Today is the 38th anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision which was the landmark case legalizing the murder of unborn children in the United States. Since that time - in this country of freedom, democracy, and opportunity - over 50,000,000 (that's right, 50 million) babies have been slaughtered in the wombs of their mothers.
The National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) wants Americans to commemorate this occasion with a "Blog for Choice" day. While I am all for choices, what exactly are people being encouraged to choose? According to NARAL:
"We believe that women should have option to choose abortion. Today they can, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. But even though access to abortion is legal, our right to it is far from safe. Anti-choice groups attack our right to choose at every opportunity."Why is this "choice" so important? Because - as President Obama says - if my daughters get pregnant, I don't want them to be punished with a baby for that mistake. Didn't you know that an unplanned baby is a punishment and a mistake?
So, those in agreement with NARAL (and President Obama) are fighting for women's "rights" and "choices" to protect them from being unduly punished. Conversely, others are supposedly "anti-choice" and seeking to "attack" these protections. Hmmmm....put in those terms, it sure isn't too hard to see who the "good" guys are, right?
But let's look at this "choice" and dissect what we are really speaking about. The biggest evidence for the hideous nature of the "choice" NARAL and others want to defend is the fact that they have to hide behind sanitized words which obscure the reality of the cause being championed.
The following practices for enacting this "choice" are used around the world:
Mifepristone & Misoprostol: a medical abortion procedure up to the first seven to nine weeks used to end the life of an in utero (in the uterus) baby. It is also referred to as RU-486, the abortion pill and Mifeprex. This drug is taken in pill form and works to block the hormone progesterone which the woman's body is producing to sustain the life of the child. Blocking this hormone causes the uterine lining (which connects the baby to the mother) to shed thereby stripping the baby from his/her source of nourishment. Then 24-72 hours later, the woman uses Misoprostol to cause the uterus to contract and expel the dead body mass, which has been still residing in her womb.When we speak of a woman's right to a 'choice of abortion', we are literally speaking of a woman's right to have her own child tortured, dismembered, burned, but ultimately: murdered. Such advocates are literally pro-(the choice of) murder for their own children! How many people want to put that on their protest signs? Why don't they proudly proclaim, "I have the right to dismember my children!" or "A child would inconvenience me, so my right to personal liberty allows me to kill him!"? Why don't they walk around proudly displaying pictures of the results of these procedures they so staunchly defend? Why do they prefer that women make such decisions in darkness rather than having access to information (i.e. ultrasounds) on these "tissues" they seek to destroy?
Suction Aspiration: a surgical abortion procedure used to end the life of an in utero baby between 6 to 12 weeks of gestation. It is also referred to as suction curettage or vacuum aspiration. This first trimester abortion involves three main steps: (1) an injection to numb the cervix, (2) insertion of a soft flexible tube (a cannula) through the cervix into the uterus; the tube is connected to a vacuum, (3) suction created by an aspirating machine (the vacuum) or a hand-held mechanism pulling the baby apart limb by limb. The baby's body parts are then sucked out through the tube. If any of the baby's tissue remains, a curette (hook-shaped knife) is used to scrape away what remains.
Dilation & Curettage (D & C): a surgical abortion procedure used to end the life of an unborn baby between 13 to 15 weeks gestation. It is also referred to as suction curettage or vacuum aspiration. Curettage of the uterus (womb) is the scraping of the lining of the uterus. While intended as a health procedure for women who have miscarried or have irregular menstrual cycles, it is now used to cause the miscarriage in the cases of abortion by cutting the baby to pieces. A curette (a hook-shaped knife) is used to scrape the uterine walls and cut the baby in order to extract the pieces of its body from the womb.
Dilation & Evacuation (D & E): a surgical abortion procedure used to end the life of an unborn baby over 15 weeks gestation. It usually includes a combination of vacuum aspiration, dilation and curettage (D&C), and the use of surgical instruments. This procedure is usually done over 2-3 consecutive days. On the first day, an ultrasound (sonogram) is performed to determine the size and position of the baby. Then, the procedure begins by numbing the cervix with injections and inserting dilators into the cervix. Overnight these dilators gently expand, opening the entrance to the uterus, simulating labor. The next day, the cervix is again numbed, the dilators are removed, and the doctor uses the instruments (such as forceps) to grab the baby. The teeth of the forceps are used to twist and tear the bones of the child repeatedly until it is totally dismembered. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove all the pieces of the baby from the womb. The final step is suction using the aspirating machine. When the baby is over 24 weeks gestation, additional dilators are inserted on the second day and the baby is removed on the third day.
Induction Abortion: a surgical procedure performed on in utero babies over where salt water, urea (i.e. urine), or potassium chloride is injected into the amniotic sac. This begins to burn the outer layer of the unborn baby's skin and also poisons him. The baby breathes and swallows this solution which results in dehydration, convulsions and brain hemorrhage. The doctor will then induce labor. There have been instances where babies are born alive even after this procedure. Here is one such testimony.
Partial-birth Abortion: a surgical procedure performed to end the life of an unborn baby over five months in gestation. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist pulls the baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal, except for the head. The head must remain lodged just inside of the woman's cervix or the procedure would legally be considered murder. The abortionist forcefully punctures the base of the baby’s skull with a surgical instrument, such as scissors or a pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar. He then inserts a tube into the wound, and removes the baby's brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the baby's skull to collapse, after which the abortionist completes the delivery of the now-dead baby.
Yet, once life has been conceived by the fertilization of the egg....a new life has been conceived. That is why it is called conception.
If a child's inability to sustain his/her own life apart from the mother is a reasonable ground upon which to legitimize murder, then why don't we accept the same claim for babies when they are born? Babies certainly remain dependent upon parents for survival outside of the womb, so why don't we allow parents to contract for the medical disposal of their children after birth? Not only do we not permit it, but such is a crime.
parental neglect: n. a crime consisting of acts or omissions of a parent (including a stepparent, adoptive parent or someone who, in practical terms, serves in a parent's role) which endangers the health and life of a child or fails to take steps necessary to the proper raising of a child. The neglect can include leaving a child alone when he or she needs protection; failure to provide food, clothing, medical attention or education to a child; or placing the child in dangerous or harmful circumstances, including exposing the child to a violent, abusive or sexually predatory person.
There is the expectation that parents have a responsibility to provide and care for their children, even if it requires a sacrifice of themselves. A parent's right to "personal liberty" ends precisely when it starts to endanger the life of another; in this case, their own children.
You cannot be a Christian and be pro-choice. If one is pro-choice, then one knows not Christ and the Spirit of God is not in you. Harsh words? Maybe. But true nonetheless.
Either you have faith in a Creator who personally and sovereignly creates each human life or you have no such faith (Psalm 139:14). Either you acknowledge that our lives and bodies are not our own, or you think that your life belongs to you to do with what you please (Psalm 127:3; I Corinthians 6:13, 20). Either you stand against murder, or you condone it (Exodus 20:13; James 2:11; I John 3:15). Either you believe and obey God or you deny Him (I John 2:4).
So on this day where many in the world want you to champion the "choice", I wonder who is crying out for the child? While they extol the merits of the "choice", who is honest enough to actually consider the consequences?
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live" Deuteronomy 30:19
Interestingly, an entertainer named Nick Cannon was almost aborted by his mother when she became a pregnant teen and he wrote a song called, "Can I Live?" dedicated to her for letting him live. There were some thought-provoking lyrics to this song as the "unborn" baby Cannon speaks to his mother about the "choice" of abortion. "$300, that's the price of living?...What do you want, morning sickness or the sickness of mourning?...If I could talk I'd say to you, "Can I live?""
What if every mother was attentive to consider the voice of their babies in the womb? What "choice" would they make then?