‘Clump of cells’ no longer a viable pro-choice argument

Online responses to Theresa Teerling’s June 2 letter on abortion applaud the Republic of Ireland’s decision to relax abortion laws. Much as pro-lifers like myself might regret this decision, it still leaves Ireland with unrestricted legal abortions only up to the end of the first trimester. This recognizes the state’s right and duty to support developing life as it approaches closer to viability.

Canada, with China, Vietnam and North Korea (where forced abortions are known to take place), is one of the few countries that have no such law. The “We Need a Law” movement that Patricia Pargeter finds so troubling (May 27 Herald) is in fact advocating for a law very similar to the proposed Irish one.

Ms. Teerling presents medical evidence to refute Ms. Pargeter’s assertion that fetuses displayed in pro-life ads are no more than a “clump of cells.” The fetuses are indeed “oversized” as Ms. Pargeter rightly points out, but this is so details can be more readily displayed. Most knowledgeable “pro-choice” advocates have long since given up the “clump of cells” argument in the face of clear evidence available in any medical textbook. It is fascinating how many descriptions of prenatal development from medically reputable sources such as the Mayo Clinic refer to “your baby.” Likewise, news accounts of prenatal technology or of the tragic loss of life to pregnant women, speak of the mother and unborn child, but when the choice is made to abort, the language changes to fetus, as if that were not simply the technical term for a stage of development in all mammals.

Ms. Pargeter attributes laws against abortion to the “alarming reality of men taking ownership of women’s bodies” and gives the extreme example of the fundamentalist Mormon sect at Bountiful. It is unfortunate when the very real abuses women have suffered at the hands of men, not least in the name of religion, become conflated with a woman’s right to control her own body in such a way as to deny life to the developing and separate individual in her womb. It is also unfortunate when both men and women speak of “women’s rights” in this way as if they were speaking for all women and as if the significant number of pro-life women, including members of Feminists for Life, didn’t exist or were not real women with a voice of their own.

J. Cameron Fraser

Lethbridge