Nao Obrigada

"Nao Obrigada"-- "No Thank You" in Portuguese-- is the rallying cry of the pro-life movement in Portugal, which has just finished a referendum on abortion. The referendum asked voters whether or not women should be given more leeway in terminating their pregnancy (Portugal has one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the EU, just a little more lax than that in the Philippines). To cut a long story short, the referendum failed to overturn current policy due to low voter turnout.

First, let me lay down my position: I am against abortion (at least the way pro-choicers want it). I think abortion should only be allowed when the pregnancy poses a medical risk to the mother's life, making abortion a legitimate form of self-defense. Let me explain.

Arguments for or against abortion often boil down to whether or not the fetus is a human being with its own right to life. Pro-life advocates argue that the fetus is a human being at the point of conception. Their reasons for believing this range from "God says so" (a weak argument appealing only to the converted) to pointing out that the embryo is a separate life with human DNA distinct from the mother (therefore, it is not part of the mother's body). Pro-choice advocates, on the other hand, argue that the fetus should still be considered part of the woman's body because it is not viable outside of it (therefore, she should have free rein over what to do with it).

I will not presume to know when human life starts, and neither should the pro-lifers or pro-choicers. The beginning of "human life" is something that cannot be materially proven because it is a metaphysical concept. Science can only tell us when certain aspects of human life are present (e.g., human DNA, beating heart, brainwaves), but it can't tell us when the fetus attains human consciousness (or a soul, for the religiously inclined). Science can't tell us when we should give the fetus the rights equal to ours.

What we can say is that human life starts at some point between fertilisation and birth-- when exactly, we do not know. Therefore, at any point during the pregnancy there is a probability 0 < h < 1 that the fetus is human, and a probability (1 - h) that it is not. So if we abort a fetus there is an h chance what we are killing another human being, and (1 - h) chance that we are not. Given the gravity of the act, this risk (h) is not something that society should take lightly, especially if we claim to value a person's right to life. Better to not kill a fetus and live with the (1 - h) chance that it could have been killed guilt-free, rather than kill it and bear the h chance that a human being was actually killed. Given h > 0, we have to err on the side of life and accord the fetus human rights.

Of course, self-defense is a valid argument for killing another person. If the fetus poses a clear and present danger to the life of the mother, she should be allowed to eliminate the threat. This goes for any person that threatens her life willingly or unwillingly, even those that have been out of the womb for some time.