"A woman has the right to make a decision about her own body, so if she wants to have her unborn child killed, then that should be her choice."

When I hear these words, I want to "throw up." How can it be anyone's choice to take the life of a human being? For accuracy and truthfulness, I replaced the word abortion with the words "kill her unborn child," but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that they mean the same.

To begin with, the fetus is not her body. The eyes, heart, brain, lungs, arms and legs of a fetus are not hers. They belong to the fetus. Even the blood type can be different. The DNA is different. She nourishes the fetus. After a baby is born, he/she also cannot survive on his/her own. he/she also requires nourishment or he/she will die. To kill the latter is murder. To kill the former after Roe v. Wade, is not murder; it is not second degree murder; it is not voluntary manslaughter; it is not involuntary manslaughter; it is not a felony; it is not even a misdemeanor.

This boggles my mind. The unborn baby is considered just a blob of tissue. It’s as if a cancer was excised. Over 45 million unborn children have been exterminated since the infamous Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court decision in 1973.

Before Roe v. Wade, if a woman had killed her unborn baby, she was looked down on. Some had to leave town. People would whisper behind her back, that she had killed her baby. The morals of our country has changed greatly, since the Supreme Court legalized the killing of the unborn. What a contrast to the mindset of the public before and after the Roe v. Wade decision. The unthinkable is now commonplace. What once was disgusting to most of us is now repugnant to only the very religious and to those with great love in their hearts.

Our forefathers, who couldn't make a move without including God, would be labeled the "religious right," or "fanatic religious right," if they were alive today. That is what today's Democrats label people, who are religious.

In 1871, The American Medical Association called abortions, "foul, unprovoked murders." Our feminist foremothers, Susan B. Anthony, Brinkerhoff, Gage, Goldman, Norton, Paul, and Stanton, all vehemently opposed abortions. Abortion was referred to as "child murder." This reflects how morality has degenerated since that time. How far do we have to go into the cesspool, before we start gagging? It’s now legal to kill your unborn child right up to term. During the third trimester, it's done for the health of the mother. If a physical reason can’t be found, then a mental one WILL be found.

Now people have an excuse to kill their unborn children. After all, these learned people on the supreme should know what they're doing. So if it's legal then there must be nothing wrong with it. People are always looking for the easy way out. "Why do I have to be inconvenienced with this pregnancy? Why, I'll just kill my child."

Is it any wonder that the killing of over 45 million unborn children is one of the contributing factors to the public's perception that LIFE IS CHEAP.

If someone were to ask God, "God, is it OK if I kill my unborn baby?" is God really going to say, "I created your baby, but if you want to kill your child, go ahead"? With the killing of 45 million of God's creations, I feel that God is looking down on us with a sad face, and the devil is looking up with a big smile on his face. Can anyone disagree with this?

Who do YOU think is smiling and who do YOU think is sad? You’re going to have to take sides and choose one, because just as sure as I am writing this, there is a battle going on in this country between good and evil, between GOD and satan.

I try to get into the minds of the PCKU (Pro Choice To Kill The Unborn) and to think the way that they do, (i.e., the fetus is nothing but a blob of tissue), but no matter how hard I try, I cannot. What manner of people are they? Why can't they see what I see: that the precious unborn, regardless of the stage of development, is God's most magnificent creation? Was I, and all the other Pro-lifers, born with an extra gene, a loving and compassionate gene? Of course not. But then why?

Their stock answer seems to be, "I personally think abortions are wrong, but I also believe the woman has to make that choice."

Why doesn’t the PCKU use the same logic for all killings (i.e., let a person have the choice to take any life) and not just the life of an unborn baby? Because it doesn't hold water and they would sound "stupid."

Why don't women who take drugs make the same argument? "It’s my body, and I have a right to take drugs if I want to." This "own body" argument would not sell. They'd be thrown in jail.

Recently in Florida, prostitutes tried to use the "own body" argument in court, but the judge threw it out. I guess it only applies when it comes to killing your unborn baby. Figure that one out.

Surely, pro-choicers have access to information of what scientists and physicians, who are specialists in their field, have told us, such as the following:

The unborn, of the human species is a highly complex, sentient, functioning individual. This is an established scientific fact. The human unborn does respond to stimuli; this is established beyond any reasonable doubt. Real time ultrasonography, fetoscopy, study of fetal EKG and fetal EEG all have demonstrated the remarkable responsiveness of the human fetus to pain, touch, and sound. Observations of the fetal electrocardiogram and the increase in fetal movements in saline abortions indicate that the fetus experiences pain as he/she dies.

The following was written by medical experts from the Ohio Department of Health:

Note that this material was not written by "anti-abortion activists"; it was written by medical experts from the Department of Health.

At 4 weeks -- (6 weeks after the first day of the last normal menstrual period).

The heart, now in a tubular form, begins to beat by the 25th day.

At 6 weeks -- Electrical activity begins in the developing brain and nervous system.

At 8 weeks -- Arms, legs, hands, toes and face begin to form.

[Recent reliable studies have found that the arms, legs, hands, fingers, feet, toes and face of an unborn child begin to form at 6 weeks gestation. It is also a known fact that when most abortions are done all of the above have already been formed, including a beating heart.]

At 10 weeks -- The heart beat can be detected electronically. The fetus begins small random movements, though they are too slight to be felt yet.

[More recent studies have found that unborn children do, indeed, move about in the womb at 6 weeks gestation. We have a description of a baby in a tubal pregnancy (again, 6 weeks, because after that, the tube ruptures). The doctor said he saw the baby swimming around in the sac once a second with a natural swimmers' stroke.]

At 12 weeks -- The fetus is able to swallow and the kidneys are able to make urine. A doctor may be able to tell if it's a boy or a girl. Blood begins to form in the bone marrow.

At 16 weeks -- The fetus can kick and sleep.

20 weeks -- The fetus has been moving for several weeks. Now the woman begins to feel these movements.

28 weeks -- The fetus has lungs that can breathe air. About 9 out of 10 babies born now will survive.

32 weeks -- The fetus can grasp firmly.

38 weeks -- (40 WEEKS after the first day of the last normal menstrual period)
The baby has reached full term and is ready to be born.

So, how in the world, with the knowledge available to us, can pro-choicers say that they are just blobs of tissue, since the fetus is a human fetus (not animal), and since he/she is a being (dictionaries define "being" as "the state or quality of having existence")? So even by definition, the fetus is a human being, unless you have the gall to say that the fetus does not exist. Dictionaries define a human being as a person.

Continued

Home