Emotional Issue by the late R.C. Sproul. I think that you will find it mentally and rationally refreshing, and it will give you a clear way of thinking about the topic.

 

If you are not a Christian and do not use the Bible as authority for your ethos, what logical reasons do you believe abortion is justified? What is your definition of what a human is? Would that definition allow abortion or would it call for them to end? I would like to leave you with part of the original Oath of Hippocrates. “I swear…I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture… I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion.”

Thanks for taking time to read this Maddening Theology post. If you enjoyed this content you can find Pastor Tim’s sermons at www.cornerstoneforestcity.org. You can also join us at 520 Marion St. Browndale, PA 18421 on Sundays at 10:45 AM. To make following the blog easier you can also register. You can also join us on Facebook at Cornerstone Forest City. Also, don’t forget to download our APP on iTunes  or Googleplay.