It’s easy to look back on moments in history with a judgemental eye and say, “I wouldn’t have done THAT.”
This is something that people do all the time. They do it with topics like slavery. They say, “I don’t care if it was part of the culture at that time -- I wouldn't have owned slaves! Wrong is wrong.”
In some cases, yes, that must be true -- after all, there were people during the period of American history where slavery was legal (... honestly, it sounds insane to even say it) that were against it and fought for abolition despite political pressure from the establishment and elite power structure.
However, the sheer number of people who hold a morally superior position is simply unrealistic.
By using my impressive predictive powers, I can create a contextual case for this by using the example of an act that is currently legal in this country, but -- I believe -- will be looked at in the future with the same abhorrent view that Americans look at slavery today.
C’mon, who really doesn’t want to talk about abortion, amiright???
But seriously, it’s not an easy topic, largely because for most of us it’s always been a political issue.
There are so many fabricated narratives about abortion that are simply taken as a given that I’m consistently astounded by how so many people manage to get through every day without dying.
(I suppose life in the modern world has become automatic enough that critical thinking or a recognition of reality are no longer critical properties for survival.)
When I think about the two main arguments in favor of abortion, this is what comes to mind:
“My body, my choice.”
It’s just a fetus, not a human being.
The problem with both of these arguments is that they’re… well… just wrong.
If you look at any biology text book or dictionary, it will define the earliest stage of development of the multicellular organism as the zygote.
In multicellular organisms, the zygote is the earliest developmental stage.
The zygote represents the first stage in the development of a genetically unique organism.
: a cell formed by the union of two gametes; broadly : the developing individual produced from such a cell
The zygote is the first diploid cell that forms following fertilization by fusion of the haploid oocyte (egg) and spermatozoa (sperm) resulting in the combination of their separate genomes.
It should be clear to anyone who’s looking objectively (ie. without political or cultural bias) that the zygote is a unique individual with their own separate genome. It’s not like an organ; it’s not a part of the woman’s body.
So the first argument is simply factually wrong, and the only reason people are persuaded by it is for emotional reasons -- it’s out of concern for the pregnant mother, which I understand, of course.
Please note: I don’t wish to disparage the struggle of pregnant women in bad situations. It truly is a blight that so many women are in bad situations while they’re carrying children, and I appreciate all of the charities that exist out there for women in those situations that also recognize the life inside the woman as well.
However, it’s easy enough to turn the “my body, my choice” argument into the “well, the baby itself might not be my body, but it is using my body” to which I would reply, yes, of course. But abortion is not a procedure on a pregnant woman’s body: it’s a procedure on the gestating human. In fact, the whole idea of an abortion is to end the life of the gestating human while doing as little damage or having as little effect on the pregnant woman as possible.
To me, it’s important not to mince words about this, because someone’s life is literally at stake.
Regarding “It’s just a fetus, not a human being”: It’s so easy to dispel that argument that it barely needs addressing (but, unfortunately because of the propaganda surrounding abortion, it DOES need addressing).
“Fetus” as a stage of development, not a race or species. That is to say: a hippo fetus is a hippo. A wombat fetus is a wombat. An orca fetus is an orca. And, of course it’s no different for humans: a human fetus is a human.
Unfortunately, this video has been blocked on YouTube, so I can’t imbed it directly, but the contents of it is quite startling.
It is undercover video of one of the National Abortion Federation conventions.
The National Review does a good job at summarizing the video, so I’m not going to remake the wheel:
‘I Might . . . Pull Off a Leg or Two’
Dr. Lisa Harris, the medical director of Planned Parenthood of Michigan:
Given that we actually see the fetus the same way, and given that we might actually both agree that there’s violence in here. . . . Let’s just give them all the violence, it’s a person, it’s killing, let’s just give them all that.
Dr. Ann Schutt-Aine, the director of abortion services for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast (which has been referred to local law-enforcement for criminal charges related to fetal-tissue trafficking):
If I’m doing a procedure, and I’m seeing that I’m in fear that it’s about to come to the umbilicus [navel], I might ask for a second set of forceps to hold the body at the cervix and pull off a leg or two, so it’s not PBA [partial-birth abortion].
Dr. Stacy De-Lin, the director of abortion services for Planned Parenthood of New York City:
But we certainly do intact D&Es [dilation and extraction, otherwise known as partial-birth abortion, a method that is illegal under federal law].
Dr. Uta Landy, the founder of the Consortium of Abortion Providers (CAPS), Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA):
An eyeball just fell down into my lap, and that is gross! [laughter from the crowd]
Talcott Camp, the deputy director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Health Freedom Project:
I’m like — Oh my God! I get it! When the skull is broken, that’s really sharp! I get it! I understand why people are talking about getting that skull out, that calvarium.
Dr. Susan Robinson, an abortion provider at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte:
The fetus is a tough little object, and taking it apart, I mean, taking it apart on Day One is very difficult. . . . You go in there, and you go, “Am I getting the uterus or the fetus? Oh, good, fetus. [Robinson makes a stabbing sound effect] What have I got? Nothing. Let’s try again.
Considering what they’re talking about so cavalierly, it’s absolutely gruesome.
But why, in the face of such an already gruesome act, would they go out of their way to try and preserve certain body parts?
Well… because they sell the body parts for profit. That’s why.
Dr. Leslie Drummond, an abortion provider at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte (a PPFA affiliate that contracted with a biotech firm to be paid per fetal organ provided):
I get a lot of oohs and ahhs from StemExpress [biotech firm]. You know, they’re wanting livers. . . . Last week I was in Sacramento, and she said, “I need four intact limbs.” And I said, you want what?
Dr. Deborah Nucatola, the senior director of medical services for PPFA:
You know, sometimes she’ll tell me she wants brain, and we’ll, you know, leave the calvarium in till last, and then try to basically take it, or actually, you know, catch everything and keep it separate from the rest of the tissue so it doesn’t get lost.
StemExpress procurement manager:
There’s a lot of clinics that we work with that, I mean, it helps them out significantly.
Deb VanDerhei, the national director of CAPS for PPFA:
But the truth is that some might want to do it to increase their revenues. And we can’t stop them.
Dr. Stacy De-Lin, the director of abortion services for Planned Parenthood of NYC:
But I think a financial incentive from you guys [CMP investigators posing as tissue buyers] is going to be like . . . the people who we have to get this approved from will be very happy about it.
Dr. Paul Blumenthal, the former medical director for PP of Maryland:
I know Planned Parenthood sells a lot of stuff [fetal organs] to people.
These videos have simply been proclaimed “debunked” by the mainstream media, which doesn’t make any sense because it’s not a slant: it’s the actual words of the actual people at an actual abortion convention. And, in the spirit of transparency, the Center for Medical Progress releases all of their videos in full on their website.
So, whenever you hear the media say “Selectively edited” or “Deceptively edited” about these videos, you know they’re lying through their teeth, because you can easily get the full videos for the entire context whenever you want and see that, yes, they are in fact saying what they’re saying.
In my opinion, this will be a moment in history that our children and grandchildren will look back on with the same degree of disgust that we do in looking back on slavery or Jim Crow laws.
So maybe we should take a more contextual view of not just the history we read about, but the history we are creating today.
But what do you think?
Let me know in the comments.
@shayne