The basis for this post was an article I wrote for an
“Opinion Shaper” column in Durham
Region’s “This Week” newspapers in
2001, but in light of the Private Member’s Bill seeking to discover when human
life begins I revised it here.
People in our
society do not like rules and restrictions placed upon them, especially in
matters that involve “personal choice.”
On talk radio I have heard numerous callers state their ethic something
like this: “People can do whatever they want as long as they are not hurting
anyone.” Now, what is wrong with this
moral code? It sounds civilized and
enlightened.
My main objection
is that to justify doing “whatever you want,” humans are very good at simply
redefining “anyone” and “hurt.” In the
past, entire categories of humans were denied the status of “somebody” and
became victims of great harm. But today
every “anyone” has rights, and there are human rights watchdogs and a Charter
of Rights and Freedoms to guarantee them, aren’t there? Not quite.
The very youngest members of the human race are not regarded as
somebodies if it is more convenient for them not to be, despite the testimony
of the ultrasound.
How do we redefine
“hurt”? When we are striving to please
ourselves, it is easy to minimize any negative effect our actions could or do
have on others. When the “others” in
question are not “somebodies,” we take no notice when embryologists announce
that pain can be felt at 12 weeks gestation.
Most newscasts do not carry the discovery that for a period of time
beginning at 12 weeks, the fetus’ natural pain-reduction system of endorphins
and other hormones is not yet in place.
A pre-born baby at this stage feels more pain than any of us can imagine
when it is violently dismembered or poisoned to death.
The leading cause
of death in Canada today (2005 statistics from www.phac-aspc.gc.ca) is not due to
disease or accident. The vast majority
of victims are perfectly healthy. Abortion
killed 96,815 in 2005, with circulatory diseases coming in second at 71,749 deaths in the same
period. We are not used to
cause-of-death statistics being reported in this way. Why?
If statistics
Canada called abortion a death rather than something therapeutic, Canadians
would have to admit somebody was hurt as they did whatever they wanted. And then we would discern that because our
enlightened moral code does not protect everybody, it doesn’t work for anybody.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.