When Doug Burgum announced his bid for Governor he said in a radio interview that he was going to “pivot from the intractable” issues like the value of human life. To his credit Burgum no longer refers to life issues as intractable he now gives them a higher place. Now he calls abortion a “theological question, not a governor [sic] question”.
Then he answered this question; apparently believing himself a great theologian, he declared that he would have vetoed both a measure that protected unborn children capable of feeling pain, and a measure that would have protected unborn children with a heartbeat.
Burgum also questioned the right of men to ask questions about the destruction of innocent human life “I would look forward to being interviewed at some point during this campaign by a woman on this topic.” How can Burgum answer a question asked by a woman about this issue, he isn’t after all, either a woman or a theologian which are apparently his requirements for someone talking about the violence of abortion.
No matter what Mr. Burgum says, when a new human life begins is not a theological question. It is a settled scientific matter coupled with a basic ethical question: Does human life have value? Human life begins at the moment of fertilization according to embryology. Every biologist knows this. The ethical question remains: do all human lives have value?
You do not have to be either a woman or a theologian to answer this question. Either human lives are valuable because of their humanity or they are not. If they are not, then why should the lives of human adults be legally protected?