Skip to content

Why Evolution is Pro-Life

January 20, 2013

Yes, I said that evolution is pro-life.  More specifically, I don’t believe that an evolutionist could honestly support abortion.

I must first say here, I do not subscribe to the theory of evolution.  However, I distinctly remember one assignment from my philosophy class in college which dealt with evolution.  We, the students, were required to ascertain to the best of our abilities the value of human life if evolution was presupposed to be true or if there was a deity that created us.

Does Evolution Value Life?

I realize that there are many differing brands of evolution, but the one with the most direct link to provable science is the survival of the fittest theory.  Survival of the fittest is the idea that only the healthiest and best equipped will survive.  This applies both within a species and with regards to different species.  IF this is true, then the only value of any life, including my own, is found in its ability to improve the species of which it is a part.

If my abilities put me in a position of leadership within my species, and if I am a good and capable leader, I might have slightly more value than others.  Assuming however that I am fairly normal, my value to my species is twofold.  First, I can be a stepping stone or a tool to aid the best of my species in improving.  Second, I can procreate – both to increase the numbers within my species and to increase the chance of some member of my species being born with special talent or ability.

It should be noted, at least with human life, that the quality of the parents does not necessarily indicate the quality of the progeny.  There are many examples of this, but the one that comes to mind is Beethoven, who was born to parents that society would have considered diseased and useless.

Does Evolution Value Unborn Life?

Yes!  Emphatically, undoubtedly, indisputably, yes!  Unborn life holds all the promise of the future for any species.  Killing off the unborn is reducing the chances your species has to evolve.  It reduces the chance that your species may be improved by some stellar individual.  In terms of individual value, the process of evolution could even be said value the potential of the unborn life more than it does the life of the unspectacular adult.

Lets put this in perspective.  According to LifeNews.Com there have been nearly 55 million legal abortions since Roe v. Wade, which was 40 years ago.  That means that we have killed (or “disposed of” if you like that term better) almost 55 million chances at a cure for cancer, aids, or the common cold. Almost 55 million have been terminated who might have discovered new energy sources, negotiated major peace treaties, wrote great works of music, or shown stunning physical prowess.

This, to the person who believes the theory of evolution, is an incredible tragedy.  In fact, the evolutionist might say that abortion is a crime against humanity.

Again, I do not subscribe to the theory of evolution.  However, I strongly believe that those who do will, after thought, find themselves required to oppose abortion in all cases.

Thank you for reading my deliberations,



From → Politics

  1. ryan59479 permalink

    On the other side of the coin, somewhere in those 55 million abortions could have been the next Hitler, Ted Bundy, and a bunch of serial rapists and embezzlers. Statistically speaking, it’s entirely possible that none of those 55 million lives would ever find a cure for cancer. Millions of small children die all over the world due to disease, malnutrition, and war. Perhaps one of THOSE children could have cured cancer. The argument you put forth supposes a predetermination that evolution does not support: that someone was “meant” to cure cancer (or whatever advancement you want to insert here).

    • You make a good point Ryan. Yes, there could have been murderers, rapists, and all kinds of other horrible people come from those 55 million lives. Yes, there are many who die from other causes. However, I think that evolution would still value the chance for one of the 55 million aborted lives to improve the species.

      I agree that another Hitler, Stalin, or other such monster would be a tragedy. With the perspective of evolution, (not my own personally) the value of a cure for a major infectious disease might outweigh the tragedy of another monster. I cannot speak to the relative values of what might have been. I can definitely say that the ideas of evolution should ascribe at least some value to each life for its inherent potential to improve the human race.

      Thanks for reading and responding,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: