Is Veganism Compatible with Pro-Choice?

My fellow vegans ---

One of the principles that we follow and try to cultivate in others is giving living beings the benefit of the doubt when assessing whether they are aware and capable of experiencing pain and suffering, and whether they have interests that deserve protection. We believe in, and in some cases preach this fundamental aspect of veganism for at least two reasons: a) to make every reasonable attempt to avoid causing harm to beings that do not want to be harmed; b) to promote sympathy for all sentient creatures, which may be the most essential criteria for creating a peaceful, harmonious, and just society.

To be consistent with our values, we need to apply the same benefit of the doubt to human fetuses. For the same reason that we advocate maximum respect for honeybees, we should question the morality of destroying a human fetus (or any fetus, for that matter) as it approaches the end of its second trimester, by which time the fetus is generally considered to be viable. It is highly likely that even prior to that point in its life, the fetus is a sentient being, just like a bird or a bee.

There is no precise moment at which the developing fetus goes from non-aware to aware, just as there is no precise dividing line for sentient and non-sentient species. We try to be as kind as possible to all creatures. If we are to subscribe to the principle of least harm, and if we are opposed to exploitation, we have to critically examine whether it's morally justifiable to terminate the life of a 24-week old fetus under less than dire circumstances.

It may be easy for the average vegan to be "anti-pro-life," because we are opposed to and offended by the tactics used by some of the more ardent pro-life fundamentalists. But, fellow vegans, let's not do to the pro-lifers what others do to us. Questionable tactics by fervent activists — perhaps fueled by built-up frustration and distress at seeing what they perceive to be wanton, selfish slaughter — is not a sufficient reason to ignore the entire pro-life message or the implied obligations in that message. This should have a familiar ring.

Furthermore, we may have a negative reaction to the pro-life philosophy because it is so closely tied in with Christianity, and Christianity in practice — not in theory, I would argue — has been violently cruel to animals and arrogantly dismissive of their suffering. Just as hating PETA is not a sufficient reason to eat meat, revulsion of Church practices should not be the basis of one's views on abortion and fetus rights.

We owe it to ourselves and to in-utero humans to examine the abortion issue independent of the politics, tactics, or shortcomings of its most outspoken proponents.

I do believe one can make a heartfelt and morally sound case for destroying early-term embryos. That is not to say that embryos are intrinsically valueless. But sentience is a hugely significant line of demarcation. Once there is even a small chance that the developing life has interests, and can start to sense the pleasure and pain of life, he or she deserves the same protections we advocate for animals. It is up to us, the powerful and responsible, to make sacrifices where feasible on behalf of those whose fate is greatly affected by our decisions.

I respect freedom of choice and believe that we have a right to privacy, but neither of these things is the highest good; they do not trump the right of an individual to not be tortured or killed. Furthermore, I'm disturbed that often in pro-choice circles, the focus is almost entirely on the needs of the mother; the profound interests of the fetus are frequently missing from the discussion. Much as the pig is totally forgotten when a meat-eater says "I want the freedom to choose to eat spare ribs."

We must strive to consider the widest definition of sentience, to presume sentience in the fetus if we're unsure. Probably long before viability, the fetus is a person, living in the womb, with feelings, sensations, and emerging emotions such as happiness, sadness, and fear. He is an animal, too, and thus deserving of rights and the compassion of ethical vegans.