PERSPECTIVE: ON ABORTION

Since we are acknowledging the fortieth anniversary of Row V. Wade, it seems appropriate to reflect on   what we have gained, if anything, from this ruling.

First let’s see what has happened to language in our country. Old words and old definitions do not meet today’s politically correct sensibilities. As an example, consider the re-definition of the word “acts of terror”. These heinous acts are planned to destroy other humans. Today, acts of terror are now defined as “man made disasters”. There is no question that an act of terror is a “man made disaster”
Abortion is such a word. We now call it “choice”. Abortion, plain and simple is the deliberate destruction of an incipient human. The aborted fetus was on the way to becoming a human being, and the natural process was cut short by the decision of a human being who “choose” to terminate it. Should these acts be called “man-made disasters”?

Since 1973 when the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution permitted a pregnant woman to decide to have her viable fetus killed by a health provider, over 40 million potential Americans have been killed or about one million per year. For comparison cancer, our worst killer causes about 550,000 deaths per year. And there are about 15,000 murders per year of which about 9,000 are from firearms. Can you imagine the outrage and demand for action if there were one million murders per year related to firearms? The demand for repeal of the Second Amendment would be ear shattering.

These statistics should give us pause. How can abortions be two times the rate of cancer deaths and 100 times the rate of murders in our country with nary a comment by the media, the church or any other so-called responsible group? This is nothing less than an outrage, and it should cause all to scream out loud.

Part of the question about what is abortion stems from the question of when does life begin. Abortion advocates believe that life only begins when the fetus is born and leaves the womb, unless the abortionist fails to terminate the fetus, and it is born still alive, then it is within the right of the abortion provider to kill the now human baby.

Well, as any fool knows, life begins at conception, period. We have always known this. If we did not know it right away, the woman whose menses stopped had a very strong clue. Then when the fetus was large enough to stir around in her womb, the woman knew it and usually asked her husband or boy friend to place his hand on her stomach and she would say, “Did you feel it kick”. Whereupon, he would reply, “Yes, and I wonder if it is a girl or boy!”. Today, there is no guess work. We can tell within days that conception has taken place, and then with sonograms, can watch the progress, and long before the birth date, can tell if it will be a boy or girl.

It may surprise you to learn who does choose abortions. Here are the facts:

• 93% of all abortions are because the child is unwanted or inconvenient

• 6% of abortions relate to physical health problems regarding mother or child

• 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest

Of all the information given above, the most important and disgusting is the child is unwanted or inconvenient. This should shock us and frighten us to a point where we should want to do something about it. Choosing to abort a fetus should not be a unilateral decision because there are others who have a stake in this incipient human life; namely, the father, the relatives of the potential child. Society also has a stake because it needs new lives to replace those who are leaving life so that society and our culture can be sustained. It is an interesting and frightening statistic that Western Civilization is not replacing itself. As a result it is predicted that Europe will become Muslim within the current century. That is scary because the technological developments we have come to rely upon and enjoy have been created principally by members of the Western Civilization. If the supply of humans in what we call western culture continues to diminish, the outcome and result can be predicted. The picture is not pretty.

Consider this. If a person tires of a pet and drops it into the street, it is considered “cruelty to animals” for which one can be arrested. Because we are concerned about this horrible act society has formed an organization called the Society for Prevention to the Cruelty of Animals (SPCA). SPCA facilities exist in nearly every neighborhood in America.

If we have no compunction about providing funds for the sheltering of unwanted animals vis a vis the SPCA, what would be so terrible about providing a comparable organization for the handling of these unwanted potential citizens? If the word Orphanage is too repugnant to use in our politically correct environment, surely we can find a euphemistic and politically correct term to define what such a facility might be called. Might I be so bold to suggest the “Society for the Prevention of the Abortion of Unwanted Fetuses (SPAUF)?