Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life because he understood that unborn babies are people

Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life because he understood that unborn babies are people

While the celestial skies and the deepest parts of the ocean remain mysterious to us on many levels, modern technology has made them less so, yielding new and fascinating insights that we once missed.

The same goes for another once bewildering frontier: the womb.

Although it is the origin of every human being who has ever walked this earth, we have known little about our first home and how we came to be for most of history.

For example, it was not until the late 1800s that scientists understood that the union of male and female sex cells creates a different human being. But otherwise, much remained a mystery.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson

Without any way to glimpse the pregnancy cosmos, scientists could only speculate about what happens during pregnancy. Even into the 20th century, we had little information about prenatal development.

As late as the 1969 edition of the Cumulative Index Medicus, a huge book listing every article published in every medical journal in the world, there were only five articles under the heading “Fetus, Physiology, and Anatomy of.”


The void of facts made the abortion-on-demand product easier to market. After all, it (not they) was just a clump of cells.

In his autobiography, the Hand of God, the late Dr. Bernard Nathanson addressed this lack of empirical data on human development. And he discussed the technological lightning bolt that struck him in the late 1970s, which prompted him to give up his lucrative abortion practices and leadership role in the pro-abortion movement to become a staunch pro-life advocate.

That transformative tool ult, resound that, provided a window revealing the miraculous process of human development. These scientific advances, along with those arising from the study of genetics, led to much research on life in the womb.

Nathanson says ultrasound has helped us “learn more about the fetus since its arrival than in almost all of the history of medicine before that time.”

In 1979 he had twenty-eight hundred articles on fetology in the Index Medicus, but in 1994, he had almost five thousand. More than 30 years later, how much more research has been done and articles written about human life in its earliest stages?

How little we knew then. How much more do we know now?

It may be easier to understand one’s support for abortion in the “dark ages” when so little was known about fetology.

But how can anyone today, especially those who ostensibly adhere to “science” as their barometer of all things true, justify abortion?

They should be blind to the facts.

Deaf to a heartbeat.

Indifferent to an innocent life unfolding before their eyes.

Numb to dismemberment.

Impervious to a violent death.

Insensitive to the rough removal of human life.

They would be and are the ultimate science deniers.

So let’s be relentless messengers of the wonderful biological truths we’ve learned over the past half-century.

Let us unceasingly proclaim that every human life begins at conception.

Let’s follow science to build a culture of life.

LifeNews Note: Bonnie Finnerty, Director of Education, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation