Abortion is a complex subject, not to be pigeonholed with biased oversimplification.

I don’t know anyone that is “for abortion” (as in the killing of unborn lives). Unless we are talking about raging sociopaths, we are all pro-life when it comes to the unborn.

As a species, we naturally thrive on procreation. This is not a cold process—it’s one with tremendous emotional importance; one that touches our deepest humanity.

However, the issue of abortion is not a black & white one.
There are circumstances where the mother may die giving birth; the unborn may be diagnosed with serious insurmountable defects*; and the more delicate issue of ending a pregnancy for numerous reasons only a woman can decide.
* About the second case, One must not confuse every case being one of eugenics. Most parents do NOT decide to abort because they want to breed a perfect descendant. It would be cruel to accuse them of such lack of empathy and love, when it’s precisely their empathy and love that leads them to that decision.
I will say it again: it’s a delicate issue… 

These are not equal issues.
There is no single “ready-to-wear” judgment anyone can make on this.
Hence, the acerbic war of opinions continues on this subject.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Since the beginning of embryonic stem cell research (offering hope for a slew of cures aimed at chronic and debilitating conditions), there is immense disagreement on when life begins.
—I will agree that the “process of Life” does start at conception. It would be a show of bad faith to deny that.
Consequently, we must first we define what Life is, and more importantly, the qualitative properties of such Life.

hatched-blastocyst
Is the life of a plant the same than the life of a newborn? Is this even a good question since a plant does not lead to a human being? Then, is a blastocyst always destined to produce a human being? Is there a moment in the process that can be interrupted? Are there any good reasons to interrupt the process, like stem cell research?

We do know that Nature is responsible for the most overwhelming amount of abortions from conception (“missed abortions”, before 18 weeks) to the intrauterine deaths (after 18 weeks), and all the way to the extrauterine deaths at delivery.

These are natural abortions.

In conclusion, Nature aborts for no other reason that it does not care about the lives of the unborn. It has no moral dilemma on the subject. It just “is” and “does”.
* Ironically, the most vehement attackers of any sort of abortion are the Christian fundamentalists that attribute this very Nature to a loving God. But that’s another issue…

Unlike Nature, we humans, on the other hand, place justified importance on our progeny. We love and care for our children, even the children of others.

The issue of abortion is a heated one.
But I will give my current opinion open to correction, based on what I have researched. So, for now:

  • I refuse to judge a woman that makes this impossibly difficult decision.
  • I refuse to judge a man that decides to save the mother rather than the child.
  • I refuse to judge parents who decide not to have a child with complications that will ruin the life of all involved, especially the child.
  • I am for stem cell research and the good it will do to humanity—the in vitro blastocyst being purposely not meant to grow as a mature human being.

There it is. The most taboo subject I know of.
I will take the heat for this…