From: long@next1.acme.ucf.edu (Richard Long)
Subject: Logical "Proof" that Abortion is not always murder.
Keywords: Abortion, RU486, twinning, conception
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 07:12:43 GMT

I have been dying to give the following argument to Rush.  Since it is  
nearly impossible to get on his program, I'll give the argument to all of  
you instead.

We will prove that terminating pregancy after conception is not  
necessarily murder.  The proof is by contradiction.

Let us assume that killing a fertilized egg, or zygote is the murder of an  
individual human being.  This implies that the person committing the act  
is guilty of the murder of one human, and not two or three or four, for  
example.  

It is obvious that the fact of murder is dependent only on the final state  
of the organism (and the nonaccidental intent of the person involved), and  
not on the details of how it got to that state.

However, there is the natural phenomenon called identical twinning.  There  
are three major means by which identical twins are produced.  One is by  
the simple physical separation of cells shortly after dividing, and before  
separate implantation in the womb.  Another is by division, but not  
separation, of the blastula, forming two placenta as well as two embryos.   
The third is by separation of the cells withing the blastula, forming two  
embryos but one placenta.  Let us consider the first (simplest) case.

If the fertilized zygote is destroyed in its entirety, we have a murder.   
On the other hand, if half of the cells are destroyed before the blastula  
forms, the embryo can still form completely intact from the cells  
remaining, and so no harm is done.  However, if half of the cells are  
first separated, both halves will form two separate blastulas, and so two  
separate embryos and eventually two separate babys.  Thus, at the moment  
of separation, two individuals exist.  Destroying half of the cells is now  
murder, as we have assumed.  Furthermore, destruction of all cells leads  
to two murders and not one.  If, however, the cells are placed in mere  
physical contact once again, a single individual will then form, and so we  
again have only one murder.  Also, dividing into thirds (triplets) and  
then destroying only two of the zygotes will result in two murders, even  
though one zygote remains, as we originally began.
  
Thus, whether we have one murder, two murders (or three or four, etc), or  
none depends on the method of cell destruction, and not on the final  
result which is the same in every case.  But this is in contradiction to  
our definition (and, I claim, anyone else's) of what it means to murder  
and individual human being.  Thus, destruction of a fertilized egg  
(zygote) does not constitute murder of an individual human being.  QED :)'

In particular, use of morning after pills, such as RU486, does not  
constitute murder.

Of course, the destruction of a developing embryo does not fit the  
assumptions of this proof, and so is not proved to not be murder.   
However, other less natural means exist for converting virtually any cell  
into a full human being (cloning, etc.) and so the destruction of any cell  
is murder by the above definition, which is absurd.

Obviously, criteria other than 'conception' is required to define the  
existence of an individual human life.   

I leave to the true believers to argue whether twins have one or two souls  
between them...

--
Richard Long
Institute for Simulation and Training
University of Central Florida
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5026, FAX: (407)658-5059
long@acme.ucf.edu