In my last piece I wrote about the illogical assertion by Vice President Biden that although he accepts the Catholic Church’s position on life beginning at conception, he’s not going to impose it on others who disagree. I’ve noticed a constant thread to the ‘pro-choice” argument: They always want proof of the pro-life position, such as science but when you show them the scientific proof they tend to change the subject and say things like, “well, the fetus is not a person or other non-sequiturs, such as “I do not agree that science is cut and dried,” as a commentator said on my last post after I presented her with the scientific proof that human life begins at conception. Now, I should point out that the “pro-choice” side never has any proof of their position; nor do they claim one. Let’s look at some logic here about what can be considered good evidence:
In his fine book, Ten Universal Principles; A Brief Philosophy of the Life Issues, by Robert J. Spitzer, one of the ten principles is the Principle of Objective Evidence. Spitzer defines Objective Evidence as nonarbitrary opinions or theories that are based upon publicly verifiable evidence. Is science cut and dry or not? science is based on observable facts that can be proven. To say that science is not cut and dry is illogical at best and a contradiction at worst. Like mathematics, science is not based on religious beliefs or opinion; it is based on observable facts. As Spitzer points out “when something is only accessible to me, it is called “subjective,” but when something is accessible to everyone, it is called “objective.” Science is objective evidence, accessible to everyone. The fact that life begins at conception is a proven scientific fact.
Spitzer continues: “We cannot simply assert something as a matter of our subjective opinion (that is, an opinion that we claim to be true just because we felt or believe that it was so). This would be merely subjective verification, and, therefore, it could not be used to prove something to somebody else.” The claim by science that a single cell zygote is a human being is objective proof.
Pro-lifers are often challenged to present proof of their position that the unborn is a human being. Now I challenge the “pro-choice” side to present proof that the unborn is not a human being. What is your evidence that meets the Principle of Objective Evidence? I’ve never heard one. I’m still waiting to hear one.