According to our founding fathers, there are certain rights we have that are attributed to the fact that we are human. These rights, according to the Declaration of Independence, are given to us by our Creator. The list in the Declaration is not exhaustive, as indicated by the preceding phrase “that among these are…” (emphasis mine)

So, according to the founding principles of this country, we have certain rights that transcend human authorities. We also have rights which are granted by human authorities. The right to vote, for example, is not ours as a result of our humanity, but our citizenship of this country. This is an often misunderstood, yet very important distinction to make.

For example, one of the recognized rights of us as human beings is the right to life. It is the first of the three “inalienable rights” that are “self-evident” according to our founding fathers. They understood this to be true. Yet, today, we have an opposing “right” that is granted by the government…the right for a woman to “choose.”

What does this mean, exactly? What is the “choice?” The choice is whether or not to terminate a pregnancy…to terminate a human life…to take away the right of an unborn child that, according to the principles this country was founded upon, comes from a higher power than the government who is allowing someone to revoke that right. This seems to be contrary to logic.

But first, we have to determine the answer to a very important question.

As Scott Klusendorf from the Life Training Institute illustrates, if a young child were to walk up behind you and ask, “Mommy/Daddy, can I kill this?” hopefully your response will be something to the effect of “What is it?” And here we have our crucial question which needs to be answered. What is the unborn?

Well, we know that it has a separate DNA from both the mother and the father. It is unique. We also know that the unborn is growing…quite rapidly for the first several weeks. These are two very important pieces of information. They give us a lot of information about what the unborn actually is.

We know that it is not simply part of the mother in the same way some other internal organ is a part of her. If that were the case, the DNA would match the mother’s. We also know that the unborn is alive. And how do we know this?  Because dead things don’t grow.

That puts us into the position where we can now address the most important question of “What is it?” To determine how we find the answer to that, let’s take a look at and illustration.

Let’s say you go out into your back yard and find something growing. At first, you can’t really tell if it’s some kind of grass or a weed or flower or what. So, you leave it alone and let it continue to grow. As time passes, you begin to realize that it’s a tree.

But, what kind of tree? With today’s knowledge and technology, you could find out almost immediately, but without being able to look up the information, many people would simply have to wait for the tree to continue to grow and mature. Eventually, it becomes clear what kind of tree it is.

How does this help us determine “What is it?” Well, use the same principle. If left to take its natural course, the unborn will continue to grow and mature and eventually will become an infant, then a toddler, then a child, a teen, a young adult and so on. So, from this we can conclude that, given the data, the unborn is nothing more or less than a human being at a very early stage of development.

If it is a human being, I would think that it should be “endowed” by its “Creator” with the same “inalienable rights” that are given to any other human since these rights are based on one’s being human.

So, if these rights, such as the right to life, are “inalienable” (can’t be taken away), how is it then that another human being can take them away by exercising a right that is the product of a human governmental structure and are not considered “inalienable?” Somehow, this does not compute.

A human being has the right to live regardless of its stage of development, quality of life or level of dependency upon others for survival. In any other situation, it is almost universally agreed to be wrong to terminate the life of a human being for the reasons that people terminate most pregnancies.

For some of the very best information about this, I encourage you to go to Life Training Institute. There is so much information there, it is far more than I can cover here. Hopefully, if you are unsure about the fate of the unborn, this will help you come to a conclusion that is accurately informed.

Grace, love and peace.

Daniel Carrington

Daniel is an Elite Trainer at (ISSA) International Sports Sciences Association. He has been working in IT since 1995 primarily in Windows environments with TCP/IP networking through 2012, shifted to Red Hat Enterprise Linux in 2012 and AWS in 2017.

Share On Social Media