Abortion results in the killing of a unique, living, human being

Such an emotionally laden statement that is. It is a profound truth for many and fodder for ridicule and angry backlash from others. We need to understand what is so offensive about this statement though. The pro-choicer would likely take offense to the "human being" claim. Some others might object to the "living" aspect of this statement. I agree this is an emotionally charged statement but is it disingenuous? Let's examine this more closely to see if there is truly anything misspoken here.

Abortion
Abortion is the ceasing of an act in progress, such as aborting a mission, aborting an idea, aborting a pregnancy. Abortion is also known as a medical procedure that terminates a pregnancy and expels the fetus. Though abortion is intended to terminate the pregnancy of a non-viable fetus, it is currently legal in all states to terminate a viable fetus due to the "mental health" of the mother clause.

Killing
As I stated, abortion will result in the termination of a pregnancy which is intended to also terminate the life of the unborn, thus killing the unborn. Killing is not to be confused with murder which is an illegal act. Killing a fetus can only become murder if elective abortion is banned.

Unique
The unborn from the point of conception is an entity distinct from the mother. The conceptus has it's own DNA containing both sets of chromosomes which is required to be considered a human being. While the gamete cells (egg and sperm) contain 1 set of chromosomes each, they are not a human being themselves because they lack the other necessary set. The fetus has it's own blood type distinct from it's mother. The fetus even grows it's own placenta. The fetus is NOT a part of the mother as a kidney is. The fetus has a symbiotic relationship with the mother.

Living
There is a consensus on the basic standards for biological life. This is not to be confused with the metaphysical and philosophical discussion of qualitative life, or "personhood". The biological standard for life is as follows:
Homeostasis, Growth, Reproduction, Absorption, Metabolism, Secretion, Irritability.
The conceptus maintains it's own shape in homeostasis, the cells will become larger in growth until the need to reproduce by splitting. The conceptus takes in nourishment and metabolises that nourishment to prepare itself for growth. The conceptus gives off heat, and as all single celled animals will do, the conceptus will instinctively move away from a source of irritation. The later stages of the unborn will follow this same pattern but the biological standard for life is met right from the very beginning.

Human
This should certainly be the easiest to comprehend and yet the obvious will often evade the closed heart. Any DNA test done on the unborn, even at the point of conception, will reveal that this is human DNA.
A legal, medical, and general dictionary will all show that the definition for human is: any living or extinct member of the family homonidae. The conceptus, and older gestations, all fit this description.

Being
This also should be too obvious to require explanation but I find myself compelled to discuss even this trivial matter. One only has to exist in time and space to fit the description of "being". To exist is to be in a state of being. To deny the unborn are beings is to deny their very existence in any variety.

Abortion results in the killing of a unique, living, human being.

Certainly this is an emotionally charged statement as well it should be. There is nothing dishonest about it except for those who would define words on their own terms. Whether you take this statement as a matter of unemotional fact or as a slap in the face of the benign message you would prefer to hear, The statement is true. There can never be progress as a people until we accept reality for what it is.

72% of America is pro-life

According to CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Aug. 29-31, 2008. N=1,031 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
When asked "With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?"
53% answered pro-choice and 45% answered pro-life. On the surface it would seem the the country is split in half, leaning slightly towards pro-choice. How can I say then that America is vastly pro-life? The answer is in the question asked by the poll. Most people consider themselves pro-choice because they don't understand what pro-choice is. It is the popular politically correct answer to give nowadays.

To be pro-choice one must want choice for abortion to be legal in all situations, at all times. Any desire to restrict abortion is a desire to restrict choice. I ask you why any pro-choicer would want to restrict abortion at all if it is only a blob of tissue living inside the mother. If there is no harm to any human being then there is truly no reason to restrict abortion anymore than there would be reason to restrict a mole removal. Therefore the only reason, realized or otherwise, for restricting abortion for any reason is that one believes, at least at some point in the pregnancy, that there is a person living inside that mother that is worthy of protecting. To find that there is life inside that mother worthy of protecting is a pro-life position.

There are various restrictions that people would like to see on abortion. Some simply want less abortions. But why desire less abortions if there is no harm to anyone? Some want restrictions at later stages of pregnancy. This is a pro-life position at a later stage of pregnancy. Some want restrictions except for rape, incest, or saving the life of the mother. Ok, let's talk about these.

Abortion that saves the life of a mother from imminent danger has always been legal, even when general abortion was illegal. If the mother is in danger of dying and the fetus is not viable, of course we want the mother to live. We just want to make sure that the fetus is given a chance to live too if it is at all possible. Let's be clear though, depression is not imminent danger. hardship is not imminent danger, fear of your boyfriend leaving you is not imminent danger.

Rape and incest exceptions are seemingly inconsistent with a viewpoint that there is a human being inside from the moment of conception. I would agree with that perception. Even with these exceptions there is still a pro-life viewpoint. The reason these exceptions come up is because they are emotionally based. The thought of the pain and unfairness of these situations override the feeling that abortion would be killing a person. Logically it is inconsistent, but the rape and incest exceptions are emotionally driven.

When other polls are given that ask more in depth questions like "Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?" You see a different picture.
According to the Gallup Poll. May 8-11, 2008. N=1,017 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
28% want abortion legal under any circumstance, 54% want it legal only under certain circumstances (a pro-life position), 17% want abortion illegal in all circumstances.

Only 28% of the country is pro-choice where there are no restrictions on choice. Remember, any restriction on choice is not pro-choice. The only reason for desiring restrictions of any kind is because of a pro-life stance. You are pro-life if you believe there is a person inside the pregnant woman worthy of protection at any time during the pregnancy.