There are a few things that abortion advocates forget when discussing the procedure. One of them is “what is the unborn?” As Greg Koukl has said, if the unborn is not a human being, no justification is necessary. If the unborn is a human being, no justification is enough.
Another issue abortion advocates typically scoot over is accurately describing just what an abortion is. Some merely state, “women should have the right to choose…”
Well, choose what? Describe the choice you want women to have.
Others settle for a sterile dictionary definition: “the termination of a pregnancy.” Yes, a pregnancy is terminated, but that’s not the whole of it.
This is the quandry one of my research class students is getting herself into. She is doing her paper on abortion, and she is defending the pro-choice view. She asked me to give her some pointers, so without jumping in and bombarding her with the pro-life view, I honed in on these questions immediately. They are questions she must face if she wants to honestly deal with the issue and face the counter-arguments to her position.
This, by the way, is what any researcher must do…without addressing counter-arguments put in their strongest possible fashion, the researcher is not engaging in research, but mere confirmation bias.
At first, she didn’t get it. “Do you mean, ‘what is an abortion to me’?” she asked.
“No,” I replied, “that is a subjective question. Though you can bring that in towards the end, like in your conclusion, the question you need to primarily address is an objective one. Abortion is an objective procedure that objectively does something to an objective entity. Therefore, scientific and philosophical considerations, rather than your personal feelings, are what you need to lead with.”
I went on to give her two specific questions she needed to address in her paper:
What is the unborn? Human or blob?
Describe an abortion in detail. What is involved in a D&C and D&E abortion, for example? What are the tools used, and what happens to the unborn and the mother?
No doubt, there are other questions she could raise. If she ends up changing her mind (if she really faces the two questions above, it will be difficult for her to not change her mind), for instance, she might want to address the issue of what should happen legally to those who perform abortions. But the two issues above are of primary importance. No one who honestly deals with abortion can avoid them.
Somewhat ironically, the second question above played itself out just a few moments later. One of the other students–a pro-lifer also researching abortion–came upon a website that had pictures of aborted fetuses. She watched, as other students gathered around. A look of shock and disgust came upon their faces. In some instances, they voiced their disgust. Did the situation make me uncomfortable? Yes–How could it not?
I let her continue, however. Why? Because the pictures accurately reflected reality. When researching an issue, you must look at the whole picture (pun intended). Were a student to research the treatment of blacks before the civil rights era or during slavery, I would fully expect him/her to wrestle with Emmett Till, the testimony of the Little Rock Nine, and the stench of slave trading ships.
The girl viewing the website didn’t push the pictures in the face of her classmates or any pro-choicers in my class. She just let the website play the pictures of what happens to a fetus when an abortion is performed. Any researcher who delves into the procedure must face them. Any researcher who doesn’t do so is researching not reality, but an air-brushed version of only half the issue.