Monday, November 26, 2007

Abortion: A Grave Offense

There is a continuous holocaust occurring in America and we the people need to stop it. America was a unanimously pro-life nation for a very long time; in fact by 1875 every state in the US of A had laws that banned abortion. Margaret Sanger, a champion of eugenics who had connections with the Nazi Party, came along in 1916 and formed the Birth Control League. The BCL is now known as Planned Parenthood. More than fifty years later in 1973, Roe Vs. Wade legalized abortion on demand. Moreover, states couldn't prohibit abortion during the first three months.

Some of you pro-death advocates might be saying "those aren't babies that are being killed, but merely tissues." Let us step backward to fertilization and see if you guys are right. Upon fertilization, the sperm and egg have already formed up to 50 sets of DNA. This DNA is a determining factor in physical characteristics, personality, and intelligence. By Day 22, the baby's heart begins to beat and by this time his brain and nervous system should be near complete. By just the fifth week, the baby has taken shape. Need I go further? The little one develops so much in the early stages that there is no doubt that he/she is more than just a "tissue."

In 40 years, from 1965-2005 more than 500,000,000 babies were killed via surgical or chemical abortion. This is not even counting the 1,000,000 that were murdered before 1965. The methods of killing the unborn are outright gruesome, but need to be described to get the point across. Prisoners on death row who are presumably guilty don't even face the pains that the innocent unborn child does. Here are a few of the methods (Source: American Life League):

Dilation and extraction (also known as D&X or partial-birth abortion): Used to kill babies well into the third trimester (as late as 32 weeks old), the abortionist reaches into the mother's womb, grabs the baby's feet with a forceps and pulls the baby out of the mother, except for the head. The abortionist then jams a pair of scissors into the back of the baby's head and spreads the scissors apart to make a hole in the baby's skull. The abortionist removes the scissors and sticks a suction tube into the skull to suck the baby's brain out. The forceps are then used to crush the baby's head and the abortionist pulls the baby's body out the rest of the way.

Prostaglandins: Used during the second and third trimester, prostaglandin abortions involve the injection of naturally produced hormones into the amniotic sac, causing violent premature labor. During these convulsions the baby is often crushed to death or is born too early to have any chance of surviving.

RU-486: RU-486 blocks the hormone that helps develop the lining of the uterus during pregnancy (progesterone). This lining is the source of nutrition and protection for the developing baby. The tiny boy or girl is starved to death and then a second drug, misoprostol, causes contractions so that the dead baby is expelled from the womb.
Let us take, for example, a woman who has just aborted her baby. She got it over with and now expects to be relieved of the hardship of bringing up a child. But wait....are the hardships really over with? Emotional symptoms of abortion include Acute grief reaction, depression, and guilt. The chance of a woman being diagnosed with breast cancer increases 140% following an abortion. If the women decides to have a pregnancy in the future following an abortion, she is 600% more likely to suffer from Placenta previa, which is extreme and life threatening bleeding.

What about the "special cases"? These include, but are not limited to: rape and incest. As Judie Brown of the American Life League put it "Killing the child doesn't solve [the mother's] problem." "What if the mother's life is......." You can stop it right there. There is no such thing as a situation in which it is necessary to kill the baby to save mother. Ever.

A culture of death has plagued America and needs to be ended. People all often too often take for granted their own life. We all were born the same way that the unborn will be born. Thus I ask: is taking away innocent life ever justifiable? In every circumstance, the answer is no.

49 comments:

  1. You are not a woman, therefore you have no rights telling a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

    Who cares about 1875; it's in the past. We are not pro-death, we are for a woman being able to choose whether or not she wants to have a baby or abort it. Abortion does not cause breast cancer; that is propaganda spread by pro-lifers. There are many cases in which delivering a baby is dangerous to the mother's life. Do some research. And don't even think about belittling a mother's life before you grow a womb. What a woman wants to do with her own body should not be the government's business.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have no rights to be an advocate for human rights? I can't tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body, you are right. I can support the unborn who is being harmed by the woman, though.

    I was briefly giving a history of the legal status of abortion.

    You are pro-death, how can you deny it? You are committing an act of murder. You guys believe that women's rights and abortion go hand in hand. Abortion is an issue of human rights not women's rights!

    I don't believe I ever said abortion causes breast cancer, but I did say that it increases the risk of a woman getting breast cancer.

    Don't tell me to do research when you just made a blanket statement. Can you at least give me a source?

    What a woman wants to do with her own body is the government's business just as homicide is the government's business. This is called infanticide.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Glen, you know I respect you, so I am merely doing this because I love to debate and I clearly do not share the same views as you do on this issue.
    Like the last poster mentioned, a person should have the right to do whatever they want to do to their body as long as it does not harm anyone else. I mean what's next? Are we going to have police invade our homes for jerking off? I can picture it, "Son, by unleashing your load on that bed sheet, you just wiped out millions of innocent children." Another point I want to make; if you are so "Pro-Life" then why don't you adopt a starving child who is actually alive right now on this planet? Anyway, this is sort of unrelated, but I recommend everyone check out the greatest comedian of all time and my personal hero, none other than Bill Hicks. He even has a bit about abortion, you can check it out on You Tube. Peace

    ReplyDelete
  4. "a person should have the right to do whatever they want to do to their body as long as it does not harm anyone else."

    As I said before to you, it does harm someone else and in a big way

    ReplyDelete
  5. Haha, Chris, then Glen makes Hitler look like a Panzy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree with Chris; if you're so obsessed with saving lives, think about all of the children from poor countries who die everyday. I don't see you talking about saving them at all.
    Also, miscarriage is a form of abortion, so should women who miscarry be sent to jail? According to you, yes, since "taking away innocent life [is never] justifiable."
    If a woman's life is in danger because of a pregnancy, then chances are, the baby will die with the woman if she is still within the time to have an abortion. Why would you not want to save the woman's life if both could potentially die?
    If abortion is illegal, they might as well outlaw menstruation as well considering every time it happens, a potential life is terminated.
    I know you're going to ignore what I just said, because you always ignore things you know you have no argument against. I just wanted to say them anyway.
    I'd also like to know where you got the statistics of breast cancer rates and the number of abortions and all that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Don't tell me to do research when you just made a blanket statement. Can you at least give me a source?"

    If a young girl is raped, say 11 or 12 years old and she gets pregnant, there is no safe way for her to deliver a child at all. Her body is not fully developed enough to hold a baby, but you probably didn't know that, since you're a guy.


    "What a woman wants to do with her own body is the government's business just as homicide is the government's business. This is called infanticide."
    Haha, basically you're an idiot. The baby is living because of the mother. A baby can't survive outside of the mother until it is past the third trimester. If the mother doesn't want to be a dialysis machine for another human, she should have the right to stop, since it's her body. Also, if she were raped, a baby with half of the DNA of her rapist is usually a reminder of a terrible event.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A miscarriage is a "natural or spontaneous end of pregnancy" not a "chemical or surgical" end like abortion is. By taking away innocent life, I was implying one being taking the life of another being.

    I don't want to sound like I am double talking about, but the situation you describe would require an ectopic pregnancy. The mother's fallopian tube malfunctions which is going to automatically cause the death of the baby. You aren't directly taking the life of the innocent baby. That is a consequence that is natural in this process. There is nothing possible to save the baby.

    Comparing menstruation to abortion is basically the same thing as comparing masturbation to abortion. Has the semen and egg come into contact with each other? No!

    All my information has been extracted from all.org.

    The 11 year old who has just gotten raped has to realize that the baby is completely innocent. She has to deal with pregnancy.

    So you have decided to compare giving birth to a dialysis machine. That makes sense?

    A baby doesn't choose what physical characteristics to take on. The mother is just going to have to love the baby and nurture it. Any past events, such as a rape, will have to forgiven and forgotten.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Glen, it generally not possible for a girl of 11 or 12 to be pyshically ready to give birth to a child. Why do you think that there were so many deaths of young girls in the Middle Ages? They were forced to wed just after their menstrual cycle began, and to begin bearing children immeadiately. The female body does not finish puberty until the teenager has reached an age between 15 and 17.

    And I can not believe that you say that the girl who has just been raped is just going to have to deal with it. That is so completely and utterly disgusting that you would have so little regard for a human life. What is the point of bearing a child when the mother, who was once the child being born, will pass in the process just because some lunatic decided to rape her?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am sorry, but there just no exceptions. They have to learn the power of forgiveness and the importance of taking care of the child. Again, the mother can't take her anger out on the baby. The baby is just an innocent who is begging for life. Disgusting? I think you are describing abortion. It doesn't seem like you have too much regard for human life. There are so many organizations out there that help the mother cope.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "They have to learn the power of forgiveness and the importance of taking care of the child."

    The young girl is nothing more than a child herself! By your definition, she should be being taken care of! Learn to phrase things better Glen, you are treading on thin ground with some of the things that you say. You have seemingly implied that the rapist should have no punishment. If the unborn child is to live a happy and successful life, where is the second parent that you say is neccessary?

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Any past events, such as a rape, will have to forgiven and forgotten."

    Try telling that to any rape victim, asshole. I'm sure they'd agree.

    "The 11 year old who has just gotten raped has to realize that the baby is completely innocent. She has to deal with pregnancy."

    Again, you're being an absolutely heartless person. Like anonymous said, a child that young is physically incapable of delivering a child without causing harm or death to herself or the baby. I hope that you never have kids, because if something like this happened to your daughter, you'd tell her to "deal with it." Please do not procreate.

    all.org is a pro-life site. Try looking at both sides of the debate before you start. Try prochoice.org for a start. If you're going to be biased with your information, I'll feel free to be biased with mine.

    P.S. I know the Bible says that a woman who is raped is at fault and should be killed, but come on. You take that book a little too literally.

    ReplyDelete
  13. And then my parents wonder why I cna't but my belief into that book. See where it leads?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Now, this just may be me injecting logic into the situation, but wouldn't the violent rape of a child at such a young age have about a 0.0001% chance of leading to pregnancy?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Small chance, but not that small. A girl ovulate before she gets her mentrual cycle, though it is rare. And there are girls who get their cycle as early as ten years old.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The girl should be brought up and if this is the case then the girl's mother must assume some responsibility to take care of the newborn.

    The rapist should be sent to jail for a few years and then if he exhibits good behavior get released.

    The family unit will be destructed, but a mother bringing up a child has all sorts of benefits like WIC that'll help her out.
    ----

    If I tell that to a compassionate and competent rape victim then yes, they will agree.

    The women who have abortions are being heartless persons!

    I checked out prochoice.org and they make out abortion to be safe and easy. Without even looking further, is it a safe and easy process if you are the innocent child?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Question for you Glen. Do you believe that animals have souls?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hey, can we just fast forward past the part where everyone gets pissed off and the office gets involved?

    ReplyDelete
  19. As enticing as that is Matt, I'm not sure the office can say much on that, since it is not directly offensive to any one or two particular students.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This blog is completely independent of the high school, which means there is no censoring of what I can post.

    ReplyDelete
  21. If animals have no souls, then how do babies who have yet to enter the world have them? The idea of souls at conception is ridiculous. If it were true, there would be some kind of feeling that the mother would have before knowing that she was pregnant. After all, why would God keep a mother from knowing the truth of her pregnancy unless a child's soul does not enter until it has been born?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Matt, girls almost always start their period before their bodies develop, so yeah, there's the same chance that a girl age 11 or 12 will get pregnant as there is that a woman will.

    "The rapist should be sent to jail for a few years and then if he exhibits good behavior get released."

    Fantastic idea, Glen. Then, he or she will have only been in jail for as long as someone who committed a petty crime and probably won't learn much from their punishment. I suppose you think they shouldn't be labelled as sex-offenders either?

    "If I tell that to a compassionate and competent rape victim then yes, they will agree.

    The women who have abortions are being heartless persons!"

    No, you are. If you have a daughter who gets raped and then pregnant from it at, say, age 13, what would you say to her? Honestly? "Get over it, you have to deal with this"? Again, please do not have kids, ever. Use birth control and contraceptives for the sake of the rest of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous, it seems to me that you are referring to an Immaculate Conception of sorts.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I am assuming that prisoner exhibits good behavior. They will have to register as a sex-offender, of course, upon being released.

    Yes, I would be so blunt as to say simply "Get over it." Are you kidding? I would help out my daughter and tell her that she made the right choice in deciding to have the baby and that I will support her and help her out whenever she needs any. Most importantly, I would tell her that you must "forgive those who have trespassed against you."

    Why would I use birth control and contraceptives when they are strongly condemned by the Church?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Please read this post:
    http://wakefieldnews.blogspot.com/2007/11/friendly-reminder-from-administrator-of.html
    Hate to single you out, Kerri. Hey, I think rape victims should be able to get abortions, too! But please, careful how you word your responses to Glen's crazy radical views.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Yes, I would be so blunt as to say simply "Get over it." Are you kidding? I would help out my daughter and tell her that she made the right choice in deciding to have the baby and that I will support her and help her out whenever she needs any. Most importantly, I would tell her that you must "forgive those who have trespassed against you.""
    Would you make your daughter marry her rapist? Just wondering how true to your faith you really are.

    I take it you don't believe in contraceptives to help prevent the spread of STD's either?

    Also, what do you think of hysterectomies or oophorectomies, Glen?

    ReplyDelete
  28. I can't help but be sarcastic again and say: "Yes, I would command my daughter to marry the rapist." How is this a test of my faith?

    Safe sex is a myth, Kerri. C'mon!

    I don't even know what the fuck you just said, but I am against both of them.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I can't believe that I'm doing this, but I have to agree with Glen on a point. it is almost impossible to practice safe sex. 2 out of 3 condoms break during sex. But I'm against everything else, I swear!

    ReplyDelete
  30. "I can't help but be sarcastic again and say: "Yes, I would command my daughter to marry the rapist." How is this a test of my faith?

    Safe sex is a myth, Kerri. C'mon!

    I don't even know what the fuck you just said, but I am against both of them."

    1. See Deuteronomy 22:29

    2. I know there's no such thing as 100% safe sex, but there are ways to prevent STD's. I'm not saying condoms are fail-proof, but they can help protect people.

    3. So you'd rather a woman get cancer and die than remove any of her reproductive organs and inadvertently prevent herself from being able to procreate? Real nice, buddy. (Next time, use a dictionary so you can construct a valid argument.)

    ReplyDelete
  31. Please, elaborate.

    I just love how the death of the mother is nothing to you compared to the death of a fetus. How is one life more valuable than the other?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Fine, then the almost as small chance of an adult woman who was violently raped being impregnated. The chemicals produced in the body by such distress distort the body chemistry in a way that pregnancy is nearly impossible.

    Not that it matters.I honestly don't think Glen believes half of this stuff anyway, he's just trying to get a rise out of people.

    ReplyDelete
  33. They are both of equal value.

    If she is past the age where she is post-menopause or whatever it is called, then removing the uterus is okay.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Haha, if you're diagnosed before you hit menopause, you have to live with your ovarian/uterine cancer without it being removed, but you can do something to save your life (surgery) if you're diagnosed after menopause. Your logic is failing.

    I'm done, unless you say something else that offends me.

    ReplyDelete
  35. And my opinion that you're pig-headed is also subjective. But I still believe it.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Seriously, to everyone participating in this debate, no more name-calling, or I'm disabling comments.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "And my opinion that you're pig-headed is also subjective. But I still believe it."

    That doesn't validate it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Pig-headed is another way of saying stubborn, it's not an insulting term. Just so you know.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I know this is throwing the page on a completely different tract, but anyone that uses the word pig-headed as anything other than a negative statement or insult isn't using it correctly.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Glen, how on earth should I know? It's possible they just wanted to show off a good vocabulary.

    ReplyDelete
  41. of course glen wouldnt allow his daughter to marry the rapist, the rapist would have to pay glen 50 sheckles first

    ReplyDelete
  42. ahahaha thank you thebricktestament.com

    ReplyDelete
  43. I thought this was supposed to be an unbiased and informative blog, not an outlet for Glen to spread his conservative propaganda and/or get a whole lot of negative attention. I don't see other members of the Étudiant writing ragingly liberal posts akin to DailyKos.com.

    Reporting on various methods of abortion is not "news" and has absolutely no relevancy.

    And, if you must blog about abortion, try upholding some sort of journalistic integrity and at least make an attempt to deliver both sides of the story.
    ("All my information has been extracted from all.org.")

    Any merit you may have been able to retain disappeared the second you proposed forcing an 11 year old rape victim to "deal with pregnancy" and that "any past events, such as a rape, will have to forgiven and forgotten."

    Besides, we all know that prolife legislation will never become nationally sanctioned, so all of you who are upset by this post: there's no use in even paying attention to this or any other desperate rants with a prolife agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Have you ever heard of opinion pieces? I do not think you have.

    I can rant about whatever I want. It seems as if you have an pro-abortion agenda. Everyone has an agenda.

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are valued greatly. Please adhere to the decorum on the "First time here?" page. Comments that are in violation of any of the rules will be deleted without notice.

3/11 Update - No Moderation

*Non-anonymous commenting is preferred to avoid mix-ups. Anonymous comments are, at the behest of management, more likely to be deleted than non-anonymous comments.