Central to the Abortion Debate: When Does Life Begin?

Last updated on: October 4, 2021 at 1:03 pm by Richard Ostling

Central to the Abortion Debate: When Does Life Begin? 2021-10-04T13:03:22-04:00 Richard Ostling

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

THE QUESTION:

When Does Life Begin?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

Those four words are regularly posed in the current abortion debate, so let’s scan the lines in pregnancy that have been drawn.

Pre-scientific cultures spoke of “quickening,“ typically between 16 and 18 weeks, when the mother first feels the unborn child moving in her womb. A famous example involves the unborn John the Baptist in biblical Luke 1:41. Some ancient Jewish authorities in the Talmud, and Roman and Greek philosophers, supposed that the unborn child “formed” earlier, at 40 days.

Then there’s “viability,” when a fetus can live on its own outside the womb, typically reached around 23 or 24 weeks, or somewhat earlier or later in individual cases. The U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion before that point in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, and after viability when there are risks to the mother’s health, broadly defined.

The high Court on December 1 hears a case from Mississippi, which defied the Roe ruling and bars abortions after 15 weeks on grounds that the fetus experiences pain by then. A Missouri law, also under court challenge, puts a ban at eight weeks when “everything that is present in an adult human is now present in your baby,” according to the American Pregnancy Association. The Court temporarily left in place a ban in Texas (likewise in 13 other states) after six weeks, when pulsations can be diagnosed at what eventually becomes the fully formed heart.

Many modern Christians believe that life begins at conception (sperm first meets egg) or implantation (fertilized egg attaches to the mother’s womb) while some put the line a bit later at twinning (after which multiple pregnancies do not occur).

Note the brief filed last month in the Mississippi case by pro-choice religions including “mainline” Protestant churches, non-Orthodox Judaism, Unitarian Universalists, and others. It says “numerous religious traditions posit that life begins at some point during pregnancy or even after a child is born.” That perhaps refers to the judgment of some Jewish authorities that the baby only becomes a “person” at birth, though that’s different from when “life” begins.

Pro-choice Supreme Court briefs contend that when “life begins” is a question of religious “belief” and therefore not the business of government to determine. That assertion is contested by conservatives such as Catholic author George Weigel, writing for First Things magazine. “When human life begins is not a matter of faith; it is a matter of scientific fact,” he writes. People believe in the conception line just like they “believe” that “the Earth is spherical, not flat; that Venus is the second planet in the solar system; that a water molecule is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. . .”

Christians like Weigel have a point if biological science determines the question. It’s incontestable that at conception, or right afterward at implantation or twinning, a genetically unique entity in the human species exists that will automatically generate continual growth on its own unless abortion or natural miscarriage intervenes.

If so, then the question is not really “when does life begin,” which is firmly established by science. Rather, the issue religions, judges, politicians and citizens face is when protectible life begins. Does this tiny living organism have any inherent value and right to exist, balanced against the right of the mother to abort? Why or why not, at what stage of pregnancy, under what circumstances, and who decides? That takes us beyond biology to moral decision-making.

On that, the Catholic Church teaches that direct abortion is illicit even if performed to save the mother’s life. This is defined in the 1974 “Declaration on Procured Abortion” from the Vatican doctrinal office, ratified by Pope Paul VI. Even “a serious question of health, sometimes of life or death, for the mother” can never “confer the right to dispose of another’s life, even when that life is only beginning.” Pope John Paul II affirmed this in his 1995 encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae (“The Gospel of Life”).

The U.S. bishops’ 2001 medical directive notes that the church does not forbid treatments to cure “proportionately serious pathological conditions of a pregnant woman” that cannot be postponed till birth, “even if they will result in the death of the unborn child” as a secondary effect.

Among Protestants, however, even conservatives and evangelicals allow abortion to save the mother’s life. So do all branches of Judaism. Consider the 2019 policy statement against New York State’s viability line issued by the Rabbinical Council of America, the largest organization of Orthodox rabbis. It declares that “there is no sanction to permit the abortion of a healthy fetus,” but if the mother’s life is endangered then abortion is allowed, “even at a late stage.” The “healthy” adjective indicates that some Orthodox scholars permit abortion of “compromised fetuses” in “extenuating circumstances,” and some Protestant denominations agree.

The mother’s-life exception has roots thousands of years ago in biblical law (Exodus 21:22-25). This passage concerns a pregnant bystander who is accidentally killed during a fight between two men. If she dies, the punishment for the killer is execution, but if only her unborn child dies a fine is paid. On that basis, Judaism’s Mishnah is emphatic that the mother’s life takes precedence over the fetus’s life in rare cases of conflict.

What does Judaism say about other reasons to abort? The late bioethics specialist David Feldman compiled many rabbinical rulings with varying stands over centuries in “Birth Control and Jewish Law” (1968). A 2019 article by Rabbi Rachel Mikva of Chicago Theological Seminary summarized much the same about the history that underlies today’s Jewish debate between “stringent opinions” versus “lenient interpretations” that expand “justifications based on a woman’s well-being.”

As Mikva observes, except for the Orthodox, contemporary Jews are reluctant “to legislate moral questions for everyone when there is much room for debate,” and they take that stance in current Supreme Court briefs.

[Disclosure: The Religion Guy co-authored “Aborting America,” the autobiography of gynecologist Bernard Nathanson, an atheist at the time, who ran the nation’s largest abortion clinic but then turned pro-life.]

Uncategorized

Previous Post

September 17, 2021

What religious groups oppose vaccination -- even during epidemics?

Next Post

October 14, 2021 What? Is the COVID vaccine the Bible's sinister "mark of the beast"?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who succeeded Moses as the leader of Israel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Caleb Joshua Samuel Aaron