Making the Case For Life

Townhall.com ^ | January 25, 2013 | Daniel Doherty

[Kaslin]

In an ideal world, Roe v. Wade -- perhaps the most insidious Supreme Court ruling since the infamous Dred Scott decision in 1857 -- would be overturned. And contrary to what most leftists assert, however, this does not necessarily mean that abortion would be universally prohibited and illegal. For example, before Roe became the law of the land in 1973, abortion was permissible in certain states. The legality of abortion, then, should be decided by individuals at the state level -- at least in the short-term -- not by a High Court of un-elected, unaccountable judges in Washington. This would be a small but significant victory.

But how do we get there?

Of course, pro-lifers argue that the taking of innocent human life is a great moral evil, and that the United States can never live up to its founding principles while such an injustice is lawful, let alone funded with taxpayer dollars. Indeed, more than 55 million unborn lives have been extinguished since 1973, and the numbers -- especially in places like New York City -- continue to climb. Imagine, in other words, how rich and diverse our country would be if these unborn millions were granted their God-given right to life? How many scientists, doctors, innovators and entrepreneurs would be alive today, making the United States -- and the globalized world -- a better place?

But sadly, the pro-life movement seems to be facing an uphill battle. A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows that 70 percent of Americans support Roe v. Wade. Consequently, the High Court’s landmark decision granting individuals a right to an abortion -- at any time, for any reason -- will probably be on the books for years, if not decades to come. And while conservatives should never give up this crucially important fight, perhaps there’s another, more immediate way pro-lifers can raise awareness and end the culture of death plaguing our cities and states.

The battle for life unquestionably begins in New York City. In 2009, 41 percent of all pregnancies in the Big Apple ended in abortion. This is unacceptable. Worse, nearly 60 percent of black babies were aborted that same year. These staggering numbers are difficult to process -- especially when one confronts the sobering fact that 56 percent of the women getting these abortions have already had one.

If anything, this suggests that a growing percentage of women terminating unplanned pregnancies in New York City are using abortion as a form of birth control. And the implications are catastrophic: How many women are choosing abortion each year in part because they don’t realize that unborn children have heartbeats as early as eight weeks and can feel pain as early as 20 weeks? The left does not want women to understand these unsavory facts. It discredits the arguments they’ve been cultivating for decades.

And yet, history teaches us that the only way totalitarian and oppressive regimes can rationalize the extermination of innocent life is through the process of de-humanization. In the eyes of their oppressors, to name just a few examples, Christians were “infidels,” Tutsi’s were “cockroaches,” Jews were “rats.” This is why educating those who are uneducated is so vitally important when making the case for life.

Moreover, rather than handing out “free” birth control pills and revamping sex education, perhaps conservatives should make the larger argument. For far too long, progressives have been winning the narrative that fetuses are nothing more than “matter” or “cells.” Of course, this belies modern science and medical research, which is one of the reasons I am hopeful (as was the case in the odious Dred Scott decision) that justice will one day prevail.

But we are not there yet.

In the meantime, most Americans still seem to believe -- in the words of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama -- that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” We all know, however, that abortion is not rare. It is, in many instances, a form of birth control. And so the way to most effectively reduce these staggering abortion numbers -- especially in our inner cities -- is to humanize the victims.

Only then can we begin to educate, and make the case that all life is sacred -- and worthy of protection.

[MurrietaMadman]

The leftists, in Philadelphia at least, addressed the subject two years ago in an article headlined as ‘Abortion Doc’s Arrest Shouldn’t Mean More Restrictions’.

Cummunists deny irony, btw.

From http://jezebel.com/5741796/abortion-doctors-arrest-shouldnt-mean-more-restrictions-for-women?rel=author

... The idea that all abortion providers are just one step away (if that) from a blood-stained, fetal-feet-filled “house of horrors” is pretty much a fixture of anti-choice rhetoric, and it doesn’t really deserve much more ink than we’ve already given it. Somewhat more worthy of debate — because it’s more honest — is William Saletan’s question: whether aborting fetuses after viability should be illegal. It’s a question on which even some pro-choicers disagree, and it’s worthy of consideration. Saletan initially posed it last week, and today he posts a series of important caveats, most pointed out by feminist writers: that Kermit Gosnell “doesn’t represent abortion providers or the pro-choice movement,” that most abortions are not late-term, and that many late-term abortions are necessary because the fetus has severe abnormalities. It’s also worth reiterating that there’s a distinction between the late-term abortions Gosnell reportedly performed and the instances wherein he allegedly fully delivered living infants and then killed them with scissors — no pro-choicers are advocating that the latter should be legal...

But in typical leftist shoot for the Moon tactics they followed their sanctimoanity and used Gosnell’s murder machine in a grotesque attempt to limit the few restrictions on late term abortions.

... Don’t we believe that women are moral decision makers, and carefully consider their options when faced with an unwanted pregnancy? Don’t we reject the anti-choice rhetoric that women make the decision to have an abortion callously? The pro-choice movement takes a step backward when we judge that a woman has taken too long to make what may be a life-changing decision. Shouldn’t we want women to take the time they need to make the best decision, regardless of where they are in the pregnancy?...

Communist/leftist/globalist forces take their war on US very seriously. You’d think by now conservatives wouldn’t be the only Americans to recognize the domestic enemies tactics since they’ve used them over and over again in every issue they have advanced since they came up with their plan for victory.

[Inwoodian]

I had a client who is black ask me to look into what she thought might have been medical malpractice- her doctor may have sterilized her while performing a D&C (dilation and curetage) during her seventh abortion. This client was 25 years old. I told that he should get a medal and then be executed.