In the Toronto Sunday Star of December 30, 1984, an article by Tom Harpur appeared under the heading “Why We Must Speak Out.” I feel that I could challenge almost every one of his statements but space would not permit, so I shall address myself to just four.
– According to Mr. Harpur, we must opt for a pluralistic society where “individuals are free to follow their own consciences and shape their lives themselves, rather than being coerced to obey the imposed values of a strident minority.”
–
– You do not have to believe in abortion yourself to know that Morgentaler’s heroic fight involves crucial freedoms for everyone.
–
– Abortion may be tragic but it is a far greater evil to commit the violence of removing people’s — in this case women’s — right to be responsible for their own lives and those of their families.
–
– Polls show that the majority of us believes in true pluralism on abortion
Is it human?
Mr. Harpur is a Christian and lectures at the Toronto School of Theology. I therefore presume that he is not in favor of the taking of innocent human life. So he must make up his mind as to whether what is being killed by abortion is a human being or not. There is so much scientific evidence that human life begins at conception that it is difficult to choose the most pertinent statements of the experts. Here are a few:
Dr. William Liley, knighted by the Queen for his research in fetology: From the moment a baby is conceived, it bears the indelible stamp of a separate, distinct personality, an individual different from all other individuals.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, former abortionist & world renowned fetologist: Modern biological and genetic studies have verified that the unborn child is a separate entity form the time of conception of shortly thereafter. Thus, life begins with fertilization of a single ovum by a single spermatozoan which is implanted in the mother’s uterus.
First International Conference on Abortion in Washington D.C., 1967: The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of the sperm and the egg, or at least at the blastocyst stage, and the birth of an infant, at which point we could say that this is not human life.
Life Magazine, Drama of life before birth (1965): The birth of a human life really occurs at the moment the mothers egg cell is fertilized by one of the father’s sperm cells.
Dr. Herbert Ratner, executive member of the U.S., Commission on Human Life: It is now of unquestionable certainty that a human being comes into existence precisely at the moment when the sperm combines with the egg.
The Geneva declaration of the World Medical Association (1984): I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception; even under threat I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity.
These statements were not made by theologians but by scientists and geneticists. As far as I know, none of them belongs to the “vocal rigid, clergy-dominated minority” to which Mr. Harpur refers.
If Mr. Harpur does not accept that the embryo is human being from the moment of conception, he is refusing to accept the findings of modern science. If the does accept the humanity of the embryo and supports Morgentaler, he is supporting the killing of human beings. If the unborn baby is human it has the same right to life as the born baby. There is no essential difference between a baby outside its mother’s womb and an unborn baby if they are both human beings. So, logically, Mr. Harpur must support infanticide. Why not?
Majorities and Minorities
Mr. Harpur speaks of a “strident minority” imposing its views on the rest of society. But 40 years ago a majority would certainly have opposed abortion just as stridently as — I hope — a majority would oppose a law allowing infanticide today.
He appears to hold that morality is decided by a vote. This is an opinion which has never been put forward by any Christian Church that I know of. If that were so, it would mean that homosexuality is a “little more moral” today than it was 40 years ago and may be completely moral in another ten years or so. God must have a difficult time watching the vote to decide on which side He is going to come down on!
Freedom for everyone
As quoted above, Mr. Harpur holds that one does not have to believe in abortion to know that Morgentaler’s heroic fight involves crucial freedoms for everybody. Morgentaler boasts that he has performed 18,000 abortions. And he says he is proud of his record! But how free were the babies whom he aborted? They had no free vote regarding what was to happen to them. Is this “freedom for everybody?”
An incredible view point
Mr. Harpur, while admitting that abortion “may” be tragic, considers it more acceptable than removing people’s — in this case women’s — rights to their own lives, etc. Wow! So we allow the killing of over a million babies in ten years — in the States, over 17 million — so that women can “live their own lives.” And “living their own lives” means killing their own babies and turning their backs on their greatest glory — Motherhood.
Come on, Mr. Harpur. Tell us straight, have you thrown the Gospels in the garbage?
The polls
Mr. Harpur tells his readers that, “Polls show that the majority of us believes in true pluralism on abortion.” Again, morality is to be decided by a vote. But I wonder to what poll he refers?
In 1983 a poll was taken which proposed the following, “The decision whether or not to perform an abortion should rest with the consenting patient and should be performed by a licensed physician in conformance with good medical practice.” Later, Mrs. Norma Scarborough, President of CARAL said, “If we were doing it again, we would never use a double-barreled question.” The question was a trap. If the persons being interviewed said “No,” they were saying that an abortion should not be performed by a licensed physician in conformance with good medical practice. 1062 people were interviewed and 73% said, “Yes.” But to what were they saying, “Yes?”
Even though the president of CARAL admitted that the question was “double-barreled,” other pro-abortionists, like Mr. Harpur, keep trumping it up as if it proved something — which it doesn’t.
A more significant poll
I can’t say that I am an ardent “poll-watcher” but, if Mr. Harpur takes them seriously, here is one he might find interesting. In September 1983, the Insurance Bureau of Canada retained the Goldfarb Public Opinion Consultants to do a survey for them. What they really wanted to find out was the opinion of Canadians on the subject of drinking and driving. But, to conceal their primary intention, they threw in a whole package of less relevant questions such as, “What do you think of child abuse?” etc. one of the questions was “Do you find abortion objectionable?” 800 Canadians (aged 16 and over) were interviewed by phone. Half were male and half female. 74% said that they found abortion objectionable. Goldfarb claims that its surveys are accurate to within 3.5%.
Cards to the government
Mr. Harpur keeps referring to a “strident minority.” Within the past few months the Mulroney Government has received one million post cards with the following printed statement, “The child in the womb is a human being who has a right to the protection of the law. I oppose the choice to kill.” Each card has the signature and address of the sender. The cards were produced by a non-religious group called, “Jury for Life.” One million people do not constitute “a strident minority.”
We must speak out
Mr. Harpur says that we must speak out. I couldn’t agree more. If we, of this generation, are prepared to sit on our hands and allow the wanton killing of thousands of Canadian children, we shall certainly have failed the future. It is not only a question of the lives of our children; it is the whole fabric of society that is at stake. On her last visit to Toronto, Mother Teresa said, “if mothers have their own children killed, what more can we expect.” It is a pity that pro-abortionists would not try to plumb the depths of those words.
