Nope, this is incorrect because science has proven that mere ‘cells’ can do nothing compared to the unique human organism which is created at conception.

A favourite tactic of the Repeal the 8th movement  is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one.

Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and thus requires all protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy. Why do the Repeal the 8th movement argue differently? Perhaps because if they argued with the truth they would have nothing to stand for. Instead they stand for a fully developed woman’s right to her body over that of the human life in the womb.

It should be noted that there is some illogical thinking in this stance, since when does size matter? You are less of person because you are small? Sorry, but size is irrelevant when we are discussing human beings.

A pre-born baby is made up of human sperm and human ovum which can only lead to the creation of a human being. It is a naive argument to describe the unborn baby as just a clump of cells or simply a foetus (as if this takes away from its humanity). Those ‘clumps of cells’ are how every human being began, even the Repeal the 8th activists  who argue that abortion is not destroying human life. For some reason, just because the unborn begin as small cells means that they are not human or worthy of further development.

What a lie that is. The humanity of a person does not start at different stages, from zygote to toddler, from toddler to adolescent and so on, that person can only be a human.¹

Therefore, if you abort a “clump of cells” as the pro-choice movement calls the unborn child, then you are in fact aborting a human.  

Let’s take this argument from a scientific stand point, something the Repeal the 8th Amendment movement cannot truthfully do. Science has proven there is a major difference between a living blob of cells, and a human organism in an adult or even an unborn baby. Dr. Condic, an Assistant Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah in the United States, writes:

“Embryos are not merely collections of human cells, but living creatures with all the properties that define any organism as distinct from a group of cells; embryos are capable of growing, maturing, maintaining a physiologic balance between various organ systems, adapting to changing circumstances, and repairing injury. Mere groups of human cells do nothing like this under any circumstances.”²

Another renound medical expert Dr. Micheline Matthew-Roth, a Harvard Medical School professor, states, “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”³

Professor Hymie Gordon, founder of the Mayo Clinic’s Medical Genetic Programme affirms the blob of tissue’s humanity by stating, “By all criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”⁴

So how is it that the Repeal the 8th movement still believe that a clump of cells is not a human and deserves no chance at development? Is it because they are so small and do not look like born human beings?

It’s true that humans start out as those tiny cells, but “in the objective scientific sense she is every bit as human as any older child or adult. In fact, she looks just like a human being ought to look at her stage of development.”⁵

If size really matters to the pro-choice movement in Ireland, does that mean that a baby is less human than an adult or a child? Of course not, we are humans regardless of our size or stage of life.

The argument used by the Repeal the 8th movement, that the unborn is just a clump of cells, holds no scientific truth. You cannot have a human without having them start as an embryo. As Dr. Alfred Bongiovanni of the University of Pennsylvanian says, “human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life.”⁶

Science says those ‘blobs of tissue’ are individual human beings so why is it that they are allowed to be starved to death by the abortion pill? Or vacuumed out of the womb through a suction abortion? Or ripped apart and beheaded in a dilatation and evacuation abortion? The method of abortion is irrelevant because the result is still the same, the intentional ending of  human life.