Many people will refuse to accept God's Word as a standard by which they should live and make decisions. That is their right to reject it. Nevertheless, I offer the following as reasons for not having abortions.

What is growing in the womb of the woman is alive. Even one-celled creatures are alive. What is growing in the woman is more than a one-celled creature. The nature of the life in the woman is human. It is the product of human DNA; therefore, its nature, its essence, is undeniably human. Because it is human in nature, if left to live, it will result in a fully developed human baby. Humans are humans not because they have feet, hands, walk vertically, and speak, etc. Not all people have feet, hands, can walk, and speak. They are humans because of their nature, their essence, and not because of physical abilities or disabilities. A person born without arms and legs is still human. A person who cannot speak is still human. A person in a coma, helpless, unaware, unmoving, is still human by nature; and it is wrong to murder such a person. What is growing in the womb does not have the nature of an animal, bird, or fish. It has human nature. If it is not human in nature, then what nature is it? If it is not human in nature, then does it have a different nature from human? If so, then from where did it get this different nature since the only sources of its nature are human egg and human sperm? Objection: A cell in the body has human DNA and is alive, and it's okay to kill it. So, it doesn't make any difference with a fetus. Though it is true that a cell in the human body has DNA and is alive; a cell (muscle cell, skin cell, etc.,) has the nature of being only what it is--not a human. In other words, a muscle cell is by nature a muscle cell. A skin cell is by nature a skin cell. But the fertilized egg of a human is, by nature, that very thing which becomes a fully developed human. Its nature is different from that of muscle or skin cells because these do not grow into humans. Therefore, a human cell and a human egg are not the same thing.

A fertilized human egg has the nature of human development, and it is alive. This is not so with a muscle or skin cell. To abort the life, which is human in nature, is to kill that which is human in nature. Therefore, abortion is killing a life which is human by nature. Where, then, does the mother get the right to kill the human within her?

A question for those who believe in abortion and that the life in the womb is not human: Is it okay to take a fertilized egg between a man and a woman and place it in the womb of a dog?