Abortion
is only ending biological life of an embryo, it is not murder
By Onyango Oloo in
Abortion
is NOT Murder, contrary to the myths of the pro-death, anti-choice gang
fighting against women and their right to control their own bodies. Here is
what the Canadian Abortion Rights League said in response to this staple of the
anti-choice propagandists: In response to the anti-choice statement: “The
embryo is human and alive, therefore abortion is murder.” The Canadian Abortion
Rights League responded:
1) “An embryo or feotus is a living organism of the species Homo sapiens.
But so is every human egg and sperm cell. There is a difference between being
genetically “human” and being a person in the moral sense.
“According to the Canadian Medical
Association’s Committee on Ethics, the possession of certain capacities has
become widely accepted as necessary for a person to exist. Specifically,
a nervous system capable of some level of self-awareness and conscious
perception (“sapient cognitive awareness”). “An embryo or feotus at the early stage at which abortions in
2) People who use inflammatory
words like “murder” to describe abortion are equating an embryo - something
which has the potential to become a person - with an actual person.
Potentialities are certainly important but they are not the same as
actualities. “Ending the biological life of an embryo through abortion is
morally very different from taking the life of a full human being.
“3) Most people treat babies
differently from feotuses, and late feotuses differently from early ones. As former Supreme
Court of Canada Justice Bertha Wilson pointed out in R. V. Morgentaler,
a miscarriage often has a different meaning when it occurs in
the first or second month of pregnancy (when it may not even be noticed), than
when it occurs in the fifth or sixth month. Most people recognize that feotuses become closer to being human in a moral sense as
they come closer to birth.
“4) Through our laws, our society
formally recognises the moral distinction between
potential and actual people. In
“5) Different cultures, religions,
and philosophies take different positions on when a new soul comes into being
or when abortion is morally justified. “Personhood” may be granted before
birth, at the moment of birth, or, as in some non-Western cultures, some time
after birth.
“For example, several schools of
Islam teach that human life begins after 120 days of pregnancy and accept
abortion up to various stages of pregnancy for various reasons. The Jewish view
is that a foetus becomes a person at birth, and that
the life and health of the pregnant woman always takes priority. Many
Protestant churches, such as the United Church of Canada, consider abortion to
be a moral choice under a range of circumstances.
“6) The Roman Catholic Church has
not always held its current position that a person exists from the moment of
conception and therefore any abortion is wrong. The Catholic moralist St.
Thomas Aquinas claimed that there is no human being at all during the first
weeks of pregnancy. St. Augustine said, “There cannot yet be said to be a live
soul in a body that lacks sensation.”
“In 1869 Pope Pius IX changed the
Catholic Church’s teaching to make conception the moment when the soul arrives.
However, not all Catholic moralists today agree with this teaching. Catholic
theologian Joseph Doncel states, “There can be no
mind before the organism is ready to carry one and no spirit before the mind is
capable of receiving it...”.
“7) The moral value that someone
places on a human embryo is a product of one’s personal religious or
philosophical perspective. Does a fertilised egg have
greater moral value (because it is human) than a mature great ape? Is killing a
fish “murder”? How about a mouse? A dog?
A cow? A great blue whale? An orangutan? How far up the hominid tree do we go before we
use the word “murder?” When people call abortion “murder”, they are really
describing how they feel about abortion.
“8) If abortion is “murder”, what
about those methods of birth control which work after conception has taken
place? Most people do not regard the “morning after” pill as a murder weapon.
Here is an excerpt from another
Canadian document, refuting the familiar anti-choice propaganda that seems to
have captured your mind, Dear Mr Attorney General of
“Anti-choice allegation: “Human
life begins at conception.
Pro-choice response: There is no
scientific consensus as to when human life begins. It is a matter of
philosophic opinion or religious belief. Human life is a continuum—sperm and
eggs are also alive, and represent potential human beings, but virtually all
sperm and eggs are wasted. Also, two-thirds of human conceptions are
spontaneously aborted by nature.
“Anti-choice allegation: Abortion
is the murder of a person. “pro-choice response:
Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact.
Religious communities have differing ideas on the definition of “person” or
when abortion is morally justified. In the Canadian courts, however, a fetus
has consistently been found not to be a person with legal rights.
“Anti-choice allegation: Abortion
is morally wrong. “pro-choice response: Most people
reject the position that abortion is always wrong. In fact, abortion often has
positive benefits for women’s lives and health. Many people believe that
bringing an unwanted child into the world is a crime, and that forcing a woman
to have a child against her will is morally wrong. Many who are opposed to
abortion for religious or moral reasons believe that it is wrong to impose
their values by civil law on everyone.
“Anti-choice allegation: The foetus should have rights under the law. “pro-choice response: If foetal
rights were enshrined in law, women’s bodies, rights, and health would be
subordinated to the protection of embryos. The legal consequences of such a law
would be catastrophic. The best way to protect the fetus is to promote the
health and well-being of women. “anti-choice
allegation: Abortion should not be legal and must be stopped.”
Pro-choice response: Laws have
never stopped abortion, but only made it unsafe for women. Abortion is a
universal practice that has been with us since the beginning of time, whether
legal or illegal.
“Anti-choice allegation: Most
Canadians believe that abortion should be illegal. The majority rules in a
democracy. “
Pro-choice response: About 78% of
Canadians believe that abortion is a private matter between a woman and her
doctor. Human rights are guaranteed for everyone and are not subject to the
whim of the electorate. Even if only a minority believed in freedom of choice,
that right should be protected from the tyranny of the majority.
“Anti-choice allegation: Pro-life
is pro-family. Pro-abortionists are anti-family. Abortion destroys the family.”
Pro-choice response: Legal
abortion helps parents limit their families to the number of children they want
and can afford. This strengthens and stabilises the
family unit. Therefore, pro-choice is pro-child and pro-family. Anti-abortion
laws can cause stress and hardship for families with insufficient resources to
raise unwanted children.
Families with unwanted children
often consist of a child and her child, living at the lowest levels of society.
“Anti-choice allegation: The right
of the unborn to live supersedes any right of a woman to “control her own
body.”
Pro-choice response: Margaret
Sanger said, “No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her
own body.” This concept is fundamental for women. Bearing a child alters a
woman’s life more than anything else. Other women’s rights are hollow if women
are forced to be mothers. Being born is a gift, not a right. People don’t ask
to be born, and some even wish they weren’t.
“Anti-choice allegation: If a
woman has sex, she has to pay the consequences. Too many women have abortions
for their own convenience or on “whim.”
Pro-choice response: “This
vindictive, self-righteous attitude stems from a belief that sex is bad and
must be punished. Motherhood should never be punishment for having sex. Forcing
a child to be born to punish its mother is the ultimate in child abuse.
Anti-abortionists trivialise motherhood and
childbirth by dismissing pregnancy as a mere inconvenience. They ignore or belittle
the needs of the woman and the conflict she endures in making her decision.
Guilt is inflicted when compassion is needed.”
Dear Attorney General, what do you
think of those pro-choice responses? Is there any part you disagree with
scientifically as opposed to religiously?
How about these two particular
legal ramifications alluded to in the above extract:
“Pro-choice response: If foetal rights were enshrined in law, women’s bodies, rights,
and health would be subordinated to the protection of embryos. The legal
consequences of such a law would be catastrophic. The best way to protect the foetus is to promote the health and well-being of women’’
and “Pro-choice response: Legal abortion helps parents limit their families to
the number of children they want and can afford. This strengthens and
stabilizes the family unit. Therefore, pro-choice is pro-child and pro-family.
Anti-abortion laws can cause stress and hardship for families with insufficient
resources to raise unwanted children.
Families with unwanted children
often consist of a child and her child, living at the lowest levels of
society.”
I think it will be a good idea if
you reflected on them, Hon. Wako. Are you guys serious or just out to lunch? I
have a serious question for you Mr. Wako. Has NARC become a Taliban regime-
only this time led by wild eyed Christian right wing Fundamentalists? If you
recall, not too long ago, women in
I understand the NARC government
has ordered the police to hunt down the “Killer Mums” who aborted those 15
fetuses. Will they be charged with murder as well? Hon. Wako, let us compare
the record of the South African government with that of your own when it comes
to reproductive rights. In October 1996, a mere TWO years after its
independence, the South African Parliament passed the Choice on Termination of
Pregnancy (CTOP) Act. The law allows women to terminate pregnancies on request
through the 12th week of pregnancy. It also provides for abortion under
specified circumstances from the 13th through the 20th week, and under very
limited circumstances beyond that point. It is fairly limited. In a Power Point
presentation in the year 2001, the Reproductive Rights Alliance of South Africa
said:
“Recognizing the values of human
dignity, the achievement of equality, the security of the person, non-racialism
and non-sexism, and the advancement of human rights and freedoms which underlie
a democratic South Africa, we believe that no woman should risk her life, her
health, her future fertility, her well being or the well being of her family
because of unwanted pregnancy and lack of reproductive health choices.
In pursuit of our vision, an
integrated, holistic approach takes into consideration the political, social
and economic context within which women seek and are provided with TOP
services. Our vision is that every woman in
Hon. Wako, here is a link to the
document. Your office may want to look at it one of these days:
http://www.pmg.org.za/docs/2001/appendices/010925Reproductive.ppt.
Dear Mr
Attorney General, is it NOT a SCANDAL that we in
What is the situation in
In the meantime, there are 700
abortions that take place in Kenya every single day, exposing women to severe
risks. On one on-line forum, I learned from a Kenyan woman that the crude
dangerous and unsafe methods used all over the country included the following:
“The most prevalent forms of
“crude” abortions are strong tea , Omo with powerfoam, boiled Coca Cola, Chloroquine/Malariaquin
, herbs, taking large doses of birth control pills (sadly after the FACT) etc.”
(message #66692, Kenya online, Tuesday, June 1, 2004,
5:14 PM).
I am told that there at least
250,000 unsafe abortions in
I understand that every single
day,
How do you sleep with a clear
conscience, Dear Mr Attorney General knowing full
well that this is because these victims are criminalised
when they should be given assistance?
Hon. Wako, your cabinet colleague,
Martha Karua has spoken strongly against the stone age abortion laws that you were defending the other
day. When you charge a suspect with murder tomorrow, are you also going to
arrest and charge Martha Karua as an accessory to
murder because of her commendable support for a woman’s right to choose?
How about if she “ confesses” that she knows somebody, or worse still that
she too, once had an abortion, will you charge her with murder?
Who is suffering because of the
existing laws?
Certainly not
the wives, mistresses or girlfriends of Kenyan male politicians. Hon. Amos Wako, be honest with me: If you had a mistress
(I am not saying that you have , but I cannot rule out
that distinct possibility) or a ndogo ndogo who is still in high school ( and again I am not
saying that you have, although I am not ruling that out either) and you had
unprotected sex with them and they came and told you a month later that they
were pregnant but did not want to give birth, what would you do? Would you
drive them personally to the nearest abortion clinic or merely give them the
money to pay for the operation?
In the meantime, Kenyan women who
are too poor to afford the astronomical fees demanded by these doctors who are
taking advantage of the fact that the Kenyan government has refused to recognise the reproductive rights of Kenyan women- these
Kenyan women are still swallowing OMO, boiled Coca Cola, Chloroquin
and I do not know what else to induce abortions- that is when they are not
submitting to unspeakable atrocities at the hands of unscrupulous, unqualified
and unlicensed quacks.
Do you have a clear conscience
knowing that it is existing Kenyan government policies that is driving these
young women to unnecessary early graves?
How many pregnant teenagers have
committed suicide since the feotus driven shock
tactics of the deranged pro- death anti-choice forces took over
You should know that peaceful,
progressive and democratic minded Kenyans will oppose these medieval policies
until we achieve total victory. It may take a year, it may take ten years but
have no doubt that one day Kenyan women will win their right to choose what to
do when confronted with an unwanted pregnancy.
Remember, the Taliban regime that
used to commit atrocities against Afghan women is no more.
Some of us who are outside the
country are launching an international campaign to expose your sexist and
misogynist policies, isolate the NARC government on this specific area of
gender oppression and work to apply diplomatic pressure and if necessary
economic sanctions to put an end to this outrageous attack on Kenyan women.
The NARC government should stop
using the abortion debate to divert attention from the fact that it has
woefully failed to deliver on its pre-election promises, not just to Kenyan women and their children, but to the country as a
whole.
If you are very concerned with the
plight of innocent Kenyan children, then I suggest you take a look at this very
sobering UN report on the abuse and sexual exploitation of Kenyan children:
http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord1998/documentation/commission/e-cn4-1998-1
01-add1.htm. I rest my case.
Published by Kenya
Socialist Democratic Alliance (KSDA)
email: harakatips@hotmail.com