Another Shift of Position by Anti Abortion Whackos
There have been so many different positions taken by anti abortion operatives I can't keep track of them all. Many decades ago another faculty member, a Protestant who opposed abortion, was holding court in the faculty lounge. He proudly proclaimed the final proof a fetus is a human being. "I asked a priest," he said, "if the fertilized egg has a soul? The Priest said 'yes.' There's your proof."
There was a period sometime around the Middle Ages when "doctors" with some training in the science of the time wanted to differentiate themselves from "doctors" who used ancient rituals to treat people. The science doctors began to tell women the sensation of movement in their bodies Was merely a stage in the process that later resulted in birth. It was not some spiritual force that arrived only at the sensation in their bodies. Catholics latched onto that idea claiming a human being existed at conception.
In recent years we've run through the fetus feeling pain and the fetus having a "heartbeat". The latter claim is made even though there is no heart when this claim is made. A decade or so ago it was found the fetus has a different DNA than the mother. This claim of "uniqueness" has been undermined by proof individual sperm and egg cell themselves are different one from another so "uniqueness" does not begin at fertilization.
Then there is what the Bible says about abortion. I've read in comments here on this blog, "God hates abortion." Scholar Bart Ehrman explained in a blog recently that no where in the Bible is abortion condemned. Only by using far fetched claims and over reaching can anyone claim abortion is condemned in the Bible.
Now there is a new angle being promoted which admits the Bible does not condemn abortion. The new sheriff says, "Nowhere in the Bible does it say, 'Thou shalt not commit abortion." What is says is, according to this new deal, we are to love our neighbor. The fetus is our neighbor.
As is ALWAYS the case, this new position whistles right past our "neighbors" who are women that need abortions. In that sense, it is not a new position. Ignoring women who need abortions is part of all anti abortion rationalities.
you write that "....the science doctors began to tell women the sensation of movement in their bodies meant that a birth may becoming...Catholics latched onto this idea claiming a human being existed at conception..." this sentence makes little or no sense to me. so far as I know, "quickening' was a legal concept pertaining to the rules of evidence. moreover, medical science did not have full and accurate knowledge of human reproduction until the middle of the 19th century. so could you explain/clarify your statement, giving sources, etc. and above all, your rationale for asserting what you did. thanks.
ReplyDeleteJon, “according to this new deal, we are to love our neighbor. The fetus is our neighbor.”
ReplyDeleteBy definition a birthright is a a right, privilege, or possession to which a person is entitled “by birth”. Go ahead love a zygote, an embryo, or a fetus. But it is the birthright of every woman to preside over and control her reproductive life to the exclusion of all others, including the neighbors.
I am disappointed. I was really hoping that you would respond to my question, hoping that you could expand/explain your remarks. what was your source of that comment: what did you really mean when you mentioned "science doctors"? which doctors specifically and when did they begin to do their "science" thing? and so on. oh well, if you care not to comment, so be it.
ReplyDeletetsm "I am disappointed." You are correct on two points. My description was not clear and the quickening was used as a legal issue eventually.
ReplyDeleteWhat I was referring to was not legal arguments taking place in lofty places but on the streets in the Middle Ages where competing "doctors" were all trying to eek out a living. I rewrote my sentence to explain the "scientific" doctors told patients the fetus existed before the quickening. Spiritual doctors told patients the quickening took place when the spirit invaded the body and left the fetus there. This is covered in some books about folk medicine. I don't have time to look for my source.
I think that I can help you out on this one. the regnant medical paradigm up to the 17th century (and sometimes beyond) was the notion of four body fluids, namely blood, phlegm, yellow bile and black bile. it was essential to keep these four in balance. thus too much blood, then the leeches. this paradigm was an essential part of the Hippocratic understanding of Medicine. it was later popularized by Galen (3rd century) and eventually debunked by Harvey, Paracelsus and others. Hippocrates, it is important to note, thought of medicine as a rational, empiric science. no gods allowed. this obviously is a very cursory treatment of a very complex matter. but it will do to give you some perspective.
ReplyDelete