10 things that suggest pro-lifers are not consistent in treating the unborn as human, in the sense that born people are human

[FiveLinden]

This thread is about what I think is a fact: people generally don’t behave as if they believe an pre-viability ‘unborn child’ is a human being in the sense that born people are. This fact can be illustrated by the behaviour of Catholics as well as others.

I think this is one reason pro-lifers and pro-choicers have difficulty in coming to common ground.

Here’s a list of indicators. I am sure there are others.

• 1. Unborn children are not counted in censuses used to determine electoral representation.
• 1. Unborn children do not have the right to sue or be sued (at least anywhere I know of) in the same way that others, including those in comas can.
• 1. Unborn children do not acquire citizenship rights before birth. If you are conceived in the US (and many other places) but born elsewhere, you do not have the rights of someone conceived elsewhere but borth in, e.g., the US
• 1. Unborn children cannot be baptised, although the faithful(in this cae the parents) have a right to the sacraments. I know there are physical impediments to baptism in this case, but my point is that the Church, in deciding on the form this sacrament would take, excluded one group of ‘human beings’. This indicates a lack of full agreement with the proposition that a pre-viable unborn child is fully human. Once born, such a being can be baptised.
• 1. Naming generally takes place only after birth and legal naming happens only then.
• 1. There is no Church tradition of requium masses for unborn children. Modern events date from the pro-choice/life debates.
• 1. There is no Church requirement to treat the bodies of unborn children who die, from whatever reason, as bodies of other humans are required to be treated. This is especially so the earlier an abortion occurs.
• 1. There is little concern raised by ‘pro-lifers’ about the incidence of spontaneous abortion, estimated at about one-third of all pregnancies. If one-third of born children were dying in common circumstances there would be a massive public response. There is no such response in the case of the unborn.
• 1. There are no religious ceremonies associated with conception, or discovering it has happened.
• 1. Christmas is a far more significant event in Christianity than the Annunication.

Countervailing evidence is hard for me to find. Possibly the practice of saying ‘two kids and one on the way’ is evidence of a different approach. Better imaging of the fetus has probably contributed to a sense that a fetus is a child. But that does not apply in very early stages.

 

[lwest]

Since it’s difficult to determine the exact moment of conception (unless the woman has sex only once in a certain time frame), several of your points are moot. They’re probably not count in the census because there’s no guarantee that child will be allowed to be born. But I see what you’re trying to say. Maybe efforts should be made to address those things.

 

[FiveLinden]

They’re probably not count in the census because there’s no guarantee that child will be allowed to be born.

But if they are human, should they not be counted? What has being born to do with it, from a pro-life point of view?

 

[po18guy]

Is this April 1?

 

[dochawk]

While I generally find your list silly, this one:

Unborn children do not have the right to sue or be sued (at least anywhere I know of) in the same way that others, including those in comas can.

is simply ignorance.

I don’t believe that there is an english speaking country that does not recognize the right of the unborn child (or his heirs) to sue.

Furthermore, unless committed by the mother, murder of the unborn child is prosecutable, and in fact happens regularly.

 

[lwest]

Maybe efforts should be made to address those things. But when someone kills a pregnant woman, aren’t they charged with 2 murders? Society has a split personality on this issue. It should be resolved, I agree.

 

[ReaderT]

Furthermore, unless committed by the mother, murder of the unborn child is prosecutable, and in fact happens regularly.

Yes - that is true from far-right Alabama to far-left California (ex. the Scott Peterson trial). If a person kills a pregnant woman or causes the death of her unborn baby, it’s child murder. But apparently it’s not murder if the mother herself ends the life.

Unborn children cannot be baptised, although the faithful(in this cae the parents) have a right to the sacraments. I know there are physical impediments to baptism in this case, but my point is that the Church, in deciding on the form this sacrament would take, excluded one group of ‘human beings’. This indicates a lack of full agreement with the proposition that a pre-viable unborn child is fully human. Once born, such a being can be baptised.

In order to baptize, the body of the person needs to be fully dunked in water (in my tradition) or sprinkled with water (in the west). The placement of the baby inside the mother makes that impossible.

Also, baptism is a “rebirth”, which means we understand it comes after birth.

There is no Church tradition of requiem masses for unborn children.

In the East, there is. We call it Pannikhida though and not requiem mass.

There is no Church requirement to treat the bodies of unborn children who die, from whatever reason, as bodies of other humans are required to be treated.

In the East, there is. In fact in Wagener SC there is a monastery with special graves for the unborn.

1. There are no religious ceremonies associated with conception, or discovering it has happened.

There no ceremonies tied with any stage of human development - conception, puberty, adulthood, entering old age, graduating out of infancy, etc. That doesn’t mean we view them as unimportant, though.

Even Last Rites aren’t tied with an age but with death, which can happen at any age. Likewise baptism isn’t tied with birth because adults are baptized also.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

Most of what you listed are legal issues (such as census and inheritance).

But I’m not sure of the inheritance thing.
I’ve read stories where a wealthy young man dies and before his estate is settled, they have to wait to see if the wife got pregnant before he died, or conversely if she was the wealthy one , he could inherit from her or not, depending if she’d had a baby (or in case of mother and baby dying at birth, which one was determined to have died first).

Actually, depending on how far along pregnancy goes, a miscarried fetus can be buried in consecrated ground—you can talk to a priest or a funeral director for the details.

Not to be too graphic, but the products of very early pregnancies that get miscarried can be hard to distinguish by the naked eye.

But none of these issues constitute a “purity test” for the sincerity of a person who wants to protect the life of the unborn.
It only represents that beginning-of-life issues have their own considerations because of how embryonic development works.

Nice try at a “gotcha”, though

 

[FiveLinden]

In order to baptize, the body of the person needs to be fully dunked in water (in my tradition) or sprinkled with water (in the west). The placement of the baby inside the mother makes that impossible.

Also, baptism is a “ re birth”, which means we understand it comes after birth

Exactly my point. Why would a Church that accepted the full humanity of an unborn child deny the child access to baptism by constructing a rite with precludes such access. And if baptism is a ‘rebirth’ then surely the wrong term has been used and it should be a ‘reconception’ and people should be ‘reconceived in the spirit’?

 

[FiveLinden]

In the East, there is. In fact in Wagener SC there is a monastery with special graves for the unborn.

Did this happen after the pro-life/pro-choice arguments began?

 

[adamhovey1988]

Unborn children are not counted in censuses

So what? Try using logic. Some countries don’t count non-citizens.

Unborn children do not have the right to sue or be sued

Again, logic failure

If you are conceived in the US (and many other places) but born elsewhere, you do not have the rights of someone conceived elsewhere but borth in, e.g., the US

This is false. I don’t know where Ted Cruz was conceived, but he was born in Canada and ran for president.
Nice try, though.

Unborn children cannot be baptised

Would someone still be alive if they were allergic to water?
You are not using LOGIC.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Nice try at a “gotcha”, though

None of it was “nice”, as far as I could tell.

 

[TRose225]

1-3. Have more to do with how governments view unborn children, not how citizens view them.
4. They cannot be baptized because that is physically impossible. However priests do bless ones unborn children.
5. Once again-government recognition does not confer or deny humanity upon a person. Many parents choose their children’s names before they are born.
6. Not sure about Masses, but stillbirth oftentimes was a very personal and even taboo subject in years past so women did not feel comfortable making it a big event. The babies often had a plot in the cemetery alongside their parents though. I myself have buried one of my unborn babies(10 weeks 4 days) in a memorial in my backyard with a St.Joseph statue.
7. There is no church requirement because there is not always a way to get the remains back if you have to have a certain medical procedure like a D&C for testing for genetic anomalies/other CODs. Even with a natural miscarriage, the baby’s body may have been disintegrating in the womb for weeks before discovery of the miscarriage, and there is so much other tissue, placenta and blood involved. So that sometimes makes it hard to identify the body in an early miscarriage. The later the gestation, the more it makes sense that the body should be more easily recoverable and therefore buriable(as in the case of stillbirth).
8. The reason miscarriages occur (for the most part)is because of genetic anomalies that are incapable with life outside the womb. The other reasons for miscarriage are progesterone hormone levels, placental issues, and other uterine issues. And it’s untrue to say pro-lifers are not concerned with progesterone hormone levels being low or other issues that could lead to miscarriage. The first pill in the medication abortion pack, in fact, makes progesterone low, and prolife doctors have developed a protocol to reverse that effect.
9. Like I said, priests bless unborn babies.
10. Jesus was still affecting people(John the Baptist, also a fetus) while in the womb.

 

[ReaderT]

Did this happen after the pro-life/pro-choice arguments began?

No. We’ve done this from time immemorial. In some villages in Greece, it is traditional for the women to decorate their aprons according to how many children they have and how many they have lost. Miscarriages are included. The idea that miscarried remains could ever just be put on the trash-heap is contrary to everything Orthodoxy teaches (and has always taught), namely that Christ came down to deify human flesh.

Exactly my point. Why would a Church that accepted the full humanity of an unborn child deny the child access to baptism by constructing a rite with precludes such access. And if baptism is a ‘rebirth’ then surely the wrong term has been used and it should be a ‘reconception’ and people should be ‘reconceived in the spirit’?

I can only speak for the East, but we didn’t “construct” a rite at all - we baptize by full-immersion just as Christ was baptized by full immersion - we simply do what He did. Even infants are fully immersed. The fact that an unborn baby can’t be dunked does not mean we view them as any less human.

 

[po18guy]

It would be ever so nice to encounter a cogent argument in contra.

Suggesting that pro-life individuals are flawed is to ignore one’s own flaws.

None of this is directed toward any individual, as none of us is a finished product.

 

[AlbMagno]

As you did in other threads, you are assuming legal person/citizen = Human being, which is not what we believe.

 

[fhansen]

One year-olds have fewer rights and are treated differently than more mature people. They cannot survive on their own and their personalities are far from blossomed; their personhood less identifiable. They can’t talk, they’re a lot of trouble. Should they be less valuable, more dispensable? How about 4 year-olds?

 

[Freddy]

One year-olds have fewer rights and are treated differently than more mature people. They cannot survive on their own and their personalities are far from blossomed; their personhood less identifiable. They can’t talk, they’re a lot of trouble. Should they be less valuable, more dispensable? How about 4 year-olds?

Each person should have equal rights.

Do you note the operative word there?

 

[TheLittleLady]

1. There is no church requirement because there is not always a way to get the remains back if you have to have a certain medical procedure like a D&C for testing for genetic anomalies/other CODs. Even with a natural miscarriage, the baby’s body may have been disintegrating in the womb for weeks before discovery of the miscarriage, and there is so much other tissue, placenta and blood involved. So that sometimes makes it hard to identify the body in an early miscarriage. The later the gestation, the more it makes sense that the body should be more easily recoverable and therefore buriable(as in the case of stillbirth).
2. The reason miscarriages occur (for the most part)is because of genetic anomalies that are incapable with life outside the womb. The other reasons for miscarriage are progesterone hormone levels, placental issues, and other uterine issues. And it’s untrue to say pro-lifers are not concerned with progesterone hormone levels being low or other issues that could lead to miscarriage. The first pill in the medication abortion pack, in fact, makes progesterone low, and prolife doctors have developed a protocol to reverse that effect.
3. Like I said, priests bless unborn babies.

This!

Every Catholic hospital I know of makes sure, if the parents are not able/do not wish, to care for the remains of their miscarried child, that these are buried and blessed. It happens once a month at our Catholic cemetery.

 

[fhansen]

Each person should have equal rights.

Do you note the operative word there?

Ok, well, I guess we’ll have to allow 4 year-olds to drive then, the right to vote, etc. The point is that we already treat people who’re born differently as well.