Why Have All Those Children Gone?
With recent legal decisions in America, Australia and Canada, abortion once again has become one of the hottest topics around. But what is often not realised is the logical connection between evolution, abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. When any one of these is allowed - who is safe?
In the nineteenth century God died. And, as a consequence, in the twentieth century man died. Or, to put it another way, first man killed God in the nineteenth century, and then man killed man in the twentieth century. Why? Because when God who made man in His image is killed, then man who is made in the image of God dies also.
How Man killed God
Just how did man kill God? In 1859, Charles Darwin wrote, 'The Origin of Species', followed in 1871 by 'The Descent of Man'. He concluded that mankind had evolved by natural selection from lower forms of life. He even went so far as to call evolution "My deity Natural Selection". Consequently, according to Darwin, "there is no evidence that man was aboriginally endowed with the ennobling belief in the existence of an omnipotent God."
In the wake of Darwin, famous German evolutionist Ernst Haeckel concluded that, "with this single argument (of evolution) the mystery of the universe is explained, the deity annulled, and a new era of infinite knowledge ushered in." Likewise, political philosopher Karl Marx insisted that "in our evolutionary conception of the universe, there is absolutely no room for either a Creator or a ruler."
Noted German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote shortly after this, in 1882: "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him." How was God killed? The great American theologian Charles Hodge tells how - by answering the title of his book 'What is Darwinism?' (1878): "What is Darwinism? It is Atheism because ‘the exclusion of design from nature is ... tantamount to atheism’." In short, evolution says there is no design in nature. Therefore, there is no Designer of nature. Evolution insists there was no creation. If so, then it follows that there was no Creator.
If God does not exist, then Everything is permitted
In his book 'The Brothers Karamazov', famous Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky noted that if God does not exist, then everything is lawful. That is exactly what happened. Starting with the Darwinian conclusion that humans were not created, but rather had evolved from lower animals, both Stalin and Hitler committed a ghastly slaughter of human life which numbered many millions.
Hitler justified his actions on the basis of evolution in 'Mein Kampf' (1924), declaring, "If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race (Aryans) should intermingle with an inferior one (Semitic). Why? Because in such a case her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile."
The Abortion Connection
But what relationship is there between evolution and abortion?
When the scientific arguments for abortion are reduced to the bottom line, they amount to this: Man is an animal, and undesired animals can be weeded out of the human herd. For example, Nobel Prize-winning professor James Watson recommended that in order to avoid birth defects, "no child... (should be) declared alive until three days after birth." (Watson shared a Nobel Prize in 1962 with biophysicist Francis Crick for their proposed model for the structure of the DNA molecule.)
In testimony before a presidential commission, philosopher Mary Anne Warren compared a disabled new-born child with a horse that had to be killed because it had abroken leg. Peter Singer, director of the Centre for Human Bio-ethics, insists that the life of an unborn baby is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee. He even goes so far as to say that his conclusions "apply to the new-born baby as much as to the foetus," thus supporting infanticide.
On the basis of such reasoning that excludes creation and the Creator, secular humanists have argued for abortion on demand, as well as suicide and euthanasia ('Humanist Manifesto II', 1973).
The results have been even worse than those of Hitler or Stalin. Since the United States Supreme Court legalised abortion in 1973, more than 23 million tiny unborn human beings have been killed. If one considers percentage of population, Australia is not far behind, with some half-million unborn children killed in Australia in the past six years.
Some, of course, have argued that human life does not begin at conception. But, like the arguments of evolution, this too is contrary to scientific fact. When does human life begin? Both Scripture and science agree that life begins at conception. David said, "
in sin did my mother conceive me" (PSALM 51:5). The angel said of Mary,
"...that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit" (MATTHEW 1:20). John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit,
"even from his mother's womb" (LUKE 1:15).
The most crucial passage on the topic is EXODUS 21:22,23. It is translated by the great Hebrew scholar U. Cassuto as follows:
"When men strive together and they hurt unintentionally a woman with child, and her children come forth but no mischief happens - that is, the woman and the children do not die - the one who hurts her shall be punished by a fine. But if any mischief happens, that is, if the woman dies or the children, then you shall give life for life."
This 'life for life' penalty for killing the unborn leaves no doubt that God considers the life of the unborn to be equal value to that of the mother. The high value on human life is because God created mankind in His image and likeness. But the image of God includes
male and female" (GENESIS 1:27). And it is a scientific fact that sex is determined at the moment of conception, thus making it clear that the image of God in a new life begins at the very moment of conception.
As for science, the testimony is just as clear. Noted Mayo Clinic geneticist Dr. Hymie Gordon testifies that it is an established scientific fact that all life, including human life, "begins at conception." Likewise, world-famous French geneticist Jerome Lejeune declares that after fertilisation has taken place a new human has come into being.
It is scientific fact, not theory, that when the 23 chromosomes of a human male sperm unite with the 23 chromosomes of a human female ovum, the resultant 46-chromosome human zygote is a 100 per cent human being. The information for all human characteristics is present at conception; no new genetic information is added from that point till death. The only thing that is added during the entire life of the human organism is food, water, and air. It is clear to anyone knowledgeable in the field that an unborn pig is a pig, an unborn horse is a horse, and an unborn human is a human being. Intentionally killing an innocent human being is a morally culpable act.
From Abortion to Infanticide
Killing unborn humans is only the beginning. It is clear that killing tiny human beings before they are born is leading to killing them after they are born. This is already occurring. One of the approved methods of abortion is hysterectomy or caesarean section. In this method, used mainly in the last three months of pregnancy, the baby is aborted alive. The baby is then killed by cutting off oxygen, by drowning, or by starvation.
Further, the Supreme Court of the American State of Indiana gave permission to the parents of 'Baby Doe' to starve him to death, which they did in April of 1982. ('Baby Doe' was born with Down's syndrome, and needed simple surgery to enable him to eat. The parents refused surgery and even refused to give him up for adoption. - Ed.) The lawyer defending the parents praised their 'courage' in letting the baby starve and die, insisting that 'it was caring so much about the child that prompted them to make this decision'!
A few years ago, a Federal judge in New York ruled that parents had the right to withhold treatment and allow their baby to die slowly of painful infections. A professor of paediatrics at the University of Wisconsin stated sadly, "It is common in the US to withhold routine surgery and medical care for infants with Down's syndrome for the explicit purpose of hastening death." ('Archives of Internal Medicine', December 1982).
On April 4, 1981, a young mother threw her live baby - born prematurely at seven and a half months - out the seventh floor of a Dallas, Texas, hotel. The autopsy revealed that the baby died of multiple injuries from the impact. Charges against the woman, however, were dismissed. After all, she could have aborted it at any clinic in the State for another month and a half.
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court decision to legalise abortion on demand, Dr. Peter A. J. Adams, of Case Western Reserve University in California, cut off the heads of 12 tiny babies born alive by hysterectomy abortion. He pumped blood into their brains to keep them alive, much the way Russians did with dogs' heads in the 1950s. In responding to an outcry over his experiments, Dr. Adams declared, "Once society has declared the foetus dead, and abrogated its rights, I don't see any ethical problem... Whose rights are we going to protect, once we've decided the foetus won't live?"
Abortion is also being used to justify widespread foetal experimentation. For example, in 1973 kidneys were taken from aborted babies for study at Dalhousie University, Canada. The 'New England Journal of Medicine' (Vol.28, No.23) reported on a study of the effects of a mother's drugs on her babies that were aborted alive. According to the 'American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology' (January 1974), Dr. Bela A. Resch cut hearts out of aborted babies. The hearts kept beating for hours.
In 1973, Dr. Reyes of the University of Manitoba cut open the skulls of live babies and studied them. He later killed the babies by a sharp puncture to the heart. Dr. Martin Kekomaki cut open the stomachs and cut off the heads of live aborted babies in 1980. Just this past year the news was reported that brain tissue is being taken from live aborted babies for transplant into patients with Parkinson's disease.
The Next Step - Euthanasia
Where does the logic of abortion lead? The answer is clear: it leads to infanticide and euthanasia. As already noted, highly respected scientists are openly recommending infanticide for genetic reasons. The Nazis began the same way. What is frightening is the extent to which this may be taken. Professor Michael Tooley of Stanford University argues that one is not a person unless he is self-conscious. But children do not become self-conscious until they are about 18 months old. On this ground, there is justification to kill a child well into his or her second year!
In 'Newsweek' magazine of September 6, 1982, a headline read, "Biologists say infanticide is as normal as the sex drive - and that most animals, including man, practice it." Next to it was a picture of a mother baboon killing her baby. The implication of the article was that if baboons are doing it, why shouldn't we? But since when did animals become the standard for human behaviour? Furthermore, animals are getting a bad rap. Even they do not kill their offspring in the percentages that humans do.
Statistics show that one out of every three pregnancies in the United States is terminated by abortion! In Australia, the figure is only slightly better at one out of four.
In some places, another means of termination is already being used. On June 21, 1986, the Associated Press reported that doctors in the Netherlands used "selective termination" on a woman carrying quintuplets. They killed three, and she gave birth to only two babies. It was reported that the mother took this step because she "was disturbed over the prospects of having quintuplets"!
Just as abortion leads to infanticide, so infanticide leads to euthanasia. Size and age make no difference once people are declared non-human. In 1973, 'The Humanist Manifesto II' declared that suicide and euthanasia are entirely acceptable. Since then, voluntary euthanasia groups have sprung into existence. One group is called 'Exit'. Another is named the 'Hemlock Society'. A pro-euthanasia book ('Let Me Die Before I Wake') provides 'how to' information for those desiring to end their lives early. The founder of the US voluntary suicide group, Derek Humphry, boasts that they have "helped a lot of people die well."
Even politicians are getting into the act. A few years ago Governor Richard Lamm of Colorado recommended openly that "elderly people have an obligation to die and get out of the way."
Pro-life US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop has warned that, "for every Baby Doe in the 1980s, there will be 10,000 Granny Does in the 1990s." Frightening? It looks like he may be right.
The logical connection between abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia is very strong. They involve the same patient, the same procedure, the same result, and the same rationale. As the late Princeton ethicist Paul Ramsey observed, there are many 'good' reasons for abortion, but unfortunately these same reasons also justify infanticide and euthanasia.
Also, the logical connection between evolution and abortion is equally strong. If there was no creation, there is no Creator. Stated another way, evolution is opposed to design. If there is no design, there is no Designer. A given evolutionist may believe in some kind of God, but evolution as a theory excludes God. Deny creation and you thereby deny the Creator.
Nietzsche was right: man killed God. How? By evolution, which Darwin called 'my deity'. But when God dies, the man dies also. This is true both logically and historically. Once God, in whose image man is made, is killed, then there is no basis for believing man is made in the image of God. In short, the dignity of man is based in the reality of God.
There is a direct connection between evolution and abortion. Evolution declares that man is an animal resulting in part from natural selection. But natural selection teaches us that we should weed out inferior breeds. Likewise, evolutionists are now extending this from abortion to infanticide and from infanticide to euthanasia. First it is voluntary euthanasia, then it will be involuntary.
by Norman L. Geisler, M.A., Ph.D.
Norman L. Geisler, M.A., Ph.D., is Dean of Liberty University’s Centre for Research and Scholarship in Lynchburg, Virginia. He has wide professional experience as a lecturer and author, and has taught philosophy, ethics and related subjects for almost 30 years. He is author or co-author of more than 20 books.
Source: ‘Creation Ex-Nihilo’, Vol.11, No.4