Thursday, June 30, 2022

WORLDVIEWS in CONFLICT: PRO-LIFE ARGUMENT WON EASILY (published 6-30-2022; article #337)


My 6/26/2022 article mentioned the 6/24/2022 USSA “Supreme Court” decision that overturned Roe vs. Wade. This article expands on the “pro-choice” versus pro-life debate that this once great nation continues to endure – based on worldviews in conflict.

I do not apologize for using the phrase “the murder of the unborn child,” instead of the euphemistic term “abortion.” That is my choice. Your choice is whether or not to read what I write on this topic. I hope that you choose to read.

I will affirm the pro-life position. My reasoning will be based on logic and fact – not emotion and subjective opinion. Sadly, the rational art of proper reasoning, by logic and fact, is often overcome, by irrational “arguments” from emotion and subjective opinion.


I will not “flip-flop” or be “wishy-washy” – as the first President of the USSA is – on this topic. I quote from “Psaki dodges question on when Biden believes human life begins: Biden previously said that life begins at conception but changed his mind,” by Andrew Mark Miller, Fox News, published February 1, 2022, 4:52 PM EST. I added yellow highlights for emphasis.

In September, Biden appeared to change his stance that life begins at conception while discussing a controversial abortion law in Texas.

"I respect those who believe life begins in the moment of conception – I respect that," he told reporters. "Don't agree, but I respect that."

Before making that statement, Biden had said multiple times dating back to at least 2008 that he believes life begins at conception.

"I’m prepared to accept that at the moment of conception there’s human life and being, but I’m not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view," Biden, who identifies as Catholic, said in 2015.

The divinely inspired James (who wrote to Jewish Christians, in the first century) stated:

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8 KJV)

Unlike the first President of the USSA, I am not a double minded man. My ways are stable. I wish that President Biden could say the same.


Before my affirmative, I must define my terms. I define my terms in this section and in other sections that follow. My definitions are from Merriam-Webster, or “old man Webster's dictionary,” as I've heard folks in these parts say for years. I have added my highlighting in yellow and underlined certain words and phrases. My note is in brackets.

Definition of pro: 1: an argument or evidence in affirmation. 
Definition of life. [Note: twenty definitions are listed. I list three here, as relevant to my affirmative.]
1a: the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body
  b: a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings
  c: an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism (see metabolism sense 1), growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction
8: a vital or living being specifically: person
18: an opportunity for continued viability
Definition of person: 1: human, individual
Definition of human: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens): a person
Definition of humankind: the human race: humanity
Definition of humanity: 2a: the quality or state of being human
Definition of baby: 1a(1): an extremely young child especially: infant
Definition of child: 1a: a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Thus, by Mr. Webster, I define “human life” as a “person” or a “human.” This, of course, should be common knowledge. A young child or baby is a person, according to Mr. Webster.

Merriam-Webster defines abortion as (with my highlighting and underline added):

1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as
a: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage
b: induced expulsion of a human fetus

Merriam-Webster defines “fetus” as (with my highlighting added):

specifically: a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth

Some abortions are miscarriages that happen naturally. Other abortions are induced by medical procedure. I will affirm the “pro-life” truth, against induced abortions.

Note that Mr. Webster defined abortion as the “induced expulsion of a human fetus,” which results in “the death of the embryo or fetus.” Mr. Webster, therefore, affirms, by definitions, my position that the unborn child is human and that an induced abortion results in the death of the human fetus.

Affirmative from Science and the Declaration of Independence


Despite President Biden's unstable double-mindedness, science verifies that human life begins at the moment of conception. The fact is not in doubt. I am not aware of any current “pro-choice” argument that claims that life does not begin at conception.

I could site many sources, to prove that human life begins at conception. I quote from the WebMD article “Slideshow: Fetal Development Month by Month,” reviewed by Amita Shroff, MD on February 24, 2021. I added my yellow highlights to the quote.

Fertilization happens when a sperm meets and penetrates an egg. It's also called conception. At this moment, the genetic makeup is complete, including the sex of the baby.

MedicineNet, Inc. is “owned and operated by WebMD.” Their “Pregnancy Week by Week (First, Second, and Third Trimester),” medically reviewed on 5/12/2021, contains the following quotes. I added my yellow highlights to the quotes.

First Trimester (week 1 - week 12)
At 4 to 5 weeks:
   Your baby's brain and spinal cord have begun to form.
   The heart begins to form.
At 8 weeks:
   All major organs and external body structures have begun to form.
   Your baby's heart beats with a regular rhythm.

The lengthy article continues to describe the further development and growth of the unborn “baby.” The truth that human life (as a developing baby) begins at conception is proved by science.

Declaration of Independence

In the July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence, it is written:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

“Self-evident” is that which is obvious. For example, It is self-evident that one plus one equals two. The Declaration of Independence states that the Creator (God) created all men equal, with inherent (unalienable or intrinsic) rights that include the right to life.

Let's ask Mr. Webster (Merriam-Webster) for the definition of “man,” as the plural of “men.” I highlighted the words in yellow.

Definition of man: 1a(1): an individual human

Mr. Webster has defined a child or baby as a “young person.” He has defined a “person” as a “human.”

The Declaration of Independence states the self-evident truth that the baby -- who became human at the moment of conception -- has the right to life – as endowed by the Creator (God).

Affirmative Won

If the unborn child in the womb is human, and if the unborn child has the right to life, then the unborn child must be allowed to live – and not to have his or her right to life violated, by induced abortion.

Mr. Webster (Merriam-Webster) states (with my highlighting added):

Definition of murder: 1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
Definition of unlawful: 1: not lawful: illegal 2: not morally right or conventional

The unborn child in the womb is human, as I have verified. The unborn child has the right to life, as I have verified. The unborn child must be allowed to continue to live.

That right to life should not be violated, by induced abortion. An induced abortion is murder. This is why I call “induced abortion” the murder of an unborn child. Induced abortion is not morally right.

The exception would be to save the mother's physical life -- if both the unborn child and the mother would die, if the child were to be born. If the child would live, after birth, but the mother would die, while in the process of giving birth, then the choice would be based on the decision of the mother – only in that situation. That situation is rare. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “Maternal Mortality” (last reviewed 4/26/2022) states (with my underlining added): “The death of a woman during pregnancy, at delivery, or soon after delivery is a tragedy for her family and for society as a whole. Sadly, about 700 women die each year in the United States as a result of pregnancy or delivery complications.” The CDC does not state the number of women who die at delivery.

Potential Rebuttals Answered

My verified affirmative victory for the unborn children will generate various rebuttals. I will respond to nine theoretical rebuttals.

Rebuttal 1: “it is my body and my choice. You do not have the right to determine my choice.” Pregnancy involves two bodies – the mother and the separate human life in her womb. The unborn child cannot yet state his or her choice – to live or die. The unborn child in the womb has the right to life, which overrules the mother's desire to kill her child. My prior reasoning proves this fact.

Rebuttal 2: “you have a right to your opinion. Don't force your opinion on me.” The topic is not subject to opinion. It is based on fact. The unborn child has the right to life. My prior reasoning proves this fact. You must acknowledge the fact.

Rebuttal 3: “the unborn child is like an acorn. The acorn is not an oak tree yet.” The acorn will become an oak tree, if it is allowed to continue to grow. It is an oak tree “in the womb” of development. The unborn child will become a born child, who will develop further into an adult. If the “fetus” is not human, give it time to grow and to be born. You will see what it becomes. Your argument from analogy is invalid and not sound.

Rebuttal 4: “I made a mistake, by getting pregnant. I want to correct that mistake.” Everyone makes mistakes. No one, except the Good Lord, is or was perfect. Do you wish to make another mistake, by murdering the unborn child in your womb?

Rebuttal 5: “I don't care for or want this baby!” Your lack of love or care for the unborn child in your womb does not override that child's right to life. As a secondary thought, the father of your unborn child may be unknown or known to you. He and you may communicate or not. He and you may have a good or bad relationship. I don't know. Your moment of passion created your unborn child. If that moment of passion was a mistake, then please don't commit another mistake by murdering your unborn child! After your child is born, I think that you will love him or her! (See “Rebuttal 6” on organizations that can help you!)

Rebuttal 6: “Having this baby will cause me emotional, relational, societal, economic, and/or spiritual harm.” Is the right to life contingent to the absence of harm? Many organizations (i.e., churches, pro-life centers, etc.) are available to help you, if you reach out to them. What if you develop a health condition that requires others to care for you? Would you want that care, or would you rather be put to death, to prevent the “harm” that your caregivers would face? Please do not cause yourself further harm, by living with the memory that you killed your unborn child – just to avoid various types of potential “harm” to yourself. Please seek help! Many others and I are ready to help you!

Rebuttal 7: “Various polls indicate that America is divided on the abortion issue. We should defer to the opinions of others and not be dogmatic.” Really? When is absolute morality (i.e, the right to life) determined by opinion polls? What if opinion polls indicated that some people consider theft, the abuse of others, or even murder to be good? Would you defer to their invalid views? Morality is not determined by the majority (or even by opinion polls). Many in this nation have immoral views that accept the murder of unborn children. What if many accept the murder of a different ethnic group (euphemistically called ethnic cleansing)? Would you defer your opinion to them? I didn't think so.

Rebuttal 8: “How can you be for the death penalty and against 'pro-choice'?” This is a false analogy. The death penalty punishes a murderer for his crime(s). I can prove my argument for the death penalty. What crime did the innocent child in the womb commit? Affirm your position that it is morally correct to murder the unborn child – if you can.

Rebuttal 9: “What about pregnancy due to rape or incest? Isn't abortion a valid choice then?” We agree to the fact that rape and incest are immoral. Pregnancy by rape or incest is rare, perhaps one percent or less, but it happens, sadly. (I have researched the statistics.) If possible, the rape victim, with caring support, could receive immediate medical treatment (the removal of the male semen) before conception. If conception occurs, the child conceived in violence is innocent. If the unborn child could speak, he or she might say, “It doesn't matter how I began. What matters is who I will become." The question on pregnancy by rape or incest does not refute the fact that the murder of the unborn child is immoral. In urgent situations, I have violated speed limit laws (with emergency flashers on), to assist family members, who were experiencing a significant health crisis. My violation of the speed limit (the lesser evil) was necessary, to help my loved one (the greater good). God will judge, not me, the woman who allows her unborn child, conceived by rape or incest, to be murdered, to help her overcome whatever real trials that she would face, if she had given birth to her child. God is a just Judge. I defer to His judgment.

Of course, other rebuttals can be offered. I can overcome any other theoretical rebuttals. My reasoning, which I have stated, is both sound and valid.

Affirmative from Scripture

You will notice that I won the pro-life argument without the use of inspired scripture. The use of the Bible to affirm the pro-life argument is valid. First, however, the affirmative must prove that the Bible is the inspired and infallible word of God. I can prove, and I have proved, that affirmative. By God's grace, I have led atheists to either theism or even to salvation. I had to start by proving the existence of the God of the Bible and then prove that the Bible is the inspired word of God.

My affirmative from scripture assumes that those who read this section believe and know that God exists and that the Bible is His inspired word. I write this section to help believers, who accept, in error, the “right to choose” arguments. If you claim to be a Christian, you cannot accept that the murder of unborn child is scriptural. I will cite scripture references and include my comments.

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” (Genesis 1:27,28, NIV)

Mankind, which includes the unborn, is created in God's image. The “divine spark,” soul, or new human is created at conception. Male and female are fruitful when they increase the number of humans by the procreation of their child together. The Creator grants his human creation the right to life, because we are made in His image. This truth is self-evident.

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. (Psalms 139:13-14, NIV)

The psalmist David addressed God. By inspiration, David stated that he (not an inhuman mass of tissue) was in his mother's womb. He used “me,” which is his reference to himself, in his mother's womb.

The word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:4-5, NIV)

The inspired prophet Jeremiah stated the Lord's word to him. God appointed Jeremiah to be a prophet, before God formed Jeremiah in his mother's womb. The physical act of procreation is when God forms the child in the womb. God, who is all knowing, knows each person – before conception. It is a sobering thought to realize that God has always known me – even before I was conceived! He knew my past life. He knows my current life. He knows my future life (and death). He knows my everlasting Home!

Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John. He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:11-17, NIV)

The inspired Luke records the angel Gabriel's statement to Zechariah, the father of John the Immersionist. I highlighted “he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born.” Reasoning from the specific to the general concludes that each innocent, unborn child is filled with the Holy Spirit, while in the mother's womb. Sadly, once the child reaches the age of accountability, and freely chooses to sin, the Holy Spirit cannot be present, until salvation restores the presence of the Holy Spirit. The purpose of this article prohibits me from unpacking further the depth of this theological thought.

I hope that my argument from scripture helps change the mind of believers, who still accept, in error, the murder of unborn children. One cannot be a true believer without affirming the right to life.

For Further Pro-Life Reading

This nine-page article cannot encompass every aspect of the worldview conflict on the murder on unborn children in their mothers' wombs. In my research, I found and read sections of several websites – both for the murder of unborn children and for the right to life of those children. I will reference two of those websites.

"Abortion Facts" contains twenty scholarly articles on abortion and provides support for pregnant women, who seek alternatives to abortion. The website is pro-life. The accreditation is:

Selected content reprinted with permission from John C. Willke M.D., Barbara H. Willke R.N., John Jefferson Davis Ph.D., David C. Reardon Ph.D.,, Eternal Perspective Ministries, Abolish Human Abortion, Life Issues Institute,, Heritage House '76, Inc. & The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.

“Abortion Procedures” is “a project of Live Action.” The website is pro-life and has videos with comments by OB/GYN medical doctors, who used to perform abortions. The videos and comments regard first trimester abortion pills, first trimester suction D&C abortion, second trimester D&E abortion, and third trimester induction. Anyone who affirms the right to murder unborn babies should watch the videos.


Conflicting worldviews is nothing new. Unbiblical worldviews love the world (i.e. the secular, the temporal, the natural, and the evil). The biblical worldview loves the Lord. The world hates the biblical worldview.

Jesus, the Christ, spoke the following words, to his disciples, on the eve before his crucifixion:

If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. (John 15:18-19, NIV)

I suggest that you read the Gospel of John 13:1 - 17:26. You will understand John 15:18-19 in context.

The inspired apostle John wrote:

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world – the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life – comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever. (1 John 2:15-17, NIV)

The “pro-choice” versus pro-life debate is one example, of many, of worldviews in conflict. True Christians and true churches need to love the pregnant mother and her baby. They should not look down on or shame the mother, if she is unwed. They need to love the mother, by their loving and supporting ministry to her. Many churches and pro-life organizations are ready to help.

Those of the world, who affirm “the right” to murder unborn children, are wrong – even if the majority of the world agrees with them. Morality is not subjective and determined by opinion polls. Morality is absolute, since it comes from the Divine Lawgiver - God, who never changes. The world vandalizes pro-life clinics, threatens pro-life individuals, and spews irrational diatribe. The world enjoys hearing its thunder. The world tries to force its ungodly worldview, by intimidation, not by logic.

We, who are not of this world, follow the biblical worldview. The Gospel of Matthew, in chapter ten, records Jesus' commissioning of his twelve disciples. In verse 28, Jesus states:

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28, NIV)

The biblical worldview does not fear the world. We have reverential fear of God, who has saved us from everlasting destruction, by our faith (based on evidence) response to His Son – who was conceived and born of a virgin – according to God's eternal scheme of redemption. I can prove these facts of faith. I have done so many times.

In the Gospel of John 13:1 - 17:26, which I have referenced, Jesus stated to his disciples:

Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know. (John 14:1-4, NKJV)

Heaven is a prepared place for a prepared people. I STAND with many, who are prepared. Our faith guides us by the biblical worldview. We STAND with God, who is the majority, against the ungodly world and its evil worldviews. If you have not joined us, will you join us? The invitation is open. You have the free will to choose. Choose wisely.

No comments: