Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity observes touchy topic

Yesterday was the Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity.  Around the world, students at over 1500 schools observed a day of silence to remember the millions of children who will remain silent forever.  

Why were these children silenced almost before their lives began?  Many arguments circle between pro-life and pro-choice groups:  religion, women's rights or special cases.

However, I contend that these arguments are really smoke screens for the real issue at hand.  

First, why are these arguments invalid?  Abortion is not about women's rights.  If a woman could not afford to support her two-year-old son, would we permit her to end his life?  What if he stood in the way of her career?  Maybe she's not ready to deal with raising her child.  Perhaps she simply does not want to be a mother—may she kill her child? 

A mother does not have the right to end the life of her child for any reason.  She may not choose whether her son will live or die, regardless of the impact that he has upon her.  

Some people will bring out the example of rape to justify making abortion legal.  If the sight of a woman's two-year-old son brings her pain and reminds her of a terrible event, may she murder her son to spare her that pain?  Of course not—he has a right to live and did not cause his mother's pain.  What about all the children who are born as the result of rape? 

Their lives are not worth less simply due to the crimes of their fathers.  Should we punish all children for the sins of their fathers?  When a child is created, even in the most terrible of situations, it is not the fault of the child.  

In both of these examples, many of you will cringe at my comparison.  A toddler is completely different from a fetus; the two are not comparable and therefore the examples are invalid. But how are they different?  Why is a toddler human and a fetus not?  

As a rational society, it is only logical that we turn to science to tell us when a new life is created, when mere cells become a new human being.  If we do that, the science is clear:  a new human being is formed at conception, when the egg of the mother and the sperm of the father fuse to create a new life.  

This new life directs its own development, and is complete—it is not merely a portion of some greater being.  The only thing needed for this new human being to become the two-year-old toddler is time and nutrition.  The fetus grows inside the mother, doing exactly what his or her mother and father—intentionally or unintentionally—created him or her to do.

What makes life worth protecting?  The fetus is clearly a separate human being, but the law says it is not a "person" and therefore does not merit protection.  The line can be drawn in many arbitrary places:  when a fetus feels pain, at birth, at the age of consciousnes and the age of maturity.  

It could depend on all sorts of factors that a person may or may not have control of.  

But to stay true to the values of our nation, I point out the words of our founders:  All men are created equal.  They are not born equal; they do not attain this equality after they have accomplished something in particular.  They are equal due to the fact that they are human, from the moment they first come into existence.  African Americans and women have been fighting for this equality for years—and now what?  

We have denied equality to over 50 million of our brothers and sisters—members of our generation.  

As a civilized society, our priority should be to protect the smallest, weakest, most vulnerable members—so why aren't we?