|
Language of Illusion: The Abortion Slogans
Source: http://www.kfl.org/0-illusion-001.htm
Every child a wanted child
Sounds Loving, doesn't it ?
Yet this slogan reduces children to objects who have a right to
exist only if someone "wants" them more than other
"things": a career or an education or a relationship. It
makes aborted children victims - not of their own shortcomings but of
the self-centeredness of others.
It fails to distinguish between an unwanted pregnancy and an
unwanted child. Even a planned pregnancy can be undesirable due to
many hormonal and physical changes. On the other hand, repeated
studies indicate that many children who are abused after birth began
as very wanted children during pregnancy, but were "wanted"
for all the wrong reasons.
The measure of our humanity is not that there are no unwanted ones
among us. The measure is what do we do with those who are unwanted.
Shall we care for them or kill them ?
Women need Partial-Birth Abortions for Health Reasons
Sounds Neccessary, doesn't it ?
At congressional hearings no doctor was able to cite a single
health problem that could be only treated by a partial birth abortion.
What women need to know is the truth that a partial birth abortion
is a breech delivery of a pre-term child who is violently killed by
having its head punctured and having its brain suctioned out.
What woman needs that ?
If the same procedure were used on an animal or violent criminal it
would land the perpetrator in jail. Abortion advocates don't like the
term "partial birth abortion." They say it is
"offensive, upsetting and vague." It is offensive and
it is upsetting precisely because it isn't vague.
 Partial
Birth
(Brain Suction) Abortion
After three days of dilating
the cervix, the abortionist reaches up the birth canal, grasps a leg and
pulls it down and out, then the other leg, body, arms and shoulder. At
this point with a gentle pull, he could deliver the final 3 or 4 inches
(the head) and send the baby to the nursery. Rather, he inserts scissors
into the base of the baby's skull, seperates the blades, and inserts a
suction tube into the skull and sucks out the brains. This kills the
baby who is then removed.
Every Woman has the Right to Control Her Own Body
Sounds sensible, doesn't it ?
But is it, when it is used to defend abortion? Common sense and
modern science both recognize that pregnancy involves two bodies.
The dictionary defines woman as a "female human
being." Since sex is determined at conception and half of those
aborted are "female human beings" then obviously not every
woman has the right to control her own body.
Our society limits rights of individuals when they infringe
on the rights of others. Apart from abortion, when else may a woman,
in pursuit of a career, education, life style or personal interest,
have the legal right to kill an innocent, defenseless human being ?
Control which involves responsibility and restraint, should
be exercised before exposing one's body to the possibility of
pregnancy.
Abortion seeks to replace self-control with the right to
control the body of someone else.
Her own body does not describe a pregnant body, since
science shows us that in pregnancy there are two different heartbeats,
two different brain wave patterns, two different blood types, and even
two different sexes.
Abortion is a Single Issue
Sounds feasible, doesn't it ?
Wrong ! Abortion is a multi-faceted issue because abortion is the
tool of choice of racists, sexists, and materialists.
A SINGLE ISSUE OR RACISM ?
African Americans (11% of the population) have 43% of all abortions.
A SINGLE ISSUE OR SEXISM ?
Women have a legal right to abortion but no legal right to be informed
about the risks of abortion and the alternatives to abortion.
A SINGLE ISSUE OR MATERIALISM ?
Each year the money from abortion rivals the cash flow of many fortune
500 companies.
Don't Impose Your Morality on me
Sounds democratic, doesn't it ?
It was the medical profession in 1859 that initiated anti-abortion
legislation because of scientific evidence establishing the humanity
of the unborn.
Because some who oppose abortion do so on religious grounds does
not make abortion a religious issue any more than the opposition of
religious people to driving after drinking makes drunk driving a
religious issue.
Religion didn't discover when life begins; biologists did. Religion
didn't establish the uniqueness of each human life from the time of
fertilization: geneticists did.
Abortion is Between a Woman and Her God
Sounds broad-minded, doesn't it ?
In a country of rights and freedoms who would dare challenge
something as sacred as one's religion ?
Between a woman and her God ? To which God does one pray for
approval to puncture a child's skull as in partial birth abortion?
From which God does one seek blessing to dismember a child's body
as in a D&C abortion ? What kind of God condones the shredding of
a child's body as in a suction abortion ? Between a woman and her God
is an attempt to impose a moral framework on an immoral act.
No One Knows When Life Begins
Sounds convincing, doesn't it ?
Except that everyone knows when life begins!
Biology students know. Obstetricians know. Pregnant women know.
If human life doesn't begin when male sperm fertilizes the female
egg, then the whole concept of biological fatherhood is an arrogant
male myth.
The reality is that is that no man contributes anything to the "beingness"
of a child except at fertilization - when individual human life
begins.
A Fetus is Not a Person
Sounds logical, doesn't it ?
That is, until you think about it.
Our individual biological system begins at conception and ends at
death. At all stages of this continuum we are human, as the science of
genetics tell us.
Our humanity does not depend on our size, stage of development or
place of residence.
Unborn children in the womb can be viewed and monitored, receive
blood transfusions, and even have surgery.
It is illogical to believe that they are not part of the human family.
Calling human beings "embryos" and "fetuses"
serves the same purposes as calling them "adolescents" or
"adults." These scientific terms are used to indicate where
a person is in his or her development. They were never meant to give
the impression that the unborn child is not human.
Just as the "infant" is different from the
"adolescent" in terms of development and independence, so
the "fetus" is different from the "infant". Yet
all are genetically human and, therefore, persons.
Click
here to read more about the Pro-Choice "Choice"
|
