For years, we in the pro-life movement have been touting every scientific fact or advancement that points to the existence of life inside the womb – from noting that a baby’s heart starts beating just 22 days into pregnancy to holding up 4D ultrasounds that show a baby’s movement, features, even smiles. If only we could prove to pro-choice adherents that this is a live baby, we think, then we could convince them that abortion is taking a real life and that it is murder.
So the argument goes within our minds. And so, we talk about fetal pain and fetal heartbeats and babies born alive in botched abortions – persuaded that this is what it will take to win the battle for life.
And, indeed, it is critical that we continue to talk about these things.
But the recent pro-abortion orgy at the Texas State House told a very different story from the one logic would dictate. As legislators neared passing a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, hundreds of raucous pro-abortion protestors capped an 11-hour filibuster, making noise such that the legislature was unable to continue its business.
• At 3 weeks, the heart starts beating.
• At 5 weeks, eyes, legs, and hands begin to develop.
• At 6 weeks, fingernails are forming, and facial features are becoming visible.
• At 7 weeks, babies begin kicking.
• At 8 weeks, every organ system is present and in place.
• By 12 weeks, or near the close of the first trimester, the unborn baby has already developed unique fingerprints, a skeletal structure, a spinal cord…and more.
Yet, despite these facts, which are hardly new to the scientific community – or to the abortion industry – an angry mob of abortion-on-demand activists (many of whom would probably call abortion “unfortunate” but argue it should still be available) descended on the Texas State House crying for government to validate the desire to stop a beating heart.
Hasn’t science proven life?
The answer, of course, is yes.
It’s almost ironic. When pro-life arguments are based on faith (heaven forbid), the pro-abortion lobby wants scientific evidence. When pro-life arguments are based on scientific evidence – as they undoubtedly now are (case in point: Gosnell) and have been for some time – the pro-choice lobby remains unconvinced.
Perhaps unconvinced is the wrong word, though. “Un-dissuaded” is far better. For as recent events have made profoundly clear, it’s not that the abortion industry doesn’t believe the unborn baby is a living human being; it’s that the abortion industry simply doesn’t care.