EDITOR: Most just think abortion should be a mother’s right. But
I, a former fetus, don’t think that should be a right because any
of the babies that are aborted might have been a future president,
a discoverer of the cure for cancer, perhaps the next Billy Graham
or Ghandi. People that have abortions don’t know that they aren’t
just having a controversial procedure, but they are killing a baby.
The main argument that pro-choice people make is that they aren’t
killing a human life because they say a fetus isn’t human until
it’s born.
EDITOR:
Most just think abortion should be a mother’s right. But I, a former fetus, don’t think that should be a right because any of the babies that are aborted might have been a future president, a discoverer of the cure for cancer, perhaps the next Billy Graham or Ghandi. People that have abortions don’t know that they aren’t just having a controversial procedure, but they are killing a baby.
The main argument that pro-choice people make is that they aren’t killing a human life because they say a fetus isn’t human until it’s born.
Pro-choice advocates make some good arguments for needing abortions such as the health of the mother, financial stability of the mother, or even because the mother was raped. But let’s look at actual statistics about the reasons why abortions are done: Only 3 percent of the abortions are done because of the woman or baby’s health is an issue, and only 1 percent is done because of rape or incest. Thus we can see that the top reason for abortions is plainly because the mother doesn’t want the inconvenience of a baby: 68 percent.
Do you think this is a valid reason to kill something that maybe human? If the unborn is not human, then no excuses are needed for abortion. But on the other hand, if the unborn is human or if we are not sure, then no excuse is good enough.
If you say a fetus is not human because it is underdeveloped and small, then you’re saying a 1 year old is less human than a 16 year old. If it’s not human because it’s still inside the mother’s womb, is it human when a doctor performs intrauterine surgery, and then “non-human” again when the doctor puts the fetus back into the mother’s womb? Or how about the case when one twin was born weeks before the second twin. Is the first twin human but the second twin not human, even though they are physically and biologically identical?
If you say that a fetus is unable to perform certain functions or is very dependent on others, then you would have to argue that it’s right to kill a physically handicapped man like Christopher Reeve. Is he any less human being or person just because he depends on a machine to help him breathe? (Certainly not) Then why would anybody kill an unborn baby, just because it depends on the mother to help him/her to survive?
So as I conclude my letter, I would just like to ask you; do you still think a fetus isn’t human, and if you do think so then don’t you think you’d better be 100 percent sure it is not human. And don’t you think that you’d better be able to prove to others that it is not human? Because even if there is a 5 percent chance that it is human do you think that it is right to kill it? It could be murder? Do you want that on your head? Until you are 100 percent sure it is not human how can you advocate killing it? In fact how can you let others kill it? Hitler thought the Jews were not human? Should we have allowed him to continue killing them? Should we have left it to Hitler’s conscience?
Well, just a thought that you can think about I hope you have a new outlook on abortion, so you can help spread your new knowledge.
Kathryn Delman,
Morgan Hill
