Last week, Philadelphia abortion provider,
Kermit Gosnell, was found guilty on three counts of first-degree murder for
cutting the spinal cords of three babies who were born alive. A lesser-known
fact of the trial is that he was also convicted of 21 counts of abortion of the
unborn who were 24 weeks or older, a violation of Pennsylvania law.
Where do we go from Gosnell? Will we turn a blind eye to the “silent holocaust” going on around us? Will we leave it for someone else to handle? Will we pretend that Gosnell is an isolated incident and we have nothing more to worry about? I certainly hope none of these are viable options for you.
This case, after a period of obviously being
underreported on by many major news outlets, has been on the public stage. I
will not outline in detail the unspeakable conditions of Gosnell’s abortion
facility or the graphic nature of what takes place during an abortion. I do believe that responsible adults must be
educated in regards to the nature of the abortion process, down to the graphic
details (especially before they decide they want to defend the practice). Be sure to be mentally prepared as possible
for what you will learn (www.abort73.com and www.liveaction.org).
It seems that the “pro-life” and the
“pro-choice” (terms used accommodatingly) sides are both rejoicing in Gosnell’s
conviction. The “pro-life” side rejoices
that this man is being brought to justice and the horrors of abortion are being
put out in public view. The hope is that
more people will see that Gosnell is not an isolated incident, but rather an
only slightly exaggerated model of what is taking place in abortion clinics all
over the country, namely the violent murder of innocent human beings in the
name of a “woman’s right to choose.”
The “pro-choice” side believes that Gosnell
is being brought to justice. Ilyse
Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a statement: “Justice was
served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he
committed.” Hogue continues, “We hope
that the lessons of the trial do not fade with the verdict. Anti-choice [i.e. “pro-life”, TJC], and their
unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will
only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.”
Notice how the “pro-choice” advocate attempts
to separate what Gosnell has done and what normally takes place with “safe and
legal” abortion care. This is common
rhetoric of cowardice for those who will not own up to what takes place during
a “safe and legal” abortion. This is the
same rhetoric set forth by Bill Clinton and repeated by our current
President. When asked about the Gosnell
trial on April 17, President Obama said, “What
I can say is this: … I think President Clinton said it pretty well when he
said, ‘Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.” The sentiment might sound
nice, but reality slices off two of those ideals. Courtesy of Roe v. Wade, abortion is
certainly legal. But is it safe and rare?
Is it rare? Consider this: two out of
every five pregnancies in New York City end in abortion. If you were conceived in the Bronx, you would
almost be more likely to be aborted than born alive (Bureau of Vital
Statistics). The Guttmacher Institute
reported that almost 20% of all pregnancies in the United States end in
abortion. Conclusion: Abortion is not
rare.
Is it safe? It depends on how one would
define safety. Safety can be defined as
“the condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause
danger, risk, or injury.” Does
what takes place in any abortion facility fit that definition? I’m not referring to the statistically
insignificant situations where a mother’s life is in real and present danger
because of the life in her womb (less than 1% of abortions according to
abortionfacts.com).
Is
the elective abortion procedure safe for the mother? Actually, even under
“sterile” conditions, abortion is more dangerous to the mother than childbirth.
One researcher states, “The
evidence overwhelmingly proves that the morbidity and mortality rates of legal
abortion are several times higher than that for carrying a pregnancy to term”
(abortionfacts.com/facts/11). That is
not to mention other significant physical and mental health issues that come to
mothers who have abortions. Not only are
these facts seemingly ignored by the “pro-choice” lobby, they are also not
adequately communicated by so-called “health care providers” to mothers
considering abortion.
How about the safety of the child? Should not the mother’s womb be the safest
place in the world for a baby? Has it
not been so designed? Oh, but many would
argue that the baby in the womb is not technically a human life and therefore
does not have a right to be protected. Really? The
logic for this does not exist. From a
scientific, moral and common sense point of view, human life begins at
conception. The only difference between
a newly conceived human being and a full-grown adult human being is size, level
of development, environment and degree of dependency. We would never apply this same logic in
determining a person’s “humanness” outside of the womb. If so, small people would be less human than
big people. A twelve year old would be more
human that a toddler. Someone’s
humanness would differ depending on his or her spatial location. A person who is dependent on dialysis would
have less human value than someone who was completely healthy. Are “pro-choicers” willing to accept these conclusions? If not, why is this logic applied to life in
the womb?
When pressed on the real issues,
“pro-choicers” are forced to retreat to pathetic and misleading rhetoric about
“rights”, “choice”, “freedom”, and “safety.”
Murder is defined as “the
unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.” The overwhelming
majority of abortions are premeditated by the parties involved. To “kill” is to
“cause the death of.” Abortions are
performed to cause the death of an already living being. If that being is a human being, abortion is murder.
If the being is not a human, by definition, abortion is not murder. The crux of the abortion debate should be
whether or not the life in the womb is a human being. As I have already shown, it is absurd to
argue that the life in the womb is not human.
Where do we go from Gosnell? Will we turn a blind eye to the “silent holocaust” going on around us? Will we leave it for someone else to handle? Will we pretend that Gosnell is an isolated incident and we have nothing more to worry about? I certainly hope none of these are viable options for you.