Induced abortion may be described in general terms as the deliberate destruction of a fetus before viability. In contrast to capital punishment the victim of abortion has not reached the use of reason or violated any laws whatsoever.

The Greek and Roman civilization did tolerate abortion and infanticide until the beginning of the Christian era. The worldwide movement to tolerate abortion once again which began in earnest after World War II as a partial response to population problems has so obscured the moral significance of the direct killing of the unborn that the current rate of abortions in many modern nations exceeds the rate in Rome and the ancient world.

The Old Testament does not explicitly treat induced abortion. There is only one passage of the Exodus which mentions a monetary fine rather than the penalty of "a life for a life" for accidentally causing a miscarriage. But the biblical reverence for life, for children, and for God's mysterious role in procreation could never tolerate abortion in any permissive way. Germain Grisez concludes that "the silence of the Old Testament about induced abortion rather indicates that legislation against abortion was unnecessary than that abortion was tacitly approved."

In Paul's epistle to the Galatians, we find that he condemned the practice of medicine (pharmakeia) which seems to have included abortifacient drugs. The most important ancient condemnation of abortion is to be found in the Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, composed no later than 100 AD. Abortion is linked to pharmakeia: "You shall not practice medicine (pharmakeia). You shall not slay the child by abortions. You shall not kill what is generated."

The Second Vatican Council declared concisely and firmly: "Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes."

Murder is abhorrent to religious and non-religious persons because of the unjust attack upon innocent victims. Abortion falls under the category of murder for both religious and non-religious persons, except when a society reduces the human dignity and rights of that class of unborn human beings who are sheltered within maternal wombs.

The Vatican Declaration on Abortion treats the question of the right to life on the grounds of discrimination, as it says : "it does not belong to society, nor does it belong to public authority in any form to recognize this right [to life] for some and not for others: all discrimination is evil, whether it be founded on race, sex, color or religion. It is not recognition by another that constitutes this right. This right is antecedent to its recognition; it demands recognition, and it is strictly unjust to refuse it."

There are instances where abortion is wrongly looked at as being the best remedy to a problem, such as:-

When a girl becomes pregnant at the age of twelve or a similar young age.

Some might say a mother can hardly be expected to care for a child when she herself is a child. Sometimes parents tell their child that the sense of humiliation is a terrible burden for them. The girl's boyfriend might threaten to end their relationship. But what these people should be ashamed of is being an accomplice in an abortion.

The fact that a young girl is not really well prepared to bear and rear a child does not amount to a proof that abortion is the answer to her difficulty. Abortion is an unjustifiable evil in itself. Moreover, doctors know that abortion poses an enormous threat to the physical health of an adolescent girl, and there is serious danger of psychological damage to the youngster as well, sometimes setting in years after the abortion. Even though the child-mother is too immature to care for a baby, there are many married couples ready and eager to adopt an infant.

When pregnancy results from rape.

Pregnancy as a result of rape is very rare. Dr C. Everett refers to studies made in Minnesota and Pennsylvania which says that out of 5,000 rape cases reported during a given period, not one pregnancy resulted. The reasons for obtaining such low results comes from the fact that a woman can become pregnant only on about 3 or 5 days during each menstrual cycle. Besides there is a high rate of sexual dysfunction among rapists. In addition the victim may be using a contraceptive, already pregnant, or infertile because of age or other conditions.

But apart from all this, who actually did the harm? Is it the rapist or the infant? The fetus did not do anything wrong to his mother, so why should it be blamed? We have heard of women who were raped, bore the child, but did not want to keep it after birth because they say it brings back bad memories: as long as they give their children in adoption, at least they are providing good homes for them.

If one were to argue that a fetus should be killed because it is a rapists' child, then, logically, why not kill also the rapist's other children, maybe grown up, married, and ideal family men?

When pregnancy results from incest.

Incest results in pregnancy only rarely and professionals who deal with such situations have found that abortion of the unborn child does further damage to the family involved. The pregnancy can help the girl and her family face the incestuous situation, whereas abortion is a way of not dealing with an unhealthy state of affairs.

The unborn child cannot be considered to have forfeited his right to life merely because his origin was socially abhorrent. Once any child is conceived, his life and future deserves to be protected.

When a woman bears a handicapped child.

A physically or mentally handicapped child is a human being as truly as is a normal child, and no less loved by his Creator. He is not without value.

A Down's Syndrome child, for instance, can become a contributing member of the family and of society. Like any child, he or she needs love, a sense of belonging, a chance to express himself, and an opportunity to achieve success in those activities that are within his range of competence. By striving to provide for the child's needs, the parents become better human beings.

Medical science is on the threshold of being able to do much for the defective child in the womb. Intrauterine treatment can correct problems or eliminate them so that the child can live a reasonable normal life. Yet amniocentesis, a method of detecting defects in the unborn child, is often used in a destructive way. When a physically or mentally handicapped infant is identified, a recommendation to abort commonly follows.

When the mother's life is in danger of death.

Indirect abortion, or indirect killing of the foetus brought about by trying to save the life of the mother is morally justified by the principle of double-effect. Attempting to treat situations of human activity within which one is forced to deal with the occurrence of both good and evil as results of a moral decision and subsequent action, the principle may be stated thus: (1) the act (directly) performed is in itself good or at least indifferent; (2) the good accomplished is at least as immediate as the evil; (3) the intention of the agent is good; (4) there is a proportionate reason for causing the evil. Classical examples include cancer, ectopic pregnancy and heart disease which happen to coincide with pregnancy.

The methods used in abortions.

An abortion is usually performed by means of one or another of five techniques: Suction (aspiration); dilatation and curettage (D & C), saline injection, prostaglandin injection, and hysterectomy. But reading on what happens to the fetus during these interventions, I was so disgusted by the inhumane treatment meted out to the unborn that I just could not continue reading, and therefore I have to omit reproducing these reports. It is amazing that such barbarities can happen in our "enlightened" era, and defended by some as being " civil rights"!

I end this article with an appeal - that persons conscious of the rights of the unborn will never cease to struggle for the condemnation of this murder of the innocents.