Critics call him a scientific illiterate but life does begin at conception.
Rubio’s detractors rely on ACOG’s Terminology Bulletin Number 1, “Terms used in reference to the fetus” (September 1965), which states in part:
“FERTILIZATION is the union of spermatozoon and ovum.
“CONCEPTION is the implantation of a fertilized ovum. ‘This definition has been selected deliberately because union of sperm and ovum, cannot be detected clinically unless implantation occurs.’
“PREGNANCY is the state from conception to expulsion of the products of conception.”
What possible motivation would there be for redefining conception as implantation and redefining pregnancy as the period between implantation and “expulsion of the products of conception”?
Certainly, the leadership of ACOG promoted, and still promotes, abortion and “contraceptive” drugs and devices that also have abortifacient mechanisms of action. A very plausible explanation for these terminology changes has been suggested by an OB-GYN friend who is a Life Fellow of ACOG and Diplomate of the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology since 1966. “Effective” contraceptive options in the 1960s were limited to the birth control pill and the intrauterine device (IUD). Christopher Tietze, MD—an advocate of population control through abortion and contraception, a member of the American Eugenics Society, a demographer and Fellow of the Population Council—often complained that IUDs could not be successfully marketed to women in Latin America due to the belief that they could cause the death of a week-old embryo by thwarting implantation. Unable to change the reality of how IUDs work, Tietze sought to change the terminology by defining abortion as terminating a pregnancy and defining pregnancy as beginning with successful implantation. It seems likely that ACOG leadership saw the benefits of Dr. Tietze’s marketing solution and adopted his approach.
ACOG’s charade deceives women and results in the loss of embryos’ lives on a grand scale. Beyond that, the new definitions lack scientific coherence and raise other definitional problems. For example, the new definition of pregnancy excludes “ectopic pregnancy,” a long-standing scientific term for a pregnancy in which the embryo is developing somewhere other than the uterus. In addition, the stated rationale for moving conception a full week forward to implantation, i.e., the union of sperm and ovum “cannot be detected clinically” before implantation, is simply false. Early pregnancy factor (EPF), discovered in 1974, is an immunosuppressive protein produced by the ovary shortly after fertilization, in response to a signal from the embryo. [H. Morton et al., Nature, 249:459-60 (1974)] EPF directs the mother’s immune system to “stand down” and not attack the new “foreign body,” as it would bacteria, for example. EPF has been detected in the mother’s blood 48 hours after fertilization [B.E. Rolfe, Fertility and Sterility, 37:655-60 (1982)] and has been documented in IUD wearers whose embryos were aborted in the presence of the IUD. [Y.C. Smart et al., Fertility and Sterility, 37:201-204 (1982)]
The verdict on Count Two: Senator Rubio was correct in claiming unanimity among embryologists on when life begins, but clearly the leadership of ACOG, as well as many advocates of “reproductive rights,” resist consensus and publicly reject the settled science that life begins at conception/fertilization. In denying the established scientific facts, many of the Senator’s detractors have claimed that, before birth, the existence of a human life is a matter of philosophical or religious belief, rather than science. In a Foreword to Dr. Condic’s White Paper, the late Rev. Richard John Neuhaus addresses this claim: “The debate in our society and others is not over when human life begins but is over at what point and for what reasons do we have an obligation to respect and protect that life. …
“It is sometimes said that the abortion debate is about ‘values’ rather than ‘facts.’ An honest debate about abortion, however, is about values based on facts. If we don’t get the facts right, we will not get our values right. Establishing by clear scientific evidence the moment at which a human life begins is not the end of the abortion debate. On the contrary, that is the point from which the debate begins.”
Let the debate begin!
Susan E. Wills, JD, LLM left law practice to join the USCCB Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, where she served for 20 years as Asst. Dir. for Education and Outreach until her retirement in 2013. She now serves as Aleteia’s English edition Spirituality Editor.
Support Aleteia! It only takes a minute.
If you’re reading this article, it’s thanks to the generosity of people like you, who have made Aleteia possible.
Here are some numbers:
- 20 million users around the world read Aleteia.org every month
- Aleteia is published every day in eight languages: English, French, Arabic, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, and Slovenian
- Each month, readers view more than 50 million pages
- Nearly 4 million people follow Aleteia on social media
- Each month, we publish 2,450 articles and around 40 videos
- We have 60 full time staff and approximately 400 collaborators (writers, translators, photographers, etc.)
As you can imagine, these numbers represent a lot of work. We need you.
Support Aleteia with as little as $1. It only takes a minute. Thank you!