Collegiate Times

It is not often that a forestry class delves into the realm of philosophy. So, when my teacher started discussing the “precautionary principle” during Forest Resource Policy, I felt slightly out of place and feared that my choice to skip over Knowledge and Reality
during my college career might result in a lower grade for this course.

It was a couple of minutes before I knew what the precautionary principle was as the teacher painstakingly wrote the definition on the chalkboard: “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

That didn’t seem too complicated. It was similar to the aphorisms “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” and “better safe than sorry.” When your mom (or your overbearing roommate) tells you to take a raincoat to class because there’s a chance of rain, she is exercising the precautionary principle in the hopes of protecting your wellbeing.

In terms of forest policy, the precautionary principle is demonstrated when a regulatory agency prohibits timber harvesting because of the possibility that some wildlife species (perhaps ones possessing cures to human ailments) may be adversely affected.

I realize that most people, even foresters, have little desire to read about the inner-workings of forest resource policy. Hence I call this argument, “The Precautionary Principle and Abortion.” As the president of a student pro-life organization, I spend a lot of time thinking about abortion and why I believe what I believe.

One matter I’m always attempting to resolve is the definition of “life” and how it applies to the unborn. The reality is that I, or any number of scientists, find it difficult to prove when life begins. Is it at conception? The first trimester? The first breath? As with most things in science, the concept of life carries a lot of evidence, but definite conclusions are hard to come by, similar to the controversy about the theory of evolution.

But it must be noted that science has not disproved that life begins before birth, at conception. For pro-lifers, the precautionary principle now becomes important. Even though “cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically,” since there is the possibility that a human life may be destroyed by abortion, our laws, and our sense of responsibility to mankind, should strive to eliminate the threat to human health.

I’m sure many might question this logic based on economic principles. After all, many things in life require risk, such as business investments that may be lost, or may generate great returns.

Abortion may risk ending a human life, but, on the other hand, fewer mouths to feed may allow mature adults to reinvest their resources toward a better life — not just for themselves but for others in greater need. Fewer humans may result in less stress on our
environmental resources, which according to many are already taxed severely.

Brilliant minds and a lot of grant money could feasibly calculate the dollars that are saved by every abortion that results in one less pregnancy, one less baby and one less human.

But what about the threat to human life, a commodity that is literally unique and irreplaceable? Of course there is the human life/human “un-life” that may or may not be threatened and destroyed. As stated earlier, semantics will always find our use of the word “life” confusing.

But there are additional costs to preventing life that we may never know.

What if an aborted being had the potential to make billions, even trillions of dollars, and the compassion to give it away to humans in desperate need across the globe? What if one of the aborted was gifted with a mind capable of solving global pollution problems? Abortion is either a really good financial deal, or it is the greatest threat to the human race by destroying millions of lives and countless potential.

We may never be able to prove which it is, but a wise person may step back and decide “Hmm, better safe than sorry, I always say” and devote his efforts toward preventing these difficult situations and developing solutions that respect the right to life of all humans.

A version of this article appeared in the Feb 19 issue of the Collegiate Times.