Enough with the endless abortion euphemisms

I thought “reproductive choice” meant choosing whether or not to conceive, not whether or not to destroy a child already conceived.

I thought “reproductive health” meant fixing faulty reproductive systems and ensuring healthy pregnancies, not puncturing uteruses and the skulls of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

And how I wish “feminism” meant fighting for equal rights, not for special exemptions from fetal homicide laws. (Existing fetal homicidal laws make a man guilty of manslaughter if he kills the baby in a mother’s womb, except in the case of abortion.)

euphemism-misc1

“We hear that abortion is fundamentally about a woman’s right to reproductive freedom. Or abortion is a litmus test for judicial nominees. Or abortion is symptomatic of what’s wrong with the social discourse in America. But none of those things is what abortion really is. Abortion is the intentional killing of unborn children.”

–Jon Bloom in Relentlessly Call Abortion What It Really Is

As much as abortion clinic counselors want to tell women that abortion is but the removal of clumps of cells, tissues, and at best “fetal matter” (watch real video footage of Planned Parenthood feeding women with misinformation and blatant lies), here’s what actual abortionists have said:

“Even now I feel a little peculiar about it, because as a physician I was trained to conserve life, and here I am destroying it.” –Dr. Benjamin Kalish

“We know that it’s killing, but the state permits killing under certain circumstances.” –Dr. Neville Sender

“In one room, you encourage the patient that the slight irregularity in the fetal heart is not important, that she is going to have a fine, healthy baby. Then, in the next room you assure another woman, on whom you just did a saline abortion, that it is a good thing that the heartbeat is already irregular . . . she will not have a live baby.” –Dr. John Szenes

“After twenty weeks, where it frankly is a child to me, I really agonize over it because the potential is so imminently there.” –Dr. James McMahon

The killing of babies can be tolerated, even championed as a human right, as long as we shroud it with euphemisms and avoid calling it what it is. Where are the honest politicians and protesters chanting, “We demand the right to decide which of our children to kill!”? Let us stand guard, lest our conscience be dulled by mere rhetoric.

euphemism

Advertisements

79 thoughts on “Enough with the endless abortion euphemisms”

  1. Thanks for liking my blog.You are on my list of follows.
    What Evil Doers like to do is “Sugar Coat.” They change a word like “Bomb” to “Protective Reaction” to lull one into thinking that something is Mainstream.
    Like “Marriage Equality” hiding a “Legalized Sodomist Union”, it is a matter of Semantics for Deception.

    God Bless You!

    M

    Like

  2. I don’t know if you’ve heard this one – but the single most pervasive and offensive one to me is when people call a baby a “parasite” and equate it to ringworm or tapeworm infestation. This just makes me nauseous. Nobody seems to get that in hardening our hearts to the most innocent in our society, we have brought the changes in morality necessary for the depravity and violence we now claim to deplore to flourish – since all human life is no longer sacred when a mother can murder her child, and worse a doctor can assist.
    Even the Roman Empire – as cruel and barbaric as they were, as frivolous with life as they could be, had very strict laws protecting the unborn. They would not beat or execute a pregnant woman no matter that her crime because the child was innocent. Hard to imagine we have lost even that last shred of decency as we have anthropologically regressed since the 1960’s/70’s. If you realize you are lost then you retrace your steps until you know you are on the right path -and then take the right one where you made the wrong turn. It’s time we accepted that this is not the right path and got back on track. Just my 2 cents – thanks for listening 🙂

    Colin
    http://catholichusband.wordpress.com

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I agree. It always shocks me to hear women likening an unborn child to a parasite or worse, though thankfully I’ve only heard this one once, likening the child to a rapist using a woman’s body against her will. Not only has the child been dehumanized, he/she has been demonized.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I completely agree. And while unfortunately I’ve experienced abortion (against my will), I thought of my baby as a baby from the moment I discovered I was pregnant, and have never thought of my baby in any other light. And even though it pains me so much to hear the rhetoric of pro-lifers (e.g. crushing skulls, baby feeling pain, etc.) I know that this is the truth without sugar coating. It’s hard to accept that my child was a victim of that. But I am starting to really want to take that truth and go out and stand up for the most innocent members of our society. This is an inspiring article and comments.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Dear Ashley, thank you so much for sharing your story. I’m so sorry you (and your baby) had to go through that. Forced abortions multiply the cruelty that is abortion, but know that there is healing in Christ for all who have had abortions (forced or voluntary). You are a strong woman, and your love for the young and vulnerable is inspirational. May God use you to speak Truth!

          Liked by 1 person

      1. I wouldn’t be surprised if a shift towards more honest politicians occurs.

        Have you heard of all the issues surrounding the mayor up this way in Toronto, Canada? Alcoholism, drug use, personal attacks and sexual comments caught on video. You’d never think that he’d still be the leading candidate to be elected next election.

        His visible faults seem to resonate with people though, he can’t hide who he really is like other politicians do. I think it goes to show how fed up people are becoming with politics and deceptive sugar-coating of agendas.

        Like

  3. Karen,

    This was so well-written, as so many of the other comments have stated.

    There are so many moral arguments against abortion, which you have pointed out are so much easier to say when it is called what it really is and not hidden under smooth words.

    I would like to add an another point to what you have already stated. So many of the judicial rulings on abortion since Roe v Wade are confusion. And we know that God is not the author of confusion.

    As you pointed out, if someone murders a mother and her unborn child, that person is charged with two counts of murder, not one. But murder the child in an abortion clinic and it is legal. Confusion,

    I remember a case a few years ago where a woman in Oregon was convicted of child abuse because she was using crack while she was pregnant and it harmed her unborn baby. My guess is that hers is not an isolated case. But if she had gone to an abortion clinic and murdered her child, it would not have been child abuse. Confusion.

    There was another case in Delaware some years ago where a young mother dumped her baby into a dumpster at a rest stop and the baby died. She had given birth to only a short time before (no more than a few hours, if I recall correctly). She was rightly convicted of murder. But had she gone to an abortion clinic the day before and convinced them that her life was in danger if she delivered her baby (and in her frame of mind, it would not have been difficult to do that), the baby would have been murdered without any legal repercussion. Confusion.

    In the week before Jesus, Himself, was murdered, he told a parable about those who helped the downtrodden and those who did not, and how it reflected on their relationship with Christ. But He could have just as easily chosen to tell the parable about those who deliberately hurt the downtrodden and those who did not.

    In that context and in the context of abortion, these words of the Lord are chilling and sobering: “… Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me. (Matthew 25:40)

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Very well written. Very very true! Abortion sickens me. I dealt with infertility until I was forced into a radical hysterectomy because of uterine cancer. I would have given anything for the blessing these women are killing. Murder is murder. I do not understand how someone can live with themselves when they kill an innocent child. I had a friend who before we met had an abortion. She has had nightmares about her baby. She knows it was a baby boy. A BABY BOY!!!! She was very young with no parental guidance, that is not excuse, she has horrible regrets and wishes everyday that he were here. It saddens and sickens me at the same time. ~Hope

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Extracting a fetus, piece by piece, was bad for my sleep. Depression clouded my office on days when I had an abortion scheduled. My pulse raced after giving the local anesthetic. Although I still felt sorry for the unmarried 20-year-old college junior, I felt increasing anger toward the married couples who requested abortions because a law firm partnership was imminent, or house remodeling was incomplete, or even because summer travel tickets were paid for.” –Dr. George Flesh, former abortionist

      (http://liveactionnews.org/former-abortionist-extracting-a-fetus-piece-by-piece-was-bad-for-my-sleep/)

      Like

  5. There’s what abortion literally is and what it means to people. Both matter in the discussion, I think. Many of the women I know strongly desire the option of an abortion, but, even more strongly, seek to plan their lives so that an abortion never happens. To them, having an unused option, repugnant though it may seem, matters. Of course that doesn’t settle the question; it’s just another point …

    I can’t remember, but some prominent feminist took a similar abortion definition to yours and continued to support it. That’s something that would make me queasy to say, but it is honest.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. The fact that abortion is such a hot topic of debate these days is appalling. How abortion ever came to pass without a drastic over population problem I have no idea, though it would seem to me that the engine of abortion is truly the economic side of it. Without such powerful potential to generate money I don’t see any amount of women’s “rights” as a legitimate reason to legalize abortion. It makes no sense.

    As someone from the left, in my social circles I regularly am scolded for being pro-life. It’s incredible. Good dissection of an argument built on sand.

    Oh, and there will never be honest politicians 😉

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I agree. Thankfully, former abortionists, former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, and pro-life groups like Live Action are doing a great job of exposing the ugly truths of the abortion industry. I also see many pro-life everyday joes on Twitter responding to Planned Parenthood’s shamefully ironic tweets about championing women’s health, rights, etc. It’s just a matter of time before this industry is entirely discredited (and not by defamation, but by truth).

      Like

      1. I certainly hope so.

        I think, though, the entire issue holds an eerie resemblance to the world’s oil industry. Or, at least in the way that politicians, and often the public, handle the two issues. In the same way that science has confirmed human induced climate change due to our obsession with oil, science has confirmed that abortion is, in fact, killing a child. Yet, economic growth is still the king of concern in America, and many other countries as well.

        Like

  7. As a pro-choicer, I understand that the goal of the pro-life movement is to treat fetuses with love and respect, but you’ve got to understand that if you give a fetus the right to life, you’re basically enslaving the woman in whose body that fetus is growing, and if she harms the fetus at all, or ends up miscarrying it, birthing it prematurely, or ends up with a stillborn baby, she’ll be charged with the death of that fetus. And, since miscarriages, premature births, and stillbirths don’t always have cut-and-dry explanations behind them, it will often be extremely hard to prove that a woman didn’t intentionally kill the fetus. The woman will have to be constantly paranoid about what she eats, drinks, and does with her life, since she’ll constantly be afraid that she’ll be charged with murdering or harming the fetus inside of her. She won’t be able to live a happy, care-free life at all. Basically, the fetus inside of her will be ruling her life.

    Seriously, how can you be okay with that sort of a mindset, and how can you be okay with controlling women in that way? I understand that you care about fetuses, but why not care about women as well? (And no, forcing women through pregnancy and childbirth—which is what you’re doing, since you’re taking away the ability for a woman to choose not to go through with her pregnancy—is not caring at all, no matter how much you claim it is.)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I appreciate your right to stand on your own opinion, but I hope you will be able to understand that you are basing your beliefs on at least one false premise. At no point has it ever been contemplated to take legal action against a woman who has a miscarriage or delivers a stillborn baby, and few things are more doable than determining whether a child has been intentionally aborted. I do hope you will make the effort to do a bit of research so that you can ground your opinion in actual fact. In any case, I can assure you that God loves you unconditionally, even if you’ve had one or more abortions, and I respect your right to hold your own opinions.

      Like

      1. Actually, women have been jailed for miscarriages and stillbirths before, in countries that are less lenient about abortion than the US is:

        http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/10/18/el_salvador_abortion_ban_women_are_showing_up_at_public_hospitals_while.html

        And it’s starting to happen here in the US as well:

        http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/07/01/256823/pregnant-women-criminal-charges/
        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mom-arrested-after-utah-stillbirth/
        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jun/24/america-pregnant-women-murder-charges

        So what exactly were you saying?

        And how is it possible to know whether or not a miscarriage or stillbirth was self-inflicted? There aren’t always obvious signs. There are many types of “at-home abortions” that involve ingesting large amounts of birth control pills or overdosing on Vitamin C. Do you think that every woman out there who has a miscarriage or stillbirth should be considered to be a potential criminal until it’s proven that she didn’t cause the death of the fetus?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. No, of course I don’t consider a woman who has a miscarriage or stillbirth to be a potential criminal. That would be contrary to all the principles of law in the United States. Of the links you have provided, only CBS is a reasonably unbiased source. The story they reported of a Utah woman whose baby died because she refused a procedure that would leave her with a scar indicates that she was charged, but not that she was convicted, although it does note that she signed an admission that she knew she was killing her child with her decision.

          I don’t argue matters of personal belief, and I have already recommended that you re-think your position. Beyond that, I wish you well and I assure you again that God loves you, no matter what. I will be giving you prayer cover for a mind and a heart that are open to the love and the truth of the Living God. The Truth has a name, and there is power in that Name.

          Like

    2. Since there has already been replies and discounting of your “evidence”.that there is even minimal risk of a woman being charged with a crime because she miscarried or because the baby was premature or stillborn, I will respond to the other points that you made.

      Regarding your use of the word “enslavement”, I will grant that there could be an element of involuntary servitude in the case of rape. According to the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-choice organization founded under the auspices of Planned Parenthood) and the Federal Government’s CDC, less than 1% of abortions occur in the case of a pregnancy resulting from rape.

      For the other 99+% of abortions, those women already exercised a choice. What you call enslavement, I call living with the consequences of their choice. I have had to live with consequences of many choices I made in life, whether it was not working as hard as I could have in college to get good grades, or choosing the wrong people as business or romantic partners. I have suffered many years as a result of those choices, far longer than nine months. I have never looked for the government or any individual to bail me out or compensate me for some serious financial and emotional consequences of my decisions.

      If that sounds mean-spirited at first, such a conclusion is nullified by a simple fact: a pregnant woman is sacrificing nine months of her life as a result of an unwanted pregnancy. The aborted baby has sacrificed an entire lifetime, was totally innocent in the matter, and had no choice in it. There’s no comparison.

      Yes, it is a BABY. And remember that “fetus” is simply the Latin word for baby, but using it is another attempt to cover up the brutal fact that it is babies who are being murdered Just look at the ultrasound pictures of a developing baby. Well within the first trimester (by week 10 at least), the in utero baby clearly looks like a human newborn baby. No wonder pro-abortion politicians in NJ sponsored a bill four years ago that would have prohibited crisis pregnancy centers from owning ultrasound machines.

      http://www.parents.com/pregnancy/stages/fetal-development/first-trimester-images-of-your-developing-baby/#page=13

      I would have more respect for the so-called pro-choice side if they were really about providing women with an informed choice, like providing information on the number of women who suffer PTSD, depression and other repercussions later in life as a consequence of having an abortion, or diligently protecting women who were forced into having an abortion (i.e., it was not the mother’s choice) as was posted by a woman earlier in this thread and happens (according to best estimates) about half the time. Of course, it is very inconvenient for Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations to keep statistics of these very real situations, so they don’t.

      Like

      1. How did anyone discount the stories I linked to? All Nanci Flynn did was disregard the majority of them just because she thought my sources were biased. That’s not the same thing as discounting them.

        And are you saying that, just because the minority of pregnancies happen as a result of rape, that means that it’s okay to ignore women who are pregnant as a result of rape? Just because something doesn’t happen often, that doesn’t mean that it’s okay to ignore the times it does happen. And the fact that you want to brush aside the cases of rape pregnancies is sickening to me. These are real, actual women that you’re brushing aside, and they’ve just been raped. How can you possibly think that the way you’re treating those women is okay at all?

        Also, are you saying that pregnancy should be some sort of a punishment (or “consequence,” as you put it, but it’s obvious that you’re using “consequence” as a synonym for “punishment”) for having sex irresponsibly? You do realize that plenty of unplanned pregnancies result from responsible sex, since the contraceptives didn’t work the way they were supposed to, don’t you? Do you think those responsible women should be punished, too?

        And since when is it a smart idea at all to punish an irresponsible woman by forcing her into a situation that she obviously isn’t responsible enough to deal with? I mean, if a woman isn’t even responsible enough to use birth control, what makes you think she’s responsible enough to gestate a child for nine months without harming it? Have you thought this through at all?

        You know, your attitude on abortion is not compassionate in the least. I mean, Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines “compassion” as “sympathetic consciousness of others’ distress together with a desire to alleviate it.” Not only are you not sympathetic to the distress of a woman with an unplanned pregnancy, but if she knows that getting an abortion would alleviate her distress, you don’t care, which is entirely uncompassionate of you. So are you okay with the fact that you’re uncompassionate?

        Also, abortion, in and of itself, does not lead to PTSD, depression, or any other emotional disorder. Here’s proof:

        http://siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureID=1984
        http://women.webmd.com/news/20000822/study-says-most-women-dont-regret-abortion
        http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/index.aspx
        http://www.1in3campaign.org/
        http://www.imnotsorry.net/
        http://www.45millionvoices.org/index.html

        Please stop lying. I know you anti-choicers love to lie because you realize, deep down, that the facts are not on your side, but at least try not to do it so much.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Dear quietdove, I doubt ts4j thinks we should “ignore” women who are pregnant as a result of rape. Pointing out that less than 1% of abortion is from rape is simply to highlight that all we shouldn’t base all discourses on the morality of abortion on the rape exception. Former abortionist Dr. George Flesh is right to differentiate crisis pregnancy clients and those requesting abortions out of callous convenience (e.g. “because a law firm partnership was imminent, or house remodeling was incomplete, or even because summer travel tickets were paid for”). For the former, which includes rape victims, I totally agree that compassion and sensitivity is particularly important. But both pro-lifers and pro-choicers should honestly examine with abortion, a so-called quick fix, is a healthy solution for the mother. Like Lila Rose says, abortion doesn’t un-rape a woman, and adds violence on top of another violence that’s been committed on her. This is something I’ve been wanting to address in a separate post of its own, but have delayed because I want to make sure I’m sensitive to the complexities of these women’s circumstances. For the far greater number of ‘convenience abortions’ that happen every day, I do believe we need to address these atrocities with an honest look at what abortion truly does, i.e. end a human life, and weigh it against the woman’s motivation.

          And lastly, I understand that many pro-choicers (like yourself) genuinely care about the well-being of the mother, but we must be aware that on the other extreme, there are those with a vested interest in increasing the number of abortions for profit (e.g. Planned Parenthood), and they tend to not present crisis pregnancy moms with their full options. For example, PP has time and again been caught not reporting statutory rape — how does that protect vulnerable young women? They essentially perform an abortion and send these girls right back into the arms of their abusers. Pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike should be outraged by people making money off vulnerable women.

          Undercover video footage: http://www.liveaction.org/monalisa/

          Top searches for “planned parenthood statutory rape”:
          http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/12/08/planned-parenthood-caught-covering-up-statutory-rape/
          http://www.lifenews.com/2011/09/22/police-want-records-in-planned-parenthood-statutory-rape-case/
          http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/13/Planned-Parenthood-Exposed-Probably-Won-t-Report-Statutory-Rape
          http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/21/planned-parenthood-forced-to-settle-suit-failed-to-report-child-rape/
          http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/18/abortion-practitioner-failed-to-report-statutory-rape-of-13-year-old-girl/
          http://liveaction.org/blog/louisiana-abortion-clinics-show-that-failure-to-report-child-rape-isnt-uncommon-in-reproductive-health-care-industry/

          (One might say that these are “biased” sources, but you just can’t make up police reports and investigations. Also, one would be hard pressed to find liberal media coverage of anything that discredits the abortion industry.)

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Stop blindly believing everything that Lila Rose and LiveAction tell you to believe and try actually fact-checking their claims, since most of them have ended up being completely untrue. Here’s proof:

            http://www.exposeliveaction.com/media.html
            http://antigoneawakens.com/2012/07/14/lies-lies-and-more-lies-aka-live-action-needs-better-fact-checkers/
            http://amplifyyourvoice.org/u/hannahology/2013/05/30/live-action-lies
            http://mediamatters.org/tags/live-action

            Tell me, why do you think it’s okay to blindly believe in outright lies?

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I have definitely come across articles denouncing Live Action’s work, such as those you have linked. In response, I go back to review the clips I’ve watched. Each edited clip comes with a link to raw, unedited footage. I watch these unedited ones as well. So far, all of them show “counseling sessions” that totally fall short of the image the benign image Planned Parenthood tries to portray in public. Have you viewed these for yourself?

              Like

              1. What makes you so sure that the “raw,” “unedited” footage actually is raw and unedited? Seems to me like you’re just blindly believing it is. And what makes you think that that footage was actually shot at a Planned Parenthood? For all you know, it could have been shot on a set that was made to look like a Planned Parenthood. You have zero actual proof that those videos are real, and I have plenty of proof that LiveAction is known for lying. So why do you want to blindly believe that you’re right and I’m wrong when the proof is stacked against you?

                Liked by 1 person

                  1. Okay, so there’s one Planned Parenthood clinic out there that had unethical employees. So what? That doesn’t mean anything about the other thousands of Planned Parenthood clinics.

                    Liked by 1 person

                  2. Also, what about the millions of women who have had positive experiences at Planned Parenthood clinics? Why do you seem to be determined to ignore those women?

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. Yes, so at least one Planned Parenthood clinic. I restate what I said earlier: Planned Parenthood never once issued a statement that Live Action fabricated those footages. I also want to bring to the table clinic practices that have necessitated police investigations, those put under probation, and those that have closed down following malpractice violations. I won’t even link these reports, because you can easily find them online. These verified instances, though not in the thousands, give us reason to be concerned and vigilant. And yes, I agree that you can’t entirely demonize Planned Parenthood. I believe that many women have reported positive experiences. I support services that genuinely promote women’s health like mammograms and pap smears. I’m just saying that just as it’s good for you to remind me to not consider only negative reports in forming my assessment of PP, I am also reminding you to not consider only positive reports in forming your assessment of PP. Everybody is vulnerable to confirmation bias based on our ideologies, but we should try our best and help one another to be critically informed. I hope this is at least one thing we can agree on.

                      Like

        2. Dear Quietdove,

          First of all, “discount” does not mean “disprove”. Words have meanings. Since I knew my post would be long, I was merely referring to the fact that a pro-life person had already responded to it and rebutted it. Therefore, I did not need to rehash that point.

          Second, Karenzai is absolutely correct that I do not ignore the plight of women who were raped and became pregnant. I acknowledged as much when I began my comments on the topic. The point is that because a group of women deserve additional consideration does not mean that should set the policy for the vast majority who were not raped.

          In fact. I do not brush aside rape victims at all, whether they became pregnant or not, whether they decided to carry their baby to term (and many do) or not. I can only try to imagine what they have suffered and been through, because it did not happen to me. But I can have empathy for rape victims because I am their sisters in the broader sense.

          What you do not know, Quietdove, is that my mother was raped (before I was born). She did not become pregnant, but it still had a lifelong negative impact on her life. And that impact was passed down and affected me because it had a negative influence on my romantic relationships as well as her willingness to accept some of my partners.

          You also do not know that one of my aunts (again years before I was born), ran into medical difficulties with her first pregnancy. Since she and her husband were Catholic, they went to a Catholic hospital. At some point, her condition became life-threatening. The doctors told my aunt and uncle that they could save her or the baby, but not both. However, they would not take the life of the baby because it was against the religious beliefs of the Catholic faith to do so.

          My uncle took her out of that hospital and had her admitted to a hospital that would respect their choice to take the life of the baby to save the mother. My aunt survived to have two healthy babies after that. And I respect that decision made in horrific circumstances when the mother’s life truly is in danger and only one life can be saved. I thank God I was never in that position to have to make that kind of decision.

          At the same time, I do not brush aside the uncounted women who are forced into an abortion they don’t want by a man in their life; a father who threatens to throw her out of home; a boyfriend who makes it clear that he will not support the child, even though he fathered it; a husband who makes her life miserable at home until she submits. Where is the defense of the women’s choice then?

          You have your surveys. I live in the liberal northeast (near NYC), nowhere near the Bible belt. I have talked to a number of women of various ages, races, and religious backgrounds who suffer from nightmares, depression and PTSD (diagnosed) even decades after their abortions. I know about the crisis pregnancy centers that cannot get enough qualified counselors to deal with the number of such women seeking solace and healing because of these reactions.

          Nor do I consider carrying a baby to term punishment. Living up to one’s responsibility to do the right thing for another human being is never a punishment. It is an opportunity to become a better person and make the world a better place. That is just as true, if not more so, for the fathers. It is reprehensible when men leave all the responsibility for birth control (which I am in favor of, by the way) in the hands of their female partner. It is even more reprehensible when they do not take financial responsibility for the child they created. If I could change biology and make them share the physical aspects of the pregnancy, I would.

          But the plain fact is that I cannot change biology. Nor can I change the fact that a human life has been created. Once created, that human being has a right to a life, and it should take extraordinary circumstances (such as I described above with my aunt) to bring that life to an end, not the normal, everyday circumstances of abortion on demand.

          We were all irresponsible and immature at one time or another in our life. And yes, there were times when I was grateful that my parents or some other adult in my life took mercy on me. But there were other times, especially if my actions caused someone else to be hurt in some way, that I was made to face up to what I had done. Looking back, I now know that my parents never punished me. But with love they had to chastise and correct me on a number of occasions. No favor is done to a person who never has to face the consequences of their actions. That is a formula for arrested development.

          As a Christian who knows that it is only through God’s mercy that my sins are forgiven, I am well aware of the blessing of mercy in my life. But I am also aware that forgiveness did not always absolve me of the consequences of what I did. Unfortunately that is a part of life, and it isn’t only when it is the result of sin. Sometimes it is merely poor judgment that has nothing immoral about it.

          I suffered over ten years of living through extreme poverty because I made a poor business decision. I did it for the right reason. A company where I worked for about 8 years had changed their business practices and started doing immoral (and I later learned, illegal) things. (The government shut them down three years after I left and the owner was sent to jail for many years.) Unfortunately, I choose the wrong option to go to (from a business standpoint, not a moral one).

          For most of those ten years, I was technically bankrupt and could have filed for bankruptcy protection at any time. I was able to hold out against that idea, even though it meant dealing with constant phone calls and letters from bill collectors and others I owed money to. Today, I am debt free, except for the monthly balance on credit cards that will be paid in full by the due date. I know I am a better person because I didn’t take the easy way out. And I believe most people become better when they face up to responsibilities often.

          Quietdove, I am 61 years old. My mother was 37 when I was born. So I come from a time when my parents’ generation had far less reliable ways of preventing pregnancy and unwanted pregnancies were more common. Let me tell you the story of people I have compassion for.

          When I was growing up, my parents were friends with a couple of similar age. The wife was a distant cousin of my dad and the husband worked for the same company. He did not want to have children and his wife was willing to go along with that, though it wasn’t what she wanted.

          Then she became pregnant. They had a little girl. Soon she was the apple of her father’s eye and the mother was thrilled that they had a child despite their plans otherwise.

          When the little girl was four years old, she came down with a serious illness and died. It happened around Veterans Day. Every year until they moved out of the NYC area, they came up and visited us on the weekend closest to Veterans Day. Before they moved, it was just too much for them to stay in that apartment with the memories it brought back. Rather than visit different people each year, they choose us (for over ten consecutive years) because they knew we were a compassionate, understanding family. And especially that was what my mother, my role model, was: compassionate.

          I have suffered many things in my own life. I thank God that it has made me more compassionate towards others who suffer, not bitter. In a situation where two suffering people are involved, I have compassion towards both. But if only one can be helped, as a rule the scales are tipped in favor of the one who is the most helpless and the most innocent. It is not saying that one person is bad and the other good. It is saying that one has greater needs and less resources to meet those needs. Or it might be saying that one had less of a hand in creating the situation. In the case of a unborn baby, both apply to that baby. That is why I defend that baby’s right to be born.

          I will give you one more example of my compassion and respect for others. I have now written two lengthy comments in opposition to many of the opinions you stated. Did I ever attack you personally? And did you extend me the same courtesy?

          Like

            1. Until you can find me a study that says that 100% of women who have been raped feel that abortion is the wrong choice for them, or a study that says that 100% of women who have gotten an abortion after being raped ended up regretting it, you have no place at all in saying that abortion shouldn’t be available to any woman who’s been raped. Different women react to rape in different ways, and for some women, it would indeed be therapeutic for them to get an abortion if the rape leaves them pregnant.

              Oh, and also, just FYI, since that article implies that all women who get an abortion eventually regret it, here’s proof that that’s not even close to being true:

              http://siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureID=1984
              http://women.webmd.com/news/20000822/study-says-most-women-dont-regret-abortion
              http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/index.aspx
              http://www.1in3campaign.org/
              http://www.imnotsorry.net/
              http://www.45millionvoices.org/index.html

              Like

              1. Quietdove, what I said was that cases of rape pregnancies calls for a different approach from the >99% of other unplanned pregnancies. And no, there will never be a study claiming that 100% of raped women don’t want abortion/regret abortion. Such results would instantly scream bogus, or at least flawed methodology. Just as there will never be a study claiming that 100% want abortion and benefit from abortion. All this study tells us is that for this study’s sample of women impregnated from rape, a large majority didn’t want abortion, and/or regretted abortion. This is based on that particular sample. What we can get from this is a reminder that there are women in such cases who defy the common assumption that abortion is a solution. There are also many testimonies of the redemptive experience birthing a child from rape. Probably not as many as you might demand to see, but still, they’re real women with real valuable insight about the path less taken, if only the pro-choice side wasn’t so adamant on shushing their voices. My purpose of sharing the study wasn’t to disprove or invalidate other studies that show women apparently benefiting from abortion. I’m trying to say, in this particular discussion, is that our society would do well to critically re-examine the often too pervasive assumption that abortion is a solution/quick fix in the case of rape. It’s my hope that the well-meaning individuals supporting a woman through such a traumatic episode of her life would not jump to the conclusion that just because she abhors the rapist (who should be duly punished for his crime), she wants the innocent baby destroyed. Having said that, I think all important and relevant points have been brought up, and I’d like to close this particular discussion. Thank you for taking the time to voice your thoughts and opinions.

                Like

            1. You do realize that statutory rape is completely consensual, don’t you? The fact that it’s known as a type of rape is a complete misnomer. In many states, it’s considered to be statutory rape when a 16-year-old has sex with an 18-year-old. And why should Planned Parenthood clinics have to report a consensual relationship between two people who are very close in age? Not everyone is as much of a meddling busybody as you are, you know.

              As for Jill Stanek, a few years ago she outright bullied a woman who “live-tweeted” about her abortion. Here’s proof:

              http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2010/02/live_tweeting_a.html (That’s just one of ten (yes, TEN) blog entries that Ms. Stanek wrote about this woman. I highly suggest you check them all out so that you can see just how deranged Ms. Stanek really is.)

              So I wouldn’t use her as a trustworthy source of information at all. (Unless you see nothing wrong with bullying, that is.)

              Like

              1. Before I close this particular discussion, I want to point out that statutory rape is a far larger can of worms than you suggest. You may be okay with a 16-year-old having consensual sex with an 18-year-old, but I believe you wouldn’t feel the same about a teenager impregnated by her own father, a 13-year-old having sexual relations with a man in his twenties and even 30s, etc… Laws requiring Planned Parenthood to report such cases are not meant to shame the female victim, but to protect her. In such cases, the older man sends her for an abortion to cover up his crime, and if the clinic doesn’t make a report, they essentially sends her back to her abuser.

                These are a few of the many reports pointing at PP’s repeated failures to report statutory rape. I hope you see the dangerous nature of such a practice (none of these instances is merely about a 16-year-old sleeping with an 18-year-old):

                http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/12/08/planned-parenthood-caught-covering-up-statutory-rape/
                http://www.lifenews.com/2011/09/22/police-want-records-in-planned-parenthood-statutory-rape-case/
                http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/13/Planned-Parenthood-Exposed-Probably-Won-t-Report-Statutory-Rape
                http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/21/planned-parenthood-forced-to-settle-suit-failed-to-report-child-rape/
                http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/18/abortion-practitioner-failed-to-report-statutory-rape-of-13-year-old-girl/
                http://liveaction.org/blog/louisiana-abortion-clinics-show-that-failure-to-report-child-rape-isnt-uncommon-in-reproductive-health-care-industry/

                The undercover video footage is truly alarming. You’ll see Planned Parenthood employees telling the 13-year-old girl (actress) not to disclose the age of her 20-something boyfriend, another one instructing her on how to hide it from her mother, and another one instructing her to go to another state where there are no parental consent laws for minors: http://www.liveaction.org/monalisa/

                Finally, we should also be wary about the concept of “consensuality”. It’s not always so black and white. Non-consensual sex isn’t always about an unwilling participant being physically pinned down and forced into having sex. Coerced sex and extorted sex are also non-consensual (e.g. a girl being threatened by physical/emotional/psychologically abused to have sex, a girl blackmailed into having sexual relations). And if a 13-year-old girl claims to be unfazed by her sexual relations with a 30-year-old man, and even wants to protect him from being arrested, you can bet that that man is taking advantage of her innocence.

                Quietdove, all this information is not meant to attack the pro-choice position. These are things about which both pro-lifers and pro-choicers should be outraged, and should demand justice.

                Again, thank you for taking the time to voice your opinions and concerns.

                Like

  8. The issue ends up being whether there is sanctity of life. If there is, which I believe there is, then does anyone have the right to terminate that life, regardless of how it was conceived?? Isn’t the precious baby always the one innocent party? It hardly seems fair that the baby should then be the one to pay the ultimate price of their life.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. I found the discussion in the comments to be highly educational, even more than the article itself. Not so much the “war between the HTML links” (hey, anyone can cherry-pick to confirm their own bias), but the opinions expressed.
    I appreciate the efforts of all who contributed to that.

    As far as the article itself, there is a problem with objecting to euphemisms on one side only. If you want unvarnished accuracy, you have to accept it when it exists from the opposite point-of-view. “Miscarriage” is a euphemism too. If every fertilized egg cell is the same thing as a baby, then “miscarriage” is baby killing. You can’t call it things like “early pregnancy loss” any more. If you believe pregnancy is God’s will, then you’ll have to accept that losing a pregnancy is God’s will also, and that God killed your baby, or decided you weren’t worthy to have it.

    I don’t believe any of those terrible things I just suggested. I also don’t believe a potential human being is EXACTLY the same thing as a human being that has exited the womb, or that can survive on its own. Viability confers a status that non-viability can’t and shouldn’t. If you start granting legal rights on the basis of things that haven’t happened yet, you have to be consistent about that too. All the unlicensed drivers must be considered equal, since they MIGHT at some future time become licensed. All the unmarrieds too, and the undocumented, to say nothing of the unskilled. That’s the endgame if you start giving rights to an “un”. Hope that something will happen isn’t a guarantee.

    Using scientific terms for different stages during human gestation is not euphemism. Each term like zygote, embryo and fetus has attendant factual, measurable characteristics. It’s too bad that by comparison the word “baby” is colloquial and euphemistic. It’s ambiguous enough that persons on both sides of this argument try to claim their definition as the only true one. No dictionary or reference book in the world defines a human before birth as a “baby” without an adjective like “unborn” or “premature” for clarification. But if you believe that a fertilized egg is exactly the same thing as a neonate, there’s no way to communicate or reach consensus, because the entire cycle of growth and development is reduced to the single euphemism “baby”.

    Perhaps there are proper uses for euphemisms, and improper uses.

    Like

    1. Yes, a miscarriage is the death of an unborn baby, a very young child. But I wouldn’t call it “killing” because it was by no person’s agency that the child died. An “induced miscarriage”, however, is abortion/killing.

      It is interesting that you bring up miscarriage. We grief with a mother mourning the loss of a child through miscarriage. No one says it was just a clump of cells, or tissues, or that it wasn’t even human yet. It is highly inconsistent to mourn the loss of a life in the case of miscarriage, but not in an abortion. Or worse, applaud another woman’s courage for willfully terminating the life inside of her.

      I agree that using scientific terms is not “euphemism”. “Fetus” is a Latin word equivalent to our English word, “baby”. It is unfortunate that we have allowed pro-choicers and pro-aborts to hijack the term and use it to create social constructs that dehumanize the unborn child. And consider a popular medical definition of fetus: the unborn offspring from the end of the eighth week after conception (when the major structures have formed) until birth. All major structures have formed. Yet Planned Parenthood counselors have been caught on tape telling young women that a fetus is but a clump of tissues.

      Like

    2. Mikey,

      I appreciate your thoughtful, even tempered post. There are a few points on which I would respectfully disagree. (And I am aware that in your third paragraph you backed away from some of the ideas you posed in the second paragraph.)

      First of all, I understand that there are those who do not approach the topic from a Biblical perspective. But for those who do use the Bible as their authority and have a more complete knowledge of Scripture, there is an understanding that while there are some things that God allows to happen, He is not the causative agent of all things. While God is ultimately in control of all things, He has given man free will, even to rebel against God, even though it grieves God when mankind does so. And part of that rebellion has given Satan and evil a foothold in this earth, to such an extent that Satan is called the Prince of this world. And again, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

      When Satan gained that foothold, corruption and death also entered in for the first time. Thus, our bodies were affected: birth defects, sickness, infirmity, and even miscarriage and stillbirths. And these are but a physical parallel to the spiritual corruption, sickness and death that entered in this world at the same time, the spiritual having far more serious consequences than the physical. Praise God that He sent His Son as a remedy.

      I have been a financial professional for over 30 years. As a result, I have had a fair amount of experience in the area of insurance. I am amazed at how easily mankind terms natural disasters, even in a legal document, as an “Act of God”, and yet is so reluctant to give God the praise for all the good things He does. Again, we know from the Bible that God is the giver of every good gift and every perfect gift (James 1:17). Jesus said, “The thief {Satan} cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.” (John 10:10)

      Addressing your points on viability and potential, i respectfully point out the following to you.

      – Viability outside of the womb is relative to the current level of medical and scientific knowledge and the ability to implement it. Babies are surviving after being born prematurely at earlier stages of gestation than would have been imagined possible years ago. Can you say where that progress will end? Is morality to be based on the moving standard of man’s ability or lack thereof?

      – There are already places in established law where potential plays a part and viability does not. For example, someone in the process of committing robbery shoots and murdered a pregnant women. As a direct result, the baby she is carrying is also murdered. In 21 states, the perpetrator may be legally charged with two counts of murder, not one, regardless of the age of the unborn baby. In one of the more recent high profile cases, Scott Peterson was convicted in California of murdering his unborn son as well as for the murder of his wife.

      Consider also the case of two men riding in the same vehicle. One is a successful doctor and the other is a blue collar worker. The doctor’s income is five times greater than the blue collar worker, and the disparity is expected to increase over time. Their vehicle is struck by a drunk driver who is 100% to blame for the collision. Both men are the same age and equally severely disabled so that neither can ever work again at their profession or in any other capacity. Their injuries will require the same medical treatment. Under law, the award to the doctor can be substantially higher. His loss of future earnings are projected to be far greater than those of the blue collar worker.

      There are a number of instances under which the law not only covers the current situation but also what is reasonably expected to occur. Statistically, human pregnancies can reasonably be expected to result in a live birth of a child. This is not relative to advances in man’s knowledge, It was true in primitive times and it is true now.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Reblogged this on Life, the Universe, and Politics and commented:
    I’m a WordPress newb, so I actually don’t know how to like this post. But it mirrors my thoughts exactly. So many liberal causes depend on euphemism to gain ground, because calling them what they really are would prevent them from ever gaining acceptance. Homosexuality comes to mind; somehow “give us special privileges so we can shut up everyone who says we’re sinning, stomp all over churches and businesses who don’t support our relationships, abridge freedom of speech and of religion, and demand not just acceptance but celebration of our lifestyle, while also perverting the definition of marriage in both the religious and etymological senses!” doesn’t have quite the same ring as “Give us equal rights!”

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I appreciate your post! The fact that abortion is murder, to me, is such a simple notion to understand. It is crazy how big players in our society keep finding ways to downplay that — and get away with it!

    Liked by 2 people

  12. I’m late to this conversation, but all I know is if you look up what happens to the baby in an abortion…It’s unreasonably cruel and inhuman. There is no kind and gentle abortion. There is no such thing as a beautiful abortion. It is cruel and savage.

    The first time I heard about what happens to a baby in a partial birth abortion, I thought I was going to be sick.

    Liked by 1 person

What do you think? Leave a Comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s