The Abortion Debate

A 3D ultrasound taken of a fetus at 17 weeks.

Image via Wikipedia

For your consideration:

 

The most common abortion procedure performed after the first trimester of pregnancy is the “D and E” (Dilation and Evacuation), a procedure which is legal throughout the nation, and which the Supreme Court itself described in this way:

“The doctor grips a fetal part with the forceps and pulls it back through the cervix …, continuing to pull even after meeting resistance from the cervix. The friction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus as it is pulled through the cervix and out of the woman. The process of evacuating the fetus piece by piece continues until it has been completely removed.”
(Gonzales vs. Carhart, April 18, 2007)

Now is the time to ask the American public, whether pro-life or pro-choice, a simple question: Should dismemberment of a living child in the womb be permitted? Let’s go beyond the all-encompassing question of “Should abortion be allowed?” and ask, “Should this specific procedure, in which a child’s arms and legs are ripped off, and head crushed, be allowed?” (Fr. Frank Pavone)

Life – Not An Abstraction!

Educators Fail – Lawmakers Fail – Journalists Fail – False Compassion Fails!

We have important moral and ethical problems to face in America and in the world.  In order to make educated decisions, people need to be educated.  Our present culture seems determined to keep the people, young and old, in the dark as to the life that lives and moves and has its being within a mother’s womb.

National Geographic will take you inside the womb, so that you can watch the reality.  While Planned Parenthood, funded by U.S. dollars, enters into the most personal and profound decisions women can make, offers less than the reality.  For the woman making a life changing decision, a decision that will impact, for better or worse, how she thinks and feels about herself and others,especially her own child, Planned Parenthood obscures the facts in favor of  its own agenda.  Planned Parenthood will, for instance, turn the monitor away from the pregnant mother during a sonogram procedure.  Why trouble the client with the fact within the womb of their client, an actual picture of the truth, the infant/fetus growing  within them.  Why is that? Could it be that seeing is believing and believing can effect a decision to abort, when such a decision would effect the financial bottom line of this booming mega-business?

Our schools are no better.  Values-free education is of  no value when it comes to living a moral, ethical human life.  Giving teenagers less than science, and telling them less than the actuality of  pregnancy and person-hood is to fail them.  We propagandize them, when we pretend they will not be effected by decisions that society makes for them in lieu of  the education that can with present technology show them, in flesh and blood, not only the life in the womb, but abortion as it really is.

When the young teenager is aborted of the baby she carries within her, she sees it and feels it, and then has to live with it.  What teacher, lawmaker, journalist or councilor has prepared her for this reality, rather than failed her  in the name of compassion and/or convenience?  False compassion leaves scars too deep to be helped by a brochure hastily given before dismissing the girl to make way for their next act of “mercy?”

The education needed for today’s moral and ethical decisions goes beyond the facts of pregnancy to the heavy lifting science touching on  embryonic stem cell research.  Here journalistic misinformation and purposeful skewing of the facts muddy the waters. Archbishop Charles J. Chaput spoke of  “The Evil of Embryo Destruction – In embryonic stem cell research, end does not justify the means.”

Commenting on journalistic integrity Chaput responses to the Denver Post:

In the debate over federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, some of the massive media coverage has been fair, accurate and thorough, but much of it — too much of it — has fallen short of reasonable journalistic standards.

By far the most troubling piece I’ve seen was the editorial, “Zealotry vs. science,” published by the Denver Post….. in this case, the Post used bombast and misleading information to argue its support for federally funded embryonic stem cell research in a way reminiscent of a not-very-bright bully.”

Ed Morrisey talks about the issue here with more from Archbishop Chaput