Pro-abortionists have historically used science as a tool to argue that babies can be aborted because they are merely clumps of cells up until 28 weeks of pregnancy, but advancements in science are changing how abortion advocates and pro-lifers argue their cause.
Published in the Atlantic, Emma Green’s Thursday article, “Science Is Giving the Pro-Life Movement a Boost,” describes how advances in science are changing people’s conceptions of morality as it relates to aborting unborn children. New technology and higher tech ultrasounds allow women to watch as their baby grows inside them, providing concrete images for what could previously only be described in the abstract.
New science is “instilling a sense of awe that we never really had before at any point in human history,” pro-life activist Ashley McGuire said according to the Atlantic. “We didn’t know any of this,” she added.
“The more I advanced in my field of neonatology, the more it just became the logical choice to recognize the developing fetus for what it is: a fetus, instead of some sort of sub-human form,” neonatologist, Colleen Malloy, also said, the Atlantic reports. “It just became so obvious that these were just developing humans.”
While the groundbreaking Roe v. Wade case legalized abortion and determined that a newborn could survive only at roughly 28 weeks of pregnancy, scientific advancements have allowed doctors and nurses to birth healthy children at 22 weeks, causing some health professionals to debate whether the medical community should change the threshold of viability.
“We’ve become steeped in a culture in which only the data matter, and that makes us, in some ways, philosophically illiterate,” Georgetown University biomedical ethics professor, Daniel Sulmasy, told the Atlantic. He points to the fact that pro-life and pro-abortion activists now regard scientific evidence as the ultimate tool in the abortion battle because modern society has placed most trust in doctors, science and facts. “We really don’t have the tools anymore for thinking and arguing outside of something that can be scientifically verified,” he posits.
Physician Farr Curlin also maintains that not only is science a vital instrument in which to study the world, including the early stages of all life forms, but also that science and support for life do not conflict like many abortion activists try to claim. “Science is a practice of using systematic methods to study our world, including what human organisms are in their early states,” Curlin said. “I don’t see any way it’s not an ally to the pro-life cause.”