There is nothing more innocent than a baby. Babies are the very essence of innocence. They have not lived to hate, to harm, to lie, to cheat, nor to do any of the hurtful things of this sinful world in which we live. They give unconditional love and have complete trust for those around them.
So-called human rights activists will hold candlelight vigils for someone who commited a heinous murder/murders and is rightfully facing execution. They will scream in outrage if a known evil terrorist, who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans, is waterboarded and never truly harmed. But they openly condone an innocent baby being ripped apart and vacuumed from its mother’s womb. They see absolutely nothing wrong when a late-term viable child is partially delivered prior to its brains being suctioned out by a catheter. These procedures sound like something that might have occurred in a Nazi death camp. To these caring people, this is all perfectly okay. They even hail the doctors who perform these inhuman procedures as heroes. I do not and never will understand this form of human rights. Can you imagine what the outcry from PETA would be if they knew that someone was doing these despicable acts on animals? Don’t take this wrong, I do not approve of animal cruelty but a human baby is far more important than any animal.
When does life begin? This subject has been argued heatedly since the pro-life/pro-choice debate intensified with the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. There is only one logical answer. Life begins at conception. Some will say that life doesn’t begin until the fetus is viable and can live outside its mother’s womb. But you can look at a sonogram at any stage of a pregnancy, and you will undeniably see a developing human being, not a blob of tissue.
On an average day, there are approximately 3,700 lives of the unborn ended by abortion in the United States. Since 1973, there have been 40+ million abortions performed in our nation. That is over six times more murders (yes, I do mean murders) than occurred during the holocaust. This should be completely unacceptable in a civilized society. Infanticide can never be an acceptable means of birth control. To demonstrate the folly of it all, let’s make a comparison. There are laws on the books that make it a double homicide if you take the life of an expectant mother along with the life of her unborn child. I agree with these laws. But a doctor in a clinical setting can kill as many unborn children as he/she sees fit. Where is the logic in all of this? There is none.
The pro-choice (which actually means pro-abortion) crowd argues that society should never take away a woman’s right to choose what she does with her body. Every woman does have the right to choose whether or not to have unprotected sex, but they should not have the right to choose to end the life of an innocent child just because it is inconvenient for them to be pregnant. Imagine how things would be if society looked the other way whenever a life was taken for convenience to the killer. No murderer would ever be punished, and our homicide rate would skyrocket.
What about instances involving rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger? These cases make up a minute percentage of the total number of abortions performed. If we could do away with all abortions except these cases that would be a huge step toward getting our moral compass close to where it should be. In the instances involving rape and incest, I personally have never understood why the innocent baby should receive the death penalty for the sins of the father. When a mother’s life is truly in danger, the medical professionals should do everything necessary to save her. However, if the baby’s life must be terminated, it should be done in the most humane way possible.
Abortions are so unnecessary. There are so many caring couples who crave to give these unwanted children good homes. For every infant that is available for adoption there are 35 loving families who would like to adopt them. Without abortion, Angelina Jolie and Madonna would not have to go to third world countries to find babies to adopt.
I truly believe that there will come a day when America’s pendulum of morality and decency will swing back the other way. And when it does, those generations will look back on this sad chapter of American history in abject horror and disgust.
Moe Lane
Steve Maley
KnightsofMalta
Dan Spencer
Dan McLaughlin
Recommended. And 400,000 unborn black babies are killed every year.
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 4:17PM EST (link)Somehow you never hear much concern from the Left about this.
15 MILLION unborn black babies have been killed total.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=8580
More killing of Americans of African descent than the clan could ever do.
gekster (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 4:25PM EST (link)But they hate the clan more, Go figure.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
I wonder if the KKK gives to Planned Parenthood
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 5:29PM EST (link)It would make sense if they did…
well they were founded for similar reasons
kyle8 (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 5:40PM EST (link)If you read about Margaret Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood, and what she believed you would see that she very much wanted to promote the sterilization of inferior humans, Of which she included, but was not exclusive to, the black races.
“Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty”
Kyle
right - the racism of progressives and their project
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 6:08PM EST (link)rarely comes to the attention of the public
Is there a spot for data
Leopard1996 (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 5:44PM EST (link)To totally disprove the meme that the supposed segrationists ran to the republican party after the 60′s. I think if we could open more eyes to that, we would be able to show who really has the back of the African-american community through freedom instead of dependence.
“The accumluated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout, “Save Us!”….and I’ll look down and whisper, “No”…The Watchmen
don't know about a site, but there are essays
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 6:14PM EST (link)many essays have been written on the subject – just start googling
martin knight here at red state might have written somethign good on it, too
Here's Martin Knight on the "Republicans are segregationists" lie
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 6:17PM EST (link)http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2008/07/16/why-black-people-dont-care-that-gop-is-civil-rights-party/#comment-94853
Thank you for the link
Leopard1996 (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 9:46PM EST (link)I read this and found it very informative. So once again, the Lib meda strikes again to lie about how conservatives really stand.
“The accumluated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout, “Save Us!”….and I’ll look down and whisper, “No”…The Watchmen
Glad to help. Share it with others. It's the best
icbm (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 9:48PM EST (link)discussion I’ve seen on the issue. Perhaps there’s a book out there, too, but I don’t know it.
In Texas, they target Hispanics.
Menlo (Diary) Tuesday, June 23rd at 6:51PM EST (link)They are somewhere around half of all abortions in Texas. Black children are still killed at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites though.
Of course that does not resonate with the crowd at La Raza and people like Sotomayor who “never thought about it.”
“The ultimate touchstone of constitutionality is the Constitution itself and not what we have said about it.” -Felix Frankfurter
Real Abortion Statistics from Med School
JHancock (Diary) Wednesday, June 24th at 12:15PM EST (link)1/4 babies conceived and verified B-HCG or ultrasound pregnancy test have been aborted since RVW.
1/3 women has had an abortion by the age of 40
1/6 woman have had 2 or more abortions
1% of abortions are due to rape or incest
6% due to loosely defined “medical” reasons–”life of the mother” is among the minority of these reasons-most common medical reason is fetal anomaly like spina-bifida, cystic fibrosis, Downs Syndrome–many of these anomalous fetuses could be brought to term and live until their 40′s. Other medical reasons aren’t medical at all, but excuses to perform late term abortions in hospitals that would otherwise not allow them. For example my hospital does not perform non-indicated abortions, however a few weeks ago there was an abortion at 19 weeks gestation for the “indication” of the mother having drank some alcohol early in the pregnancy–ie a common occurrence that can be harmful to a fetus but that often happens with no bad outcome. So basically “medical” reasons are often used to get an abortion into a hospital that wouldn’t otherwise allow it, or to get insurance to pay for the procedure.
93% of abortions completely elective—the real # is probably closer to 96% if you include “soft call” medical decisions.
Only 1% is for rape and only approximately 3% for the health of the mother. Less than 1% is actually to save the life of the mother, and in many cases high risk women could avoid this all together by getting IUD’s or Essure coils and avoiding pregnancy with these more permanent BC measures.
Interesting stats
Neil Stevens (Diary) Wednesday, June 24th at 12:30PM EST (link)Those are why I have no problem with the three exception people. Even they would eliminate over 95% of all abortions in America.
It’s just common sense.
RS contributing editor, technical administrator, and “a hardy variety of crabgrass.”
Read the RedState Posting Rules
Unlikely Voter: Poll Analysis, Election Projection.
“I rejoice that America has resisted.” – William Pitt, the Elder
True
JHancock (Diary) Wednesday, June 24th at 6:15PM EST (link)Although I think the three exceptions should be boiled down to 2
1) The life of the mother is in imminent danger for which there is no other good treatment, and the fetus is not yet viable to be delivered as a pre-mi
2) The fetus has an anomaly incompatible with life outside the womb that is not medically or surgically correctable
These cases would represent less than 3% of all abortions and are the only two exceptions that could be argued from a strong ethical stance.
I completely disagree with the implications of the "abortion = Holocaust" argument
aesthete (Diary) Thursday, June 25th at 11:33PM EST (link)We probably agree more than we disagree on abortion: I’m not much of a SoCon, but it’s one of my top issues. That said, the abortion = holocaust meme is one that I find myself completely and violently disgusted by. First, let’s think of the implications of this:
1) As you say, six times as many babies have been aborted as Jews were killed in Nazi Germany, and the number is likely also higher than those directly killed by Communist dictatorships. So, one has to say that the US is infinitely more evil than either of those nations. Venezuela, Iran, and many nations in Latin America and the Middle East have banned abortion, except in the case of risk to the mother. I am therefore left to conclude that any criticism of those nations human rights violations must be met with the same reaction that such critiques from Nazi Germany would be met with: disdain. Is this the reaction that you have when you see us critique such dictators? If not, why?
2) If abortion = holocaust, would you also have to say that women are not victims, but active participants in “America’s Holocaust”? If so, would it not be appropriate to administer the death penalty, or at least life in prison, as was done with the active participants in the Holocaust, as lefties often accuse of wanting? If not, why? Same question goes with the doctors and nurses who have performed or assisted in the operations involved.
Here’s why I think that the reasoning behind the rhetoric is faulty:
1) There is no active attempt being made to exterminate these kids by the government, or organized groups (NARAL and the like notwithstanding), and in the case of NARAL, it’s unfair to pin that on the whole of the US.
2) There is a great amount of honest uncertainty in the minds of most folks on abortion, and it’s one of the reasons that I don’t see the debate ending in any group’s favor anytime soon. I know that many of my friends, extended family, and co-workers are truly confused as to when life begins, and it’s a fair question. Many of them have changed their minds on late-term abortions, after seeing pictures, but many don’t, and I think that (assuming that you and I are right about abortion) the crime is less as a result of genuine ignorance on the beginnings of life, and disagreement as to the beginning of sentience/personhood. The Nazis had no such luxury, and though eugenics gave them an excuse to do what they do, there isn’t much doubt that there was wrong, and there was little excuse when it was revealed to the world.
3) If we look through their eyes, and accept their premise that a fetus=property, rather than life, you have agree with them that infringing on their “right” to abortion would be unethical regulation. Of course, I don’t agree with their premises, but there is a strong case to be made if you do.
I’m on the pro-life side because of the scientific evidence that shows the “fetus” to be alive, anecdotal evidence (pictures, personal opinion, and my personal beliefs), and the logical argument that tells me that, if I am wrong, the cost (some personal rights, from their view) would be greater to liberty and society than the cost if they are wrong (babies murdered),. Any of those is more than good enough to provide a rebuttal to liberals, and hyperbole only damages our cause.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
No, they are very similar
jerry38 (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 2:38PM EST (link)Actually, on reflection, the Holocost and Abortion prove to be very similar. I see three major similarities between the two, other than the obvious mass extermination of a class of people who are innocent nonagressors.
1. They are both based on eugenic movements
2. They both seek to dehumanize their victims in order to justify their slaughter
3. They both present a utopian outcome to make the slaughter appealing, (but cash is still King)
NOTE: I could add a fourth in that they are both progressive horrors, and I could argue that government forced abortion is already in the minds of many here in America who like to make it a reality at such time as it becomes politically palatable or at such time as our form of government changes from a democracy. This has occurred in China of course already. But these are topics for another day.
As to 1. here are a couple of good links in this regard from my friend Mark Crutcher at Life Dyamics. This guy is the Jack Bauer of the pro-life movement and can use all the support he can get. I truly believe with enough funding this guy could end abortion.
http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm
http://www.klanparenthood.com/
Life Dynamics also has a good piece on comparing the holocaust and abortion.
http://lifedynamics.com/DeathCamps/Holocaust.cfm
As to number 2, consider these side by side statements from pro-aborts and Nazis used to dehumanize babies and Jews respectively. Of course we also have experience doing this with blacks.
Only persons of German or related blood can be citizens: this does not include the Jews.
- Reich Citizenship Law, 1935
Compared to –
The word person as used in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn.
- US Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade 1973
Or –
It was nothing to do with Humanity – it was a mass. I rarely saw them as individuals.
- Franz Strangl, former commandant of Treblinka, 1971
Compared to –
What is aborted is a protoplasmic mass and not a real, live grown-up individual.
- Drs. Walter Char and John McDermott, 1972
Or –
Removal of the Jewish element.
-Hans Frank, 1943
Compared to –
Remove the products of conception
- Dr. Thomas Dillon, 1974
As to the third, Hitler saw a world where we could remove certain elements of the gene pool and create a utopia with a race of superior people. The promoters of abortion see the same thing, but they also see a different kind of utopia, one of a reduced population that allows for great prosperity for the chosen few, one of no morality (or a new “green” morality) and no consequences associated with sex and drugs and rock and roll.
The big differences in abortion and the holocaust are also threefold.
1. The baby that is killed is not visible when it is killed, making it easier to justify
2. The person (mother) has selfish reasons for the killing, making it easier to justify
3. The indoctrination time by pro-abortion forces has been much longer and more advanced than the pro-Hitler forces.
As you point out, these differences make it easier to justify the conduct of those involved in abortion, and in fact make them less culpable – precisely because the mental requirement necessary to be guilty of the worst crimes is not there, or has been indoctrinated out of many many people. So I would agree that the outside appearance of the conduct is less horrific than the holocaust and that the individual motives for committing abortion are greater than the individual motives for killing Jews.
But these are mainly aesthetic differences and not true differences. The motives and appearance are altered only because of the deceptive propaganda and are not actual differences in the horror of the conduct. Therefore I would say that the comparison made is very apt, and will only be offensive to those who have been taken in by some portion of the pro-abortion propaganda.
“Justice is always naive and self-confident; believing that it will immediately win once recognized. That is the reason why the forces of Justice are so poorly organized. On the other hand, the Evil is cynic, sly and fantastically organized. It never ever has the illusion of the ability to stand on its own feet and to win in a fair competition. That is why it is ready to use any kind of means without hesitation. And of course it does – under the banners of the most noble ideas.”
–Vladimir Bukovsky
You don't need to convince me that abortion is evil
aesthete (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 4:33PM EST (link)I already agree that it is. That said, I see it as being more similar to crimes of institutional omission, like slavery, rather than crimes of institutional commission, like the Holocaust. Saying 40 million > 6 million = the Holocaust is a specious argument, precisely for the three points that I’ve stated, none of which you really addressed.
On point 1, I’m not really sure what you’re referencing–unless you are suggesting that Planned Parenthood belongs on my list of organizations that are actively pushing abortion, in which case, I must agree with you. Otherwise, I see attempts by isolated parts of the American landscape to do this, and not the unified effort made by Nazi Germany to exterminate the Jews. Unless you can give me evidence of an anti-Holocaust movement allowed to freely exist and fight for its goals in Nazi Germany analogous to the pro-life movement in the US, I see no grounds for comparison.
On point two, you have succeeded in showing that there are some people whose statements seem to share similarities with those made by Nazis in authority (though I would like to see some context). But don’t you think that it’s unfair of you to tar and feather all of those who are not pro-life with that brush? That’s like me saying that Pres. Obama’s statements and beliefs represent all Americans, simply because he is American. I still stand by my point that there is genuine ignorance on the issue of when life begins, and honest disagreement on what constitutes personhood. That statement doesn’t apply to everyone (probably doesn’t to those mentioned by you), but it does apply to many.
On point three, I would say, you’re right in the sense that virtually anything can be made right if viewed “from a certain perspective”. Still, I do think that intent, in large part, plays a role in the magnitude of the crime. Certainly, our legal system takes it into account when passing a verdict on a criminal. Also, the goal of those in favor of abortion is irrelevant, unless it is tied with motive. If abortion “terminates” the life of a baby, as I think it does, who cares whether it is done with the end goal of getting Hummers or Priuses?
As for the rest, I can’t argue as to how much of the anti-abortion propaganda I’ve “taken in”, but as I’ve said, the only groups in the abortion debate that you can accuse of being comparable to the Nazis are Planned Parenthood and their ilk–a fringe group that, Presidential pandering notwithstanding, is repudiated by a majority of people, both pro- and anti- abortion.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
I have to disagree
Menlo (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 8:41PM EST (link)The only difference between abortion and the Holocaust is that more people (at least among those capable of saying so) support it. The wide support only perpetuates into more support. I have argued that abortion needs to be prosecuted against the will of the majority if need be.
As I point out below, there is no uncertainty or interpretation about whether or not life exists. That is how it is defined in biology, and there are no other definitions in this context, so there is no chance it might be “wrong.” Those who claim otherwise are either ignorant of basic biology and making up an excuse, or they are lying. Those who resort to the excuses of “sentience” or “personhood” make up or follow an excuse that is no more justifiable than was used for the Holocaust. I do not believe it is hyperbole
“The ultimate touchstone of constitutionality is the Constitution itself and not what we have said about it.” -Felix Frankfurter
In that case, how would you answer the questions that I've asked?
aesthete (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 9:56PM EST (link)If you believe that the only difference between the two is simply that more people support it, then I believe that there are several implications that must be considered: 1) that we are a decidedly more evil nation than Venezuela, Iran, and most Middle Eastern and Latin American countries, all of which have made abortion illegal (or legal only in cases where the mother’s life is at risk).2) That women who have abortions, as analogues to guards in Nazi camps.
If that is true, you would have to believe America an evil country beyond Iran and Venezuela, and you would have to penalize women who have committed these crimes severely, probably terminally. I don’t see any way around that, do you?
I’ve said why I don’t believe the two to be identical: intent, extent of national participation, and the ambiguity of personhood (the third isn’t as relevant to me as the other two). I believe that it is wrong, given what I know (including the biological fact that a “fetus” is alive, and the increasing evidence accumulating in favor of the humanity of the fetus), but I think that slavery is a more apt analogy than the Holocaust for the reasons given.
Thanks for replying so respectfully. I look forward to reading your reply to my reply
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Define "nation?"
Menlo (Diary) Saturday, June 27th at 1:18AM EST (link)Was Germany an evil nation because of the Nazis’ actions? Is Venezuela an evil nation because of its dictator? Is Iran evil because of its officials who act brutally? Was America not evil for its slavery? Evil always was and always will be carried out by some people in every nation.
I do not see the extent of national participation as being at issue in what is being compared. If you do, then slavery is indeed a better analogy. I am comparing action of killing (often through brutal torturous means) and, yes, intent. The intent is, in most cases, to eliminate the child (as opposed to ending pregnancy). Assuming one truly believed it, I would find the “personhood” excuse to be the most cruel and evil justification for abortion imaginable.
“The ultimate touchstone of constitutionality is the Constitution itself and not what we have said about it.” -Felix Frankfurter
woman who have abortions
JHancock (Diary) Monday, June 29th at 11:40AM EST (link)are very similar to Nazi death camp guards. They probably would rather not be put in a situation to choose life or death, but they have a vested interest (freedom from court-martial for the German and Freedom from social and financial responsibility for the mother) to kill. Neither are as culpable as people who make the choice to kill without the coercion of motherhood or regimented military structure (high ranking Nazi’s and Abortion doctors are worse), but neither are blameless by a long shot.
to answer one of your questions
JHancock (Diary) Monday, June 29th at 11:36AM EST (link)yes…I do laugh when America tries to lecture other countries on Ethical Behavior. We are one of the least ethical or moral countries in the world right now. Countries like Iran do participate in violations to human rights in the form of restricting liberty. We do far worse by allowing our citizens to deny unborn children life. In the hierarchy of rights
1)Life
2)Liberty
3)Property
4)Pursuit of Happiness
Countries that don’t allow abortion still have a ways to go to be just countries, but they are further along the road than us.
exceptions and err on the side of life
Common_Cents (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 4:19PM EST (link)I’ve noticed the abortionists nearly always argue the exceptions as the entire basis of their position as well as the left in general on many issues. Secondly, they just plain ignore the life argument.
Common sense would tell us the primary debate should be establishing some consensus on the definition of life. Why? Because then all our laws protecting life kick in. But this debate is ignored.
A successful life is one in which you continually trade your current set of problems in for a lesser set of problems, there is usually no perfect solution. If we could get rid of 95% of the abortions that’d be one heck of a start.
Until we know beyond a shadow of a doubt what life is and when it starts, wouldn’t we err on the side of life? That logic or lack thereof is backwards on this issue in the justice system. Criminals are accused and alleged until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, why don’t we give life the same justice?
I’d like to have every abortionist walk up to a chronological series of fetuses in jars and point out which jar the fetus deserves life. The bodyworlds exhibit had a setup like this, very powerful. At least put the burden on them to make a stand other than some disconnected sterile euphemism of choice.
Obama=Golfer in Chief, Leading from,
behind, the Back Nine.Leaders don’t create movements. Movements create leaders. Get involved. Your future depends on it.
Govt “invests” YOUR tax money for POLITICAL return rather than economic return.
We do
Menlo (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 7:32PM EST (link)It is simple scientific fact when life begins. There is no uncertainty, and it is not a matter of opinion. Biology has a definition for what constitutes a whole and distinct living organism. There are no other definitions without speaking in metaphors, where the context is completely different.
The “science” establishment disregards any genuine misconception in order to push their agenda of correcting “misconceptions” on evolution, global warming, and experiments on humans.
“The ultimate touchstone of constitutionality is the Constitution itself and not what we have said about it.” -Felix Frankfurter
You're asking the wrong question.
illustrator Friday, June 26th at 8:35PM EST (link)There has never been a debate as to wether the fetus is alive. The question is if it is a child. Different people come to that decision by different means. You have every right to come to the conclusion through interpretation of your faith that a fetus is a child… but you do not have the right to dictate your views to other people.
This is why secular logic must be used to determine reproduction rights. Using only one religious viewpoint is not only unconstitutional, it is unethical.
I hope that makes some kind of sense to you. I’d be happy to discuss it further.
Troll alert
Menlo (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 8:54PM EST (link)I almost responded before seeing illustrator’s “history.”
“The ultimate touchstone of constitutionality is the Constitution itself and not what we have said about it.” -Felix Frankfurter
I don't think it is a child either
Jack_Savage (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 8:59PM EST (link)“There has never been a debate as to wether the fetus is alive. The question is if it is a child.”
I think the fetus is a lizard. Yeah, a lizard. Hell, who cares about lizards?
Translation: "I'd be happy to explain why you're wrong."
Moe Lane (Diary) Friday, June 26th at 9:13PM EST (link)Sorry, Sparky, but you’re not interesting enough to make the first cut. Nothing personal.
The Kim Kardashian of blogging.
Check out my blog at http://moelane.com/.
http://moelane.com/filthy-lucre-filthy-lucre/
http://twitter.com/moelane
My (combined) wish list.
not a religious view
JHancock (Diary) Wednesday, July 1st at 10:42AM EST (link)actually an ethical medical one
do no harm
Hippocratic Oath–because we can’t prove when a fetus is or isn’t a person we need to err on the side of doing no harm–abortion docs throw the Hippocratic Oath under the bus. We do need to err on the side of life, lest anyone say we are doing harm…and no I’m not Catholic…just a conscientious Medical Student
Who, by the way was adopted from a teem pregnancy.
My mother was told to abort by her Doctor, family, friends, school councilor, and preacher….she decided to err on the side of life and respect the rights of the “possible person” inside of her.