Dear First Lady Michelle Obama,
So much discussion about
abortion is in the news today in anticipation of a Supreme Court decision that
is expected to return legislation on abortion to the states. In this
regard, I note with regret your comment, "State lawmakers will have the
power to strip womxn [xic] of the right to make decisions about their bodies
and their healthcare." Might I briefly clarify four matters of
biology?
First, a child in the
womb has a different, though related, DNA from the mother. Therefore, a
choice to abort the child is not a choice about the mother's body so much as
about her son's or daughter's body. The child inherits one chromosome from
each parent, making a separate individual. Any decision to take the life
of the unborn child is a decision about the child's life. Stripping a
woman from the so-called 'right' to make decisions about terminating someone
else's life is hardly a decision about her own body. Incidentally, even
in the case of two persons with identical or nearly identical DNA--i.e.,
identical twins--the persons are not one person. An identical twin cannot
and should not be able to choose to terminate the life of his or her sibling.
Mothers share even less DNA with their children.
Second, DNA establishes
gender. A baby girl inherits an X chromosome from the father and an X
chromosome from the mother. A baby boy inherits an X chromosome from his
mother and a Y chromosome from his father. There are no other chromosomes
or combinations, and so there are no other genders. Girls have XX
chromosomes, and boys have XY chromosomes.
Third, the chromosomes
determine the gender, reproductive organs, and sexual characteristics of the
child. From the moment of conception, a girl with two X chromosomes has
what it takes to develop into a child-bearing woman some day. Boys have
what it takes to develop into fathers. There are no alternatives, such as
your 'womxn' category. Simply put, men do not have babies, and if someone
pretending to be a man does, this only reveals that she is a woman, not a man.
Fourth, from the above,
it follows that one cannot turn an intention, such as someone's sexual identity
choice, into a fact, such as biological sex. To imagine that this is so
involves the same logical fallacy that, if a human being intends to identify as
a dog, one actually is a dog. One's gender identity cannot alter the fact
of one's gender, that is, one's biological sex. You need not worry about
the recent invention of a 'womxn' category in all the history of humanity as it
has no basis in fact. As we read in Genesis, 'So God created man in his
own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he
created them' (1.27).
The science is both
simple and marvelous. We should follow it because there is no alternative
in reality. I trust this clears up any confusion or misunderstandings.
Sincerely,
Professor Grams
Comments