This ask references this ask.
For you to understand my position, you must understand that I, along with millions of others, including embryologists and other scientists, KNOW that life begins at the very moment that the male and female haploid DNA carriers fuse during fertilization. There is no other point on our timelines where you can select our beginning without being subjective and arbitrary. Agreeing that our lives, and by default our personhood, begins at fertilization replaces that subjectivity with objectivity. Our beginning is a certainty proven by the science of embryology. Shouldn’t the law prefer certainty over subjectivity and opinion when certainty, in this case, is so easily attainable?
Now that you understand that I value an unborn human being just as much as I value a born human being, you can see why I am unmoved by the argument that their killer might harm themselves during the act of ending their lives. Trying to convince me that poisoning or slaughtering an unborn child should be legal because their mothers are desperate is like trying to convince me that killing toddlers should be legal if their mothers are desperate enough to ‘need’ to end their lives.
Remember, I am not only working to outlaw the practice of killing unborn children, I am working to shift the underlying culture that accepts their killing as a means to an end.
Together, we can extend the Right to Life to all human beings equally.
Together, we can change the world.
Stand for Life.
Be a voice for the voiceless by subscribing to our weekly digest and sharing the truth with the world.