We must move beyond the definition of ‘life’

I didn't catch Dr. Peter Kennedy's column “Child is ‘produced' at beginning of pregnancy” (March 29, 2011), but, judging by Steve Udermann's defense of it (Jan. 2), it might well have earned a rebuttal from me.

As to the weary claim that “life begins at conception”: the fertilized egg's precursors, sperm cells and ova, are also alive, so, his point? Moreover, a goodly portion of fertilized eggs fail to implant, yet I fail to detect any widespread hand-wringing over this monumental loss of “life.” If it is your conviction that “life begins etc.,” by all means honor it, but spare the rest of us your sodden logic.

For many of us, life is defined by things like viability and sentience. To equate a blastocyst with a nearly full-term fetus produces one scrambled fruit cart indeed.

And anyone who would force a victim of rape or incest to continue a pregnancy is not only a misogynist, but lacking in any empathy whatsoever.

How much longer do we have to keep doing this?

Cynthia Adhikari

Cedar Rapids