I know, you expect me to say just exactly what my opinion is concerning abortion. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but I don't intend to say. What I do intend to do, however, is see where following a trail of logic can lead.

Initially, perhaps I should establish some sort of parameters or perhaps it would be better to say some given points. First is that abortion is either wrong (in any case), right (in all cases), or sometimes right & sometimes wrong. I don't think there are any other alternatives to the situation. You will find groups of people, each zealously supporting their viewpoint and maintaining that any other viewpoint is wrong, foolish, ridiculous, criminal, or, well, you choose the adjective. For purposes of this page, I am choosing to ignore the always wrong/always right viewpoints and will concentrate on the concept that there are those who believe abortion is right in some cases and wrong in other cases.

Now, of those who belong in this camp, a further division can be made between those who decide the 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of abortion based on certain factors. These factors include such points as pregnancy due to rape or incest, or if the life of the mother is threatened by carrying a pregnancy to term. Mixed in with these factors is another consideration: how far along the pregnancy has gone.

Let me now eliminate the situation where the life of the mother is at stake from our further consideration. I am not wise enough nor saintly enough to tell any woman that she must give up her life rather than saving her life by means of abortion of the pregnancy. That must be her decision and I refuse to judge any woman on this matter.

I also choose to not consider pregnancy by rape or incest in this page, although I must go on record as saying that I am not sure that I understand why either case is sufficient in itself to authorize abortion. If a woman has been raped, she has, without a doubt, been subjected to a terrible trauma. If as a result of that rape she becomes pregnant, then I agree that to be forced to bear that child, possibly to raise it, would be an additional trauma and burden. No question about it. But, the child itself, like the mother, is innocent of the rape and bears the potential of developing into an outstanding member of society. So, to me, it becomes a question of whether the trauma to the mother of taking the pregnancy to full term outweighs the importance of the life of that future citizen. For certain, abortion will not erase the trauma of the original rape. That will always exist.

The second case, which deals with the pregnancy as a result of incest, would have us abort the pregnancy merely because of the possibility of a genetic problem. Again the unborn child is innocent of anything. If it is OK to abort in the case where the mere possibility of a genetic flaw exists, then reasonably it should be OK to kill the child at the moment of birth when an actual flaw is discovered. It would appear to me that those who believe all life is sacred are put on fairly thin ice if they accept abortion in this case as acceptable.

But I point out the above arguments merely as a side issue. My real purpose here is to focus on those who decide on the appropriateness of an abortion based simply on a matter of how far along the pregnancy has progressed.

Essentially, the scale runs from those who will accept an abortion only at the point of conception to those who accept what society now calls 'late term' abortions, with others picking points along the way. Some say during the first trimester, others say no later than the second semester, etc. Each thinks that the person who accepts a later date is a homicidal maniac and each thinks that the one who accepts only an earlier date is a pro-life weirdo. BUT, each picks a particular point in time because they believe that at that moment and thereafter, the developing embryo has reached a point where it can be considered a potential human being and therefore achieves sufficient 'humanity' that to abort it then or later would be denying the world of a human being. Prior to that point it is merely a collection of cells that can be done away with.

It is obvious to all that as we progress further and further along this dateline that we will see more and more people who believe that abortion is no longer a viable option. At the moment of birth there are few indeed who would be so bold as to suggest that it would be OK to kill the child. The interest lies in going the other direction. As we count down from 9 months to 8 months to 7 months, and finally to the point of conception we find more and more people willing to consider abortion as a valid procedure. (Remember, we have already eliminated from this discussion those who consider abortion at any time to be wrong.)

The reason abortion is accepted by these folks is that the embryo lacks potential, or at least sufficient potential, to become a human being on it's own endeavors. Therefore, what can be wrong, so the argument goes, of doing away with the embryo?

Now the earliest time that can be given where the cell matter possesses sufficient potential to shield it from the danger of abortion is the immediate moment of conception when the egg is fertilized by the sperm. The question that then arises is: Is that in fact the earliest? Now bear with me as this is the point of this whole page and it is at this point where people will cease reading and write me off as a crackpot. Remember, I am not advocating anything. I am merely seeing what happens when logic is applied rigidly.

What is the difference in potential between the unfertilized egg and the fertilized egg? Very little. Microscopic, as a matter of fact. The fertilized egg can develop into a full human being PROVIDED that certain conditions are met. It must lodge correctly in the uterine wall; it must receive nourishment; it must have it's wastes removed; and, to survive on it's own after birth without the help of specialized support equipment, it must remain in the uterus for a period of approximately 6 months or more. The unfertilized egg, on the other hand, has only one additional requirement; namely that it be fertilized. Therefore, the unfertilized egg DOES possess potential to become a human being. Following that, it means that refusal to fertilize the egg is, in effect, causing it to abort itself!

So, if it is wrong to abort cell clumps such as embryos simply because they possess potential, then it must be wrong to abort unfertilized cells because they do have POTENTIAL. Maybe more than a fertilized egg, but not very much more.

Following this line of argument to it's logical end, we can then assume that if we are against abortion, then we must encourage the fertilization of all eggs. Otherwise the egg will not develop and a human being, who could have been born, will not see the light of day.

The same argument could be applied to sperm, of course, but with each man producing the incredible millions of sperm and with women producing only a few hundred or so eggs, it is obviously impossible to see that each sperm finds a viable egg. The best we can do is to ensure fertilization of all eggs.

Now, for those who think that abortion is OK in the first couple weeks, but not thereafter, rest assured that you are not laughing any harder at this logical conclusion I have drawn than the people who think you set the final date far too early are laughing at YOU. If the six month people feel more pro-life than the nine month people, and the three month people feel more pro-life than the six month people, and the zero month people feel more pro-life than the three month people, so those who support fertilization of all eggs feel more pro-life than all of the aforementioned. And, if you don't think there are such people, then I suggest you check out the fantasies of the average 16 year old boy!

Before you flame me for my heretical beliefs, please remember that I am not saying whether I am pro or anti abortion. My purpose in this article was simply to explore where logical thinking would seem to take us provided we accepted the initial assumption that abortion can sometimes be OK based upon the time remaining before birth.