What About Abortion?

There are a number of arguments to support the premise that abortion on demand is morally right.  All of these arguments are merely "smoke screens" (intended to divert the issue).  The only relevant question is:  "Is the fetus a living human being?"

The following series of questions are offered for consideration of the reader:  (1) Is the fetus human or non-human?  (2) If the fetus is  non-human, what is it?  (3) If the fetus is human, is it alive?  (4) If the fetus is living and is human, is it a part of the mother or a separate  human being?

The genetic makeup of the fetus proves it is human - the DNA, etc., is  human. Any medical expert qualified to testify in any court of law would testify the tissue is human.  All medical evidence proves the fetus is human.  In addition, the genetic makeup of the fetus proves it is not part  of the mother - it frequently has a different blood type and certainly has a different DNA pattern.

This whole issue revolves on the question of the definition of life itself. How is life defined?  The following characteristics are given as a definition of life:  (1) reproduction, (2) growth, (3) metabolism, (4)  movement, (5) responsiveness, and (6) adaptation.  The fetus has all of  these characteristics prior to birth.  Some life forms are unable to move or at least appear to be unable to move, but many life forms can move.   These six characteristics are cumulative characteristics of life.  It is generally accepted as "undisputed evidence of life" if all six  characteristics are present.

If some "thing," having these six characteristics, was observed by astronauts who landed on Mars, it would be said to be alive by scientists.   The advocates of abortion on demand will not define life precisely.  If  they ever define life, they will be forced to admit their actions constituted the killing of a living human being.

What about the cases of rape, incest or deformity of the child?  These questions merely "beg the question" because they assume the fetus is not a living human being.  Do those who use these cases to prove abortion on demand should be allowed claim a 10 year old person who was conceived as a  result of rape should be killed?  Do they claim a 12 year old should be  killed because of his/her deformity?  Do they claim that an 11 year old  child conceived as a result of incest should be killed?  Unless they claim  these children should be killed, they admit that these questions are  assuming what they are trying to prove (begging the question).  It is not realistic to claim there are no living humans conceived as a result of rape  or incest. This would prove that their argument is a smoke screen.  This line of argumentation on cases of rape, incest or deformity is based upon the premise that an exceptional case establishes a general rule.  The fetus is a living human being who is separate and distinct from his/her  mother.  It is murder to kill the fetus and those who do so are just as  guilty as the person who murders a two year old child.

Does this preclude the usage of birth control?  No, because neither the sperm cell nor the egg has the six characteristics of life listed above.

How will either the atheist or the agnostic answer these arguments?  Usually they do not respond at all, but when they do it has always been to change the  subject to the question of the existence of God.  That does not answer these arguments!