|
|
Thanks
in no small part to a group called the Coalition on
Abortion/Breast Cancer, or "ABC," it has recently
become in vogue throughout the pro-life movement to tout the
results of various studies linking abortion to breast cancer.
The results of these studies are presented as if they
were not only gospel truth, but also the most effective way to
prevent any woman from ever considering an abortion.
Unfortunately,
the studies are not definitive by any stretch.
The disparities between the results of the 37 known
studies linking breast cancer and abortion are great. They range
from results that are statistically insignificant to an alleged
160% increase in breast cancer risk based on abortion (though
the most commonly quoted of the studies indicates a 4% increase
in risk). Additionally,
many of them make no distinction between induced abortion and
spontaneous abortion, or miscarriage.
The
abortion/breast cancer activists have a noble, albeit thinly
veiled goal -- to end abortion altogether.
Their only problem, at least scientifically speaking, is
that they started with the conclusion they wanted and worked
their way back to a theory.
In other words, they needed a scare tactic and went about
the business of finding one to suit their target audience --
women.
People
say that all is fair in love and war.
Well, I love human life and I believe abortion is war
against the most innocent of human life.
But I do not believe it is fair to the pro-life movement,
or to the women being given these statistics, to attempt to
balance the entire abortion argument on this one point.
The
truth is, even a 4% increase in breast cancer risk from induced
abortion is inconsequential to the true heart of the abortion
debate. Touting
that statistic simply appeals to the same selfish impulses that
would compel a woman to consider an abortion in the first place.
Now, that may save some pre-born lives now and in the
immediate future, which is highly worthwhile, but it isn't
really changing any hearts or minds on the abortion issue
itself.
The
abortion/breast cancer connection is not a miracle fix.
It won't change the way our legislators vote.
It won't change the way the media cover things.
And it definitely won't influence future generations to
stop slaughtering their unborn children -- they'll simply direct
their resources toward finding a cure for breast cancer.
Curing breast cancer is a wonderful goal--but one that,
once achieved, will make the abortion/breast cancer link a moot
point.
Any
possible link to breast cancer in post-abortive women has no
bearing on the true argument against abortion, which is that it
kills innocent life. Some
pro-lifers seem excited that we have a 'real scientific
argument' now with this breast cancer debacle, when the truth is
that we have had a real argument all along in the form of little
heartbeats that once were, but are no more.
Our
argument is lasting and unchanging--abortion kills.
The breast cancer argument is only usable for as long as
the current studies last--which is only as long as it takes
before some other pseudo-scientist releases a conflicting study
'disproving' the first studies. Just think of the
headache-inducing reports on everything from coffee to hair dye
that are staples of the nightly news.
One day, we learn that butter will surely kill us all;
the next, it's margarine that is the villain.
On Tuesday, doctors say we should have a glass of wine
nightly; by Thursday, they've changed their tune.
Depending on a statistical study as our moral ground in
the abortion debate is foolhardy.
|