Abortion: ‘Mercy Killing’ One Fifth Of The American People

Since Roe v. Wade took effect in 1973, almost 56 million abortions have been performed. The US population is 319 million. In four decades, approximately one-fifth of the American population has been legally exterminated. The excuses given for abortion vary. In some cases, the life in the womb may be hopelessly compromised by deformity or other physical condition diagnosed pre-birth. This makes abortion a form of mercy killing.

In other cases, it isn’t about physical well-being, but about certain social conditions under which a child might live. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood’s predecessor and the progenitor of eugenics and social engineering, favored abortion in cases where the child would suffer the social ills of poverty or of coming from a low ethnic caste. She considered large families a blight on society and advocated the wholesale extermination of any ethnic group she considered undesirable to the rest of humanity. Among these were people with black skin, whom she said would pollute the gene pool. She succeeded remarkably in this egregious venture, considering that, of the 56 million abortions performed since 1973, approximately 16 million were black. Even Hitler could not outdo Margaret Sanger. He killed only 9 million. Margaret Sanger openly admired him. She considered the abortion of black children a mission to save society, a kind of mercy killing that was more a mercy to society than to the lives taken.

Since Roe v. Wade, we have seen and heard reasons for abortion that are based almost exclusively on the choice of the woman who wants to end her pregnancy. She need not even give a reason for aborting. But mostly, it boils down to whether the woman feels better about killing the life growing in her womb than she does about carrying it to term. This too is a form of “mercy” killing, but without the slightest excuse that it is for the benefit of the child. It is killing exclusively for the mother’s comfort.

In survey after survey, when asked whether they favor abortion, women have said that they do not favor it for themselves but that they favor some other woman’s right to choose whether or not to abort. This is invalid reasoning. If one favors the right of someone—anyone—to choose the death of another, one favors that death as much as the person who is doing the choosing. There is no moral sliding scale here.

As to the argument that the fetus is nothing more than a glob of tissue, then why is it necessary to have a procedure in which its life is ended by stopping its heart or vital processes? And even if one perceives that the fetus is only tissue, what kind of tissue is it: a tree, a fish, a rare bird? No, a human fetus is destined to become a functioning human being.

The process begins with conception. Even the word “conception”–derived from the Latin root “concepiere” and “conceptus” meaning to take in and hold, as in an egg which takes and holds the sperm–indicates clearly that the point is for the sperm and egg to join and “conceive” a life which will gestate and become a person. Regardless of terms bantered about in forensic debate, there is no denying that what is inside the womb during the gestation period for all mammals is a life. Therefore, whether it is tissue or more than tissue, it is human tissue which is unquestionably alive.

Women will often speak angrily of arguments against abortion. These arguments always center upon the rights of the mother and always presume that the life within the womb belongs to that mother to use and dispose of as she wishes. Notice the term “mother” is always used, causing one to ask further: can a woman be mother to mere tissue? The question is rarely asked, however, in regard to abortion, whether someone possesses the right to decide the fate of another person, someone outside that woman’s womb.

Indeed, except in rare circumstances outlined by law, no one possesses that right, not even if it makes her feel better. She cannot, for example, decide, for instance, whether the rapist who made her pregnant must die. She may wish it, and she may file charges against him. But she has no right to determine his fate, regardless of how ugly a crime rape admittedly is. Even a murder victim’s family does not have the right to determine the fate of the murderer. That must be determined by a court of law, in a tortuous series of legal procedures. Why, then, is the life within her womb not also entitled to a judicial hearing and due process? It would seem that the question is worth a national discussion.

Does anyone have the right to end a life that she has had a part in conceiving? First, the woman had a part in conceiving that life; but she was responsible only for the physical contribution of the egg which captured the sperm of the man with whom she conceived it. But, they are responsible only for the physical contribution of egg and sperm, not for the magic of creation itself.

Whether or not one believes in God, there is no denying that the process by which life is created takes place out of the realm of human will. People do have reproductive rights, but those rights are simply to decide whether or not to have sex. All people can do to control whether or not conception occurs is to avoid it by methods that keep the egg from capturing the sperm. In cases of rape, it is regrettable that the woman is prevented from exercising her will in the matter; but the physical reality is that, once that union occurs, nature takes its course–and conception does or does not occur at the will of God or nature.

One could reason that Roe v. Wade flies in the face of our fundament laws, the Founding Documents, upon which all other American laws proceed–notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s interpretation in 1973. The Declaration of Independence states clearly that we are endowed by our Creator with the unalienable right of life. That creator is not specifically defined, leaving it to individual interpretation. But if human rights are endowed by their creator, they are endowed at the moment of creation.

It can in no way be interpreted that the Declaration recognizes the Creator as either the man or the woman who committed the act that led to conception. They are merely the agents who provide the physical means of creation. But creation itself, the endowing of life, is not the work of the parents; thus, they do not have a right to use and dispose of that life. If indeed the biological parents could be recognized as its creators and had the right to dispose of that life, then the man would have as much right to make the decision to abort as the woman. Why could he not decide to have the life destroyed within the woman’s belly even if she objected? The logic of such a proposition is absurd.

Women argue their right to abort by saying that the fetus is a part of the mother’s body. Actually, it isn’t anatomically a part of her physical self. It is a separate, self-contained entity thriving in the amniotic sack separate from, but within her body. Far from having a right to destroy a life they are merely agents in creating, parents have the obligation to nurture and protect that life from all harm.

Neither the man nor the woman has the right to do that life harm of any sort, including killing it and removing it from its mother’s belly. Whether one considers it tissue or a baby, it is the life they have no right to take; and that it is life is undeniable.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

WATCH: This CEO Just Admitted Something About Planned Parenthood That Will Make Your Blood Boil

An eighth video detailing the sales of aborted baby body parts is more shocking than any of the others, with a StemExpress L.L.C. CEO laughing about how fully intact babies are shipped to the lab. Here is a preview:

“Tell the lab it’s coming. You know, open the box and go ‘Oh my God,’” Cate Dyer, StemExpress’ CEO, said with a laugh. Dyer said there are a lot of cases where intact babies are sent to the lab.

The latest video went online Aug. 21, immediately after a judge lifted a restraining order against the Center for Medical Progress. StemExpress, which procures aborted babies from Planned Parenthood, filed a lawsuit to block information released in the undercover operation. A California court blocked the Center for Medical Progress in July from releasing videos of some StemExpress meetings. It was a narrow restraining order, so the group released other videos while the court ruled on the StemExpress information.

Reaction to the videos has been swift, with StemExpress cutting ties with Planned Parenthood and two congressional committees launching separate investigations. A House committee is considering whether the non-profit abortion provider has broken federal law when doctors, admittedly by Planned Parenthood officials, change procedures to gain better body parts to sell. Another committee, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is probing whether the Obama Administration provided grants to Planned Parenthood through the Department of Health and Human Services that ultimately supported the sales of tissue and organs from aborted babies.

Five states have revoked taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood since the first video’s release. Those states include Utah, Arkansas, New Hampshire, Alabama and Louisiana. The latest official to state concern is Iowa’s governor, Terry Branstad, who has ordered a review of funding for the non-profit.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Alert: Something Massive Is About To Happen In Over 300 Cities That Could Change Countless Lives

Image for representational purposes only.

Multiple pro-life groups are coming together to sponsor a nationwide protest of Planned Parenthood on Saturday, August 22. Over 300 rallies are planned in cities across the United States from 9am to 11am local time.

The three main groups organizing the #ProtestPP rallies are Pro-Life Action League, Created Equal, and Citizens for a Pro-life Society.

In a joint release, the groups said the purpose of the rallies is to create “awareness of the barbaric practice of abortion and the sale of aborted baby body parts…”

According to the release, the protests come in response to undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress showing leaders of Planned Parenthood discussing the sale of aborted babies’ body parts. “Currently, there are over 300 cities in 47 states and 5 countries represented in the nationwide protest.”

“Our aim is to make this big national scandal a local story all over the country by bringing public protest to the actual abortion facilities where the dismembering and selling of aborted babies’ bodies is taking place,” Eric J. Scheidler, executive director at the Pro-Life Action League, told the Christian Post

Mark Harrington, Created Equal’s National Director, stated the ultimate goal of the #ProtestPP campaign: “We don’t just want to defund Planned Parenthood; we want to defeat Planned Parenthood.”

And Monica Miller of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society noted that “when PP technicians are scavenging through the body parts of aborted babies to find tissue that they hope to sell, this adds a whole new gruesome and ghoulish layer to the already highly controversial practice of abortion in America.”

“It’s bad enough that Planned Parenthood is profiting from abortions–but on top of that they exploit the bodies of their murder victims for additional revenue,” said Miller.

Image Credit: Twitter/@LiveAction

Image Credit: Twitter/@LiveAction

As reported by Western Journalism, the most recent video released earlier this week features a former “tissue procurement specialist” with a Planned Parenthood partner organization, discussing the horror she felt witnessing the beating of an intact aborted baby’s heart. Her supervisor then instructed her to harvest the boy’s brain for sale.

Saturday’s rallies will mark the second nationwide protest against Planned Parenthood. The “Women Betrayed” rallies, coordinated by Students for Life of America and Pro-Life Future, were held on July 28 and drew over 13,000 people in 85 cities and 34 states, according to Life Site News

The Gospel Herald reports that Saturday’s rallies will likely be the largest protest against Planned Parenthood in the organization’s 99 year history.

Locations for protests can be found HERE.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

One 2016 Candidate Just Made A Huge Move To Ensure Planned Parenthood Vids Can’t Be Ignored

Republican presidential hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz just wrote an op-ed for USA Today in which he makes an impassioned plea for Congress to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood in the wake of a series of shocking videos about the practices of the nation’s largest abortion provider. But another GOP candidate for the 2016 nomination, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, is taking a more visible and dramatic tack in his effort to promote pro-life policies.

Cruz’s piece in USA Today was compelling as he argued that Americans should not be forced to fund the activities of Planned Parenthood through their tax dollars. “An organization that generates a large part of its revenue from terminating innocent human life should not receive one penny of taxpayer money and those who engage in what may be criminal activity must be held to account.”

Jindal’s pushback against Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion activists has taken the form of a big-screen visual display outside the Governor’s mansion in Baton Rouge. According to Breitbart, the Thursday showing of the videos released by the pro-life group Center for Medical Progress (CMP) coincided with a protest at the executive residence by pro-choice supporters of the abortion provider:

…while abortion supporters protested outside the Governor’s mansion in Baton Rouge, Jindal set up a huge movie screen and speakers and played on a continuous loop all of the videos released in recent weeks showing the brutality of Planned Parenthood’s baby-parts business.

One of the problems faced by the Center for Medical Progress is that many people are refusing the watch the grisly undercover videos where Planned Parenthood personnel discuss dissecting aborted babies in order to sell their eyes, lungs, livers, hearts, and even brains.

As Western Journalism has reported, the most recent video released by CMP shows a former Planned Parenthood insider describing how an employee restarted the heart of a close to fully developed baby boy and then cut through the baby’s face with scissors to retrieve his intact brain. That harvested brain was then reportedly sold for medical experimentation.

Regarding Thursday’s big-screen display of the CMP videos during the protest by pro-abortion rights activists, Jindal’s office issued a statement that read in part: “Planned Parenthood has a right to protest today, but Governor Jindal’s office will ensure that anyone who shows up will have to witness first-hand the offensive actions of the organization they are supporting.”

Louisiana is among a handful of states where Planned Parenthood has lost government funding since the release of the videos showing officials and employees of the organization and its affiliates discussing the sale of aborted baby parts. Live Action News says that New Hampshire, Utah, Arkansas, and Alabama have also taken action to strip financial support from Planned Parenthood. Other states have launched investigations of Planned Parenthood offices operating within their borders.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Hillary Complained About GOP’s ‘Offensive’ Term. Huckabee Fired Back 2 PERFECT Sentences…

Former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, a Republican presidential candidate, slammed his Democratic counterpart, Hillary Clinton, on Twitter Wednesday after she condemned the use of the term “anchor babies.”

Speaking on Bill Bennett’s Morning in America Wednesday, another GOP presidential candidate, former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, told the former Reagan education secretary his view on illegal immigrants who are able to stay in the United States by virtue of having children after crossing the border:

If there’s abuse, if people are bringing — pregnant women are coming in to have babies simply because they can do it, then there ought to be greater enforcement.

That’s [the] legitimate side of this. Better enforcement so that you don’t have these, you know, ‘anchor babies,’ as they’re described, coming into the country.

Taken aback by the use of the two-word term, Clinton tweeted the following along with an article from Politico:

Shortly thereafter, Huckabee noted that those seen and discussed in the videos produced by the Center for Medical Progress, in which Planned Parenthood employees are seen negotiating prices over fetal tissue, are also babies:

While at a press event in New Hampshire Wednesday, a reporter asked Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump if he was “aware that the term ‘anchor baby,’ that’s an offensive term?”

“You mean it’s not politically correct, and yet everybody uses it?” the real estate tycoon immediately responded. “So, you know what? Give me a different term. Give me a different term. What else would you like to say?” 

The reporter suggested to Trump a loquacious alternative: “The American-born child of an undocumented immigrant.”

“Oh, you want me to say that?” asked Trump. “OK. I’ll use the word ‘anchor baby.’”

Is the term “anchor baby” offensive? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth