Skip to main content

Those scientifically backward pro-choicers

Unlike Marco Rubio, I am not comfortable with abortion being illegal even in cases of rape and incest. I hasten to add that I cannot defend that position theologically or philosophically. Yes, I am being emotional here. But I can't help it. I have had both friends and people under my spiritual care who have been the victims of rape, and I'm sorry, but I could not force any woman to bear a rapist's child.

Again, I can't defend that position ethically or theologically. But there it is. The failing is mine, and I frankly admit it. I believe it was LCMS theologian John Warwick Montgomery who, when asked in a debate whether he would prevent his daughter from getting an abortion if she were impregnated by a rapist, said, "I can tell you exactly what I would do. I would find her the best doctor available. I'd pay for the abortion. I'd drive her to the clinic. I'd hold her hand while the procedure was being done.

"There's only one thing I wouldn't do: tell myself that I was doing the right thing."

That's my position, too. As I said, I cannot defend it philosophically or theologically. But there it is. I have no doubt that there will be many who will be judgmental about that. I do not seek to inoculate myself from their criticism, because- as I say- I cannot defend my own position.

But I just can't do it.

That said, this conversation between Sen. Rubio and CNN "journalist" Chris Cuomo is fascinating. Rubio- who takes the position I cannot in conscience take- takes Cuomo to school on the issue of abortion. Cell division begins at conception, and that makes it life. Not being a kangaroo or wombat fetus, but a specifically human fetus, it is therefore a human life. As Sen. Rubio points out, it can't be anything else, being both alive and human!

Cuomo insists on confusing the question of personhood- which, contrary to his continued assertions, is not a scientific matter at all, but a value judgment- with humanity and life. It is an absolute scientific fact that as of the moment of conception we have a human life; it is a philosophical and theological question whether that human life is the life of a person.

Roe v. Wade says that it is possible for an indisputably living and indisputably human entity not to be a person. Those of us who are pro-life maintain the opposite. That philosophical debate- which by its very nature cannot be settled by science- is the difference between, say, Chris Cuomo and Mario Rubio.

So how is it possible for the radical New York governor's son to think that somehow the humanity of the fetus is in question? As Sen. Rubio repeatedly pointed out, rarely is a human fetus born as a porcupine or an orangutan.

National Review's Kevin Williamson has the answer. It appears that Mr. Cuomo is doing precisely what he repeatedly accused Sen. Rubio of doing; imposing his personal religious beliefs on the subject and pretending that they're science.

Cuomo's position seems to be based on Catholic theology- but not good or even contemporary Catholic theology. It's the theology of Aquinas, the theology of the Middle Ages, which followed Aristotle in arbitrarily deciding that male fetuses became "ensouled" at 40 days- and female fetuses at 90 days. Which is not science. Nor is it even particularly Christian.

Nor is "ensoulment" personhood. "Ensoulment" is a pseudo-scientific and purely arbitrary event; personhood, on the other hand, is a frankly philosophical characteristic which by its very nature cannot be decided scientifically.

What can be- and in fact is- scientifically established is precisely what Sen. Rubio pointed out was scientifically established, Cuomo's denials to the contrary: that a human fetus is 1) a living entity in which genetic information is not only stored, but in the process of being expressed; in which cell division and growth is taking place; and in which all the processes which scientifically define life are taking place; and 2) unavoidably and emphatically human.

An unborn child is, as a matter of indisputable scientific fact, both alive and human. Ergo, it is a human life.

Mr. Cuomo and those on his side of the abortion debate are certainly entitled to argue that not all who possess human lives are persons. But that's not an idea with a particularly glorious history, and one whose ethical pitfalls seem to me to be rather obvious.

Obvious, at least, to anybody whose biology is more modern than that of Aristotle.


Popular posts from this blog

Jan Chamberlain's rhetoric is too strong. But the stand she has taken is right.

I do not share the religion of Jan Chamberlain. I don't even pray to the same god. But I can't help but admire the integrity of the woman who quit the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rather than sing at Donald Trump's inauguration.

Ms. Chamberlain, like me, voted for Evan McMullin in November. Like me, she holds no brief for Hillary Clinton or her agenda. But she cannot, as she put it, "throw roses at Hitler."

As I've said before, comparing Trump to Hitler strikes me as harsh. I believe that Trump is a power-hungry narcissist who exhibits disturbing signs of psychopathy, like Hitler. Like Hitler, he has stigmatized  defenseless minorities- Muslims and undocumented aliens, rather than Jews- and made them scapegoats for the nation's troubles. Like Hitler, he has ridden a wave of irrational hatred and emotion to power. Like Hitler's, his agenda foreshadows disaster for the nation he has been chosen to lead.

But he's not going to set up death camps for Musli…

Neither Evan McMullin nor his movement are going away

Evan McMullin has devoted most of his post-college life- even to the point of foregoing marriage and a family- to fighting ISIS and al Qaeda and our nation's deadliest enemies as a clandestine officer for the CIA. He has done so at the risk of his life.

He has seen authoritarianism in action close-up. One of his main jobs overseas was to locate and facilitate the elimination of jihadist warlords. Evan McMullin knows authoritarians.

And when he looks at Donald Trump, what he sees is an authoritarian like the ones he fought overseas. He knows Donald Trump. After leaving the CIA he served as policy director for the Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives. He tells about his first encounter with The Donald in that role in this opinion piece he wrote for today's New York Times.

In fact, when Mitt Romney and Tom Coburn and all the others who were recruited to run as a conservative third-party candidate against Trump and Hillary Clinton backed out,  McMulli…

Huzzah! Once again, 45 does something majorly right!

First. he appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and now 45 has- at long last- initiated a sensible space policy, with a plan to promote a "rapid and affordable" return to the moon carried out by private enterprise by 2020.  Afterward, it will be onward to Mars and beyond.

This is a great idea for three reasons. First, private enterprise is the future of space exploration, and as far as I know we will be the first spacefaring nation to put most of its eggs in that basket. Second, it's nice to have eggs! Since the Obama administration canceled the Constellation program to develop the Ares booster and the Orion crew vehicle (though it subsequently reinstated the Orion part of the program), the United States has been twiddling its thumbs while China has taken great leaps toward the moon and other countries- including Russia, India, and Japan- have to various degrees intensified their own space programs. It would be both tragic and foolhardy for the nation which first…