Images of smiling babies in the womb have pro-abortion activists screeching

ALL OF BRITAIN was buzzing last week after a tabloid published highly controversial photos — not of a topless supermodel or two female pop singers kissing or Prince William in a grass skirt, but of angelic babies smiling in the womb.

The ultrasound images, taken between 26 and 34 weeks after conception, were released by Professor Stuart Campbell and widely circulated on the Internet via the Drudge Report. Campbell’s an obstetrician at the privately run Create Health Centre in London. For the past two years, the medical facility has offered state-of-the-art 3-D/4-D scanning equipment services to expectant parents. Campbell performs an average of 30 scans a week. His outspoken enthusiasm for this blessed technology is refreshing. “Parents love them,” he told the Mirror. “I hear so many couples laughing when they see the pictures — it’s wonderful.”

Campbell’s high-tech window to the womb also shows the babies moving their limbs at 8 weeks, leaping and turning by 12 weeks, curling their toes and fingers at 15 weeks, and yawning at 20 weeks. The clients’ reactions are overwhelming, Campbell said, “especially with fathers, who rarely get involved. Before, they sat in the corner. Now, they really show emotion. I enjoy scanning and looking at babies. It is so informative about babies and behavior. Every scan is an adventure.”

How have pro-abortion activists abroad reacted after seeing the happy, grinning photos of these unborn babies? With reflexive scowls and dour grimaces, naturally.

Anne Karpf, a commentator for the British-based Guardian who bills herself as a “medical sociologist,” says the photos are “deeply disquieting” and ridicules the anti-abortion lobby for being “intoxicated with evidence of a fetus’ humanity.” (God forbid this cold woman ever be exposed to a pregnant mommy experiencing the undiluted joy of a baby kicking inside her for the first time.) Australian Birth Control Services medical director Geoff Brodie complained that the photos “will be picked up by those groups that use anything and everything to stop terminations but ignore the fact that women have a right to choice.”

Here in America, the pro-abortion lobby is having the same toxic reaction. It was bad enough when conventional, 2-D sonograms revealed unborn hearts beating and blurry hands waving, but the abortionists are absolutely aghast over rapidly spreading access to 3-D/4-D ultrasound technology. When General Electric began running incredibly moving ads last year celebrating the company’s new innovations in sonography, a writer for the liberal American Prospect complained the commercials were “a milieu of clever illusion” that “blur(red) the distinction between a fetus and a newborn infant.”

This from the masters of deception who gave us the infamous euphemisms “fetal matter” and “uterine tissue,” which have successfully blurred the distinction between human life and disposable Kleenex for more than three decades.

Similarly, pro-abortion advocates have attacked legislation in Congress, introduced by Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns, which would guarantee free ultrasound screenings to any woman who visits a non-profit crisis pregnancy center that receives subsidies for sonogram equipment. Kathryn Allen, Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, griped, “With all the problems going on in our world, I can’t imagine that Congress would spend its time and energy on ultrasound for anyone.”

Allison Herwitt, director of government relations for NARAL Pro-Choice America in Washington, also attacked pro-life supporters of the bill. “They don’t want women to go to Planned Parenthood, where they’ll get their full range of options,” said Alison Herwitt. “They just want them to go to crisis pregnancy centers, where women will be exposed to this weapon at taxpayers’ expense.”

Liberals in America are all for the government giving away any health services for free — except if it’s a service that has the ability to persuade a wavering patient to preserve a life instead of end it.

These amazing advances in golden-hued ultrasound have illuminated an insurmountable truth: No amount of NARAL money or National Organization for Women screeching can overcome the persuasive power of an unborn child’s beaming face.

Michelle Malkin is author of “Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores” (Regnery).

The pro-life movement is totally misguided in pursuing this approach.

I know women who've had abortions. (We all do, of course, but I actually know a few who've talked to me about it.)

Not one of them doubted that they were aborting a living child. Every one of them could imagine how that child looked like. The bottom line was that they were unready to have the child and saw the guilt and grief associated with abortion as less burdensome than carrying a pregnancy to term (and enduring the associated public ignominy) and then either having a baby and dealing with single parenthood and a recalcitrant or absent father, or giving up a child for adoption and spending a lifetime wondering about that child and whether s/he would come back and disrupt her life.

It is THOSE factors and considerations which the pro-life movement must address. It must remove, entirely, the shame and discomfort which attends a single woman being pregnant. It must assure these women that they won't be burdened by raising a child, and that a woman giving up her child has an absolute right to elect a completely zero paperwork, zero chance of reunion, adoption.

If the pro-choice movement can't or won't do that, it will make no progress against abortion, because it simply won't address the demand. And as long as there is demand, there will always be supply. (And given that abortion will certainly remain legal in places in the U.S. if Roe is overturned, and remain legal in most places in the "First World" outside of the U.S. no matter what happens in the U.S., the supply will actually be legal and largely unimpeded.)

Pro-Abortion. Sorry, the word is MURDER.
NOTICE to all POLITICIANS who campaign on PRO-ABORTION platform. TELL THE TRUTH. PRO-MURDER platform.

Know why Abortion is kept legal?
As part of the ONE NATION, ONE WORLD, ONE KING plan, there are just too damn many mouths to feed, and there will be many many more than our agriculture can support.

To allow the RULING CLASS to keep eating, there need to be cuts out on the playing field.
SO, the government needed you to get used to accepting MURDER of PREBORNS. Because they are planning to have it be NO CHOICE ABORTION, instead of PRO-CHOICE.

Don't think I am right. It's already in practice in China and other countries. FEMALE PREBORNS HAVE HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR BEING MURDERED. Isn't that nice, all you women?

>>>>I think with images like this, we will soon be able to convince more people, including politicains, judges and expectant moms that a living baby is in there.

"It's a hollywood trick", "Staging and Lighting"....You have heard it before.

>>>>Laws should be passed that each mother going in for an abortion see a sonagram like that.

That one is a touchy one.

I would be MORE supportive of preventive medicine rather than the controversary that can arise from the above suggestion.

Let's get this back in the schools where it belongs. Kids should see this as part of the Health Class adolescence and puberty coverage FIRST. Then revisited in biology.

It's worth pointing out that only about 10% of abortions are done after 12 weeks - about 60% are done at or before 8-9 weeks, and about 88% are done at or before 12 weeks. While those pictures of the babies are cool, they aren't really relevant to the overwhelming majority of the abortions done in the US.

Sleepy 12-week old:

It must assure these women that they won't be burdened by raising a child, and that a woman giving up her child has an absolute right to elect a completely zero paperwork, zero chance of reunion, adoption. >>

We have crisis pregnancy centers who do that every day. They will even raise the child if need be.

And, Most states of Safe-Haven Laws where a mom can drop off their child, no questions asked, to any hospital, police dept. etc. It's worked out well in the states which promote the program.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.