Saturday, February 19, 2011

"When Abortion Was Illegal, Tens Of Thousands Of Women Died Every Year From Back-Alley Abortions. We Won't Go Back."

     This is probably one of the most common arguments used to advocate abortion.  It is a strong argument. Like all things that try to mislead us in life, this argument is based on something we know to be good.  This statement about back-alley abortions strives to receive sympathy and compassion for women who are faced with this difficulty.  Sympathy and compassion are good things - we should have sympathy and compassion for women who are faced with this difficulty or who feel that abortion is the only option.  By playing this argument, abortion advocates set up an argument that if you disagree or oppose them you appear to be cold and cruel.  But it is so very important to show that TRUE compassion for women does not mean that you should support legalized abortion. I will first explain why this argument given by abortion advocates fails, and then will show that this argument is a LIE to begin with.
     If abortion is once again made illegal, it will be because our society has finally realized that life begins at conception and that an unborn child is a human person.  People who play this argument for back-alley deaths are still arguing under the premise that an unborn child is not a person.  But if we realize that the unborn child IS just as much of a person as women are, then we need to be concerned with saving as many lives of combined mother and children as possible.  (Again, I am not in any way down-playing the deaths of women who have died in illegal abortions - I have extreme compassion for them. No one 'should die' and I am heart-broken that those women felt that was their only option. I will provide an alternative later)  If we are trying to SAVE LIVES, we can save more lives by making abortion illegal.  Yes, there will still be a percentage of women who would probably still seek illegal abortions and the results may be fatal. This is a travesty, and I wish it would not happen. But at least 3,000 (low estimate) abortions take place in the U.S. DAILY resulting in deaths, where as even the most extreme estimates (will discuss below) say there were 10,000 illegal abortions resulting in death each YEAR before Roe v. Wade. Make abortion illegal, immediately start saving lives, and then we can turn our attention and passion to finding ways to help women who feel they still need illegal abortions.
     Furthermore, the argument of "Women will still get abortion even if it is illegal" is completely faulty. This is like saying, "Theft at gun-point happens every day even though it is illegal, so theft at gun-point should be made legal so the thief has no reason to shoot". Fear of disobedience of the law is no reason to abolish the law. I mean, the whole point is to NOT GET AN ABORTION. The law would be to PROTECT WOMEN. Even when legalized, abortion is extremely dangerous for women.

If this was understood, the next Pro-Choice response would be:
"Okay, so maybe the fear of illegal abortions isn't a great argument for legalized abortions.  But 10,000 deaths of pregnant women, AND their unborn children is still a LOT of deaths... We can't just let that happen". Unfortunately, this is where people are buying a lie. A BIG, FAT, UGLY, COMPLETE LIE.  
     Dr. Bernard Nathanson was one of the co-founders of the National Association of the Repeal of Abortion Laws, later renamed National Abortion Rights Action League, now commonly referred to as NARAL.  He was one of the most influential doctors in Roe v. Wade and specifically talked much about these back-alley abortions. He helped have the American people realize that 10,000 back-alley deaths occur a year and that 1,000,000 illegal abortions took place a year.  However, since Roe v. Wade, Dr. Nathanson has completely changed his stance on the issue of abortion. He is now a pro-life advocate (Has anyone noticed this tendency of top abortion advocates and directors to have a complete change of heart??? 'Jane Roe' from Roe v. Wade is also now a pro-life advocate.)  He has since confessed to what really went on during the push to legalize abortion. Here are some quotes from him:

"We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened,
sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken,  we would be soundly defeated, 
we simply fabricated the results of fictional  polls."

We announced  to the media  that we 
had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in  favour of permissive 
abortion.  This is 
the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie.  Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused 
enough sympathy to sell our program  of permissive      abortion by fabricating the number of 
illegal abortions done annually in the U.S."

The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but 
the figure  we    gave  to the media  repeatedly was 1,000,000."

The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 
200-250  annually.   The figure  we constantly fed  to the media   was 10,000."
"We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its 'socially backward ideas' and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion." 
"A favourite pro- abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is          impossible;  that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one,  anything  but a scientific one.  Foetology  makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy."
So instead of accepting this lie and telling women we care for them by wide-spread           abortion, I suggest a social and cultural shift.  It's been done before and we could do it      again. We need to make sex a more sacred part of our culture, not a publicized one. Instead of telling women it's impossible to have children and be successful, we need to make both these things possible for women.  We need to make pregnancy a much more common and usual thing.  We need to have systems and programs set up in the work-place to                accommodate this aspect of natural reproduction.  It's a beautiful thing! Why don't we       embrace it?
Also, Roe v. Wade should be thrown out as a mistrial. They lied.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

"We Need Abortion Because The World Is Becoming Over-Populated"

     Who's heard this one before? I know I have.  While I think this is one of the weaker Pro-Choice arguments, people still like to throw it out there.  People like to claim that a larger population creates more poverty, that a larger population causes a shortage of food, and that a larger population runs out of land to live on.  Besides the fact that these claims are FALSE, would these things really justify murdering our own children?  I may not be a parent yet, but I know I would rather sacrifice my own life than take the life of my own child (or any child, for that matter) so that I could have more food.  Even if these claims of over-population were true, I would rather work together in society to find a way to support more of my world wide family than settle for abortion.  If we come to the conclusion that abortion takes a life, then that is no better than starving people from a lack of natural resources.  The claim that abortion is necessarily to maintain resources is like saying, "X amount of people might die from natural shortages, so let's just go ahead and go against nature and murder 5X amount of people to make sure that doesn't happen".
     But like I said, it's still a moot point. Because over-population isn't real anyway. Don't believe me?  Here are some entertaining and informative clips from the folks at

Thursday, February 3, 2011

More Thoughts On "Anti-Women" Accusations

     Do advocates of abortion really believe that every male Pro-Life supporter is trying to suppress women? I struggle with thinking that anyone could reasonably tell themselves all those people are just 'out to get women'. I mean, I'm a man, I'm Pro-Life:  I spend a lot of time and energy contemplating the horror of abortion and ways to influence people to understand and see it for what it is.  Does anyone really think I am spending all this time and energy to simply put myself above pregnant women?  What would I even have to gain from suppressing pregnant women, anyway?  Do they think I am planning to help have abortion outlawed so that one day in the distant future I might have a chance to take my pregnant manager's job because she has to take time off to give birth? That is honestly ridiculous.  That is the only type of scenario I can imagine that it is even remotely possible that a particularly malicious man could somehow personally and selfishly benefit from advocating life.  And even then, if it was my plan to do all this for personal benefit, I think I could gain a lot more for myself by taking all the life-advocacy time and spend it earning more for myself.  I just don't get it.  What would the motivation be for "taking away women's reproductive rights"?
     Referencing my earlier post, the only thing that could possibly motivate so many people to rise up to speak against abortion is if they honestly believed it was taking a life.  On the flip side, I don't think all abortion advocates are purposely trying to murder babies.  I understand that some of them, if not most of them, honestly think abortion can be a good thing.  Which is why I will try to calmly and respectfully show them that the baby in the womb is a person.  I think we'd get a lot farther in the abortion debate if we could narrow it down to this real and crucial issue.  A person's a person, from the moment of conception.  You can accuse me of being wrong, but you can't accuse me of purposely and maliciously trying to harm women.

What do I have to gain from suppressing women? Nothing.
What do I have to gain from stopping abortion? 50,000,000 of my missing friends.


Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Is Anti-Abortion Anti-Women?

     It seems to be a common argument for the acceptance of abortion that 'Pro-Lifers' are discriminatory against women. I have seen countless signs or facebook groups or youtube videos that say things like '"Keep the government out of my uterus" or "It's my body, it's my choice".  Similarly, President Obama ended a statement about the Roe v. Wade anniversary last month with, "I am committed to making sure our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams." This seems to be at the heart of the Pro-Choice position.
     However, Pro-Lifers are not trying to discriminate against women. On the contrary, they are trying to promote women and women's health.  What Pro-Lifers are trying to say is that a fetus is a person.  If those who hold the position of Pro-Choice would consider for a moment the implications of abortion IF a fetus is a human person, then things will change a little bit.  For anyone who is honest with themselves will realize that the right a person has to life is greater than the right to an abortion.  If we can show that a fetus is NOT a human person, then I completely agree that a woman has a right to an abortion.  But I do believe that a fetus is objectively a human person. I believe that the baby in the womb's right to live is greater than the woman's right to an abortion.  Therefore, the question at the center of the abortion debate is not about a woman's right to control her body: I think we can agree on that. The question truly at the center of the abortion debate: Is a fetus a human person?  

Can we agree that IF A FETUS IS A HUMAN PERSON abortion should be illegal?  If a fetus is a person, by definition, abortion is murder.

Now, as a man, I fully support a woman's right to her body.  Which is why (amongst many other reasons) I am strongly against rape.  If a woman does not want to become pregnant, the obvious answer is to not engage in sex.  She has a choice.  When a man tries to take away that choice, we call it rape and it is illegal.  But the purpose of intercourse is obviously reproduction, not simply pleasure.  The world today is trying to remove the reproductive piece while keeping the pleasure.  When a person realizes the natural results of sex, and sees how much that result of a child can change their life, THEN they might begin to see why the Church and Christians so adamantly teach that sex is to be protected by marriage.  Both men and women should reconsider the sacredness of marriage and the physical expression of their love.  The blame for the promiscuity that leads to this high demand in abortion does not fall only on women; the blame also falls on men. I would even suggest that MORE blame goes on the men. But I digress.  My main point is that being against abortion does not mean you are trying to take away women's rights or trying to degrade women. Pregnancy is a natural part of life.  No one has to be pregnant if they don't want to be.

In conclusion, there is nothing truer than this:
There is more love and joy for women in motherhood than there ever will be in abortion.

Thank you for reading.

Amazing Grace

     When I was about 5 years old, I remember learning that there was once a time in our country's history when we enslaved other human beings.  I remember feeling personally guilty for this hideous crime.  I felt that I, as a white person, was in a way responsible for the actions of what those white men did in the past.  But I felt consoled when I could confidently tell myself that if I had lived in that time period that I would have been a part of the small percentage of people who stood up against slavery.  At 5 years old, I told myself that I would have been a person who stood up for the freedom and lives of slaves even when it was unpopular.  I told myself that I would have given my life to defend the lives of those who were enslaved and killed because of slavery.
     I think it is easy for most of us to have that same mind-set in modern times.  I think a lot of people say that they would have opposed slavery.  But I don't think we always realize what opposing slavery would have been like in the 1700's and 1800's.  Most people accepted slavery and would openly ridicule you if you tried to suggest that it was wrong.  It was not common sense to anyone who seriously considered it that slavery was wrong.  There were many seemingly legitimate arguments for the acceptance of slavery.            
      For example, they would tell you, "The Bible itself gives directions on how to treat slaves." Or, "The economy would crash from the lose of plantations if slavery were abolished."  Also, "Freeing the slaves would only make them poor and miserable. It would be better to just keep them as slaves."  Along with these arguments, Pro-Enslavers would tell you that blacks were less human, and that there was a biological difference that makes them not full persons.  Some would probably tell you that since the law permits slaves that slavery is not wrong.  They would also tell you that the slave owners have a right to their slaves because they are their property and have paid for them, and that taking slaves away from owners would be violating their privacy.

     I have been contemplating these thoughts on slavery this past weekend in Washington D.C. on the March For Life.  We still have slavery in our country.  And, like in the 1800's, it is completely socially acceptable.  Abortion has taken more lives in the last 38 years than slavery did in 200 years.  Once again, our laws tell us that we "own" another person.  We say that, because of biological factors, a baby in the womb is less of a person than a baby outside the womb.  We say that it would be better to kill a human being than to allow them to be born into poverty.  We say that we cannot financially afford to outlaw abortion.  We say that keeping a life alive is a violation of privacy.  DO THESE ARGUMENTS SOUND FAMILIAR TO ANYONE?!?!?!
     I believe I am now fulfilling that promise I made to myself when I was 5 years old.  I will give myself to defend those who are defenseless.  I understand that the other side has arguments it tries to make, but I believe in what is right.  I hope and pray that all people who see the unborn child as a person will rise up with the same intensity and energy that I feel now.  Regardless of how unpopular or difficult it is.  I believe that anyone who believes they would have opposed slavery should answer this call.

I do find it extremely ironic that our first African-American President is one of the strongest supporters of abortion in our country's history.