I rarely read MSNBC anymore, but curiosity got the better of me. I clicked on their response to Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s comment about liberals denying the science of life and abortion.

Baby at 6-8 weeks

The MSNBC headline read, “Marco Rubio’s scientific blunder on abortion.”

Here’s what the third paragraph said, “In fact, ‘life’ and ‘conception’ aren’t scientific terms, and the rights of a blastocyst, embryo or fetus compared to the pregnant woman aren’t up to scientists; they’re subjective, based on personal, religious, or political commitments.”

I couldn’t help but scoff at that sentence. It made me wonder how journalism has sunk to this new low. (My background is in journalism, by the way.)

Their statement that life and conception aren’t scientific terms is ridiculous (and I don’t use that word lightly). Even the determination of when life begins is a scientific fact, as Sen. Rubio stated.

Life, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is “an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction.”

These terms are not subjective. If they were subjective, then how could scientists look for life on Mars or in the Mariana Trench? If they were subjective, how can we determine whether you or I are alive?

Sometimes I think our head-to-the-iPhone culture saturates our minds with so much information that we forget to think about what we’re reading.

As pro-lifers, we need to step up and be critical thinkers – whether we’re reading an article from a pro-life perspective or a pro-abortion perspective.

Our mission is too critical. We are fighting against 40-plus years of legalized abortion. We are fighting for the 56 million babies who lost their lives as a result, and the millions more who are vulnerable to the threat.