abortion
‘Perhaps no subject illustrates the Leftist bias in Big Science better than the abortion issue. If the leading journals and science reporters actually respected observational science, they would have to agree with the pro-life position: that human life begins at conception. Instead, they fall in line with the radical Left on this subject as well as all their other current hotbed issues. A lot has happened since April 29 when we reported on Big Science’s activity promoting abortion, and how a major Supreme Court document was leaked to the press. Take a look.
After this list of recent evidence, we will see an ID scientist with a good rebuttal from actual science and logic.
The Court is ignoring science (Diana Greene Foster in Science Magazine, 19 May 2022).
This essay appeared in America’s leading science journal from the AAAS, with no rebuttal. Foster’s title indicates that she sides with the leftists currently protesting the draft opinion in Dobbs that would overturn Roe v Wade – a document was leaked illegally by a still-unidentified staffer at the Supreme Court. Foster is claiming that her pro-abortion stance is scientific. Let’s see.
The research revealed that patients who were able to receive an abortion were more than six times more likely to report aspirational 1-year plans than those who were denied one. They are more likely to have a wanted child later and better able to take care of the children they already have. Because the majority of abortion patients are already parents, this means that being able to obtain an abortion has powerful, multigenerational impacts.
By contrast, if people are forced to carry a pregnancy to term, they are more likely to experience lasting financial hardships. After being denied an abortion, women had three times greater odds of being unemployed than those who obtained abortions and had four times higher odds of being below the federal poverty level.
Foster’s “science” consisted only of surveys of 1,000 women in the so-called Turnaway Study, commissioned by former justice Anthony Kennedy. It had nothing to do with biology. It only measured subjective feelings of women who had abortions and those who did not. Most importantly, it said nothing about the human life inside the womb. The tacit conclusion is this: if something is inconvenient, and is getting in your way, or is making you unhappy, kill it. Treat it like you would a nuisance dog or cat or gopher.
The US Supreme Court is wrong to disregard evidence on the harm of banning abortion (Nature Editorial, 5 May 2022).
The world’s leading science journal preceded by two weeks the AAAS in jumping on the bandwagon to fight the Supreme Court’s draft opinion, claiming the high moral ground: it is “wrong” to ban the killing of babies (imagine!). Nature makes similar quasi-scientific arguments that only concern the health and convenience of the woman.
Abortion bans will extract an unequal toll on society. Some 75% of women who choose to have abortions are in a low income bracket and nearly 60% already have children, according to one court brief submitted ahead of the December hearing and signed by more than 150 economists. Travelling across state lines to receive care will be particularly difficult for people who do not have the funds for flights or the ability to take time off work, or who struggle to find childcare.
So what’s their solution? Kill the baby who had nothing to do with the problem? These crocodile tears fail to point out that Planned Parenthood puts their abortion centers in poor neighborhoods that are mostly black and minority. Some 40% of abortions are of black children, even though they make up just 7% of the population. This harks back to the plan of racist eugenicist evolutionist Margaret Sanger (31 July 2020), who saw minorities as less fit than whites; abortion was her way of reducing the numbers of the poor and unfit (Fox News). Sanger’s arguments still gain traction; they were reiterated recently by Janet Yellen, Biden’s Treasury Secretary (Daily Wire, 10 May 2022). Nature‘s editors are just as guilty of promoting eugenics. Rather than helping poor women, they want to eliminate them.
Abortion funds are in the spotlight with the likely end of Roe v. Wade – 3 findings about what they do (Gretchen Ely, The Conversation, 13 May 2022).
As a social work professor who studies reproductive health care, I have led research that reviewed thousands of case records of patients who requested assistance from abortion funds to help pay for a procedure that they could not afford.
Dr Ely’s article consists only of statistics about how abortion funds are allocated to women seeking abortions, and how overturning Roe might make them harder to get. Her euphemism (linking abortion with “reproductive health care”) reveals her pro-abort position. Again, nothing is said about the vulnerable living human being inside the womb. Her silence treats “it” as a non-person.
The Lancet warns US Supreme Court over abortion (Medical Xpress, 13 May 2022).
Editors of one of the leading medical journals in the world, The Lancet in Britain, give their support to protestors who are fighting the draft Supreme Court decision. Look for any sign of balance, or any concern for the life of the unborn, or any analysis of whether the Roe decision in 1973 was a good legal decision. It’s not there. Instead, you will find slogans and hate speech that could have been shouted by Chuck Schumer, Senate Majority Leader, who literally threatened two pro-life justices (Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) from the steps of the Supreme Court during their confirmation hearings (YouTube).
“The fact is that if the US Supreme Court confirms its draft decision, women will die,” the publication said.
“The justices who vote to strike down Roe will not succeed in ending abortion, they will only succeed in ending safe abortion.”
“Alito and his supporters will have women’s blood on their hands,” it concluded, referring to justice Samuel Alito, who authored the draft majority opinion of the court that was leaked last week.
Less than 1% of abortions take place in the third trimester – here’s why people get them (Katrina Kimport, The Conversation, 17 May 2022).
Baby in the womb (Illustra media)
Kimport’s article begins with a stock photo of 9 smiling young women with the caption, “If Roe v. Wade is overturned, more people could find themselves needing a third-trimester abortion.” Is that a scientific argument for abortion? No. Like the other articles emanating from Big Science and its lapdog Big Science Media, it is another argument for the convenience of the mother. Knowing that late-term abortion is unpopular even among those who support abortion “rights,” Kimport tries to make the case that there aren’t very many of those now, but there will be more if Roe is overturned (see fear-mongering in the Baloney Detector). Her evidence is anecdotal, not scientific:
Other women described barriers that weren’t directly related to policy. One young woman, for example, was so afraid that her parents would judge her for becoming pregnant and wanting an abortion that she took no action toward getting the abortion. By the time she felt able to confide in her brother, who was able to get her an appointment for an abortion, she was in the third trimester of pregnancy.
Such an argument, though, is inconsistent, because it assumes that late-term abortion is bad. So if early-term abortion is good, where does she draw the line to where it becomes bad? Like the others, she completely overlooks the issue of whether the baby growing within the mother, with its own genome, sex and human potential, has a right to life.
Roe v. Wade FAQ: What if abortion rights law gets overturned? (Live Science, 4 May 2022).
Devoid of any pro-life arguments, this article, pretending to be objective, ends up only telling women where they can still get abortions if Roe is overturned.’ The rest of the article may be read at https://crev.info/2022/05/big-science-goes-all-in-for-abortion/
‘Following Politico’s report of a leaked draft opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization indicating that a majority of justices seem inclined to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide, multiple churches and pro-life advocacy organizations have been burned, looted and vandalized by abortion extremists.’https://www.christianpost.com/news/churches-pro-life-offices-burned-vandalized-since-supreme-court-leak-list.html?uid=*%7CUNIQID%7C*&vgo_ee=FHunWZOlcI1UzNC2%2Fz2RaNSYFmrMikCwlKFARSZoYAo%3D
- “Instagram did take our feed post down. This is ok, fortunately we have talked with our team at YouTube and they’re keeping the documentary up there, which is most important. They did demonetise and take the video out of the algorithm. Which is all ok, we assumed this would happen,” said Cole in an update about the video.”
- “The biggest thing this does is significantly reduce the video’s reach. The more people the video reaches, the more people who can find help. This makes it where you can really only watch the video if you have a link or go directly to our channel.”
- “YouTube won’t further share it,” Cole continued. “At this point we’ll leave the message in God’s hands and trust that whoever is supposed to watch it, will watch it. You guys have supported this so much and we’re so thankful. If you feel lead, please share the documentary with people you know.”
BACKGROUND:
- Husband Cole and wife Savannah together have over 10 million Instagram followers and 13 million YouTube, subscribers.
- The pair met and married after Savannah already had her oldest daughter, Everly, whom she carried while in her teens.’https://americanfaith.com/instagram-influencers-the-labrant-familys-pro-life-video-removed-as-fans-attack-their-stance/
While an audience laughs at Goober the baby murdering clown another mother dies from an abortion.
‘An inquest into the death of a 31-year-old woman has found that she died of “sepsis following termination of pregnancy”.
The mother of five, Sarah Dunn, died on 11 April 2020 following an abortion in Blackpool. The post-mortem found the cause of death was “Group A streptococcus sepsis following termination of pregnancy”.
Dunn had a medical abortion at seven weeks gestation. In the week following her abortion, Dunn experienced heavy vaginal bleeding, nausea, sweating and pain. She went to her GP 8 days after the abortion, but the infection was not detected, despite the fact that, according to the family’s lawyers, these were clear indicators of infection.
Her symptoms progressively worsened until she was rushed to Blackpool Victoria Hospital on 10 April, where she suffered a seizure, then multiple organ failure and died in intensive care.
The details of the inquest are not yet available.
The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) is the largest abortion provider in Britain. On their website, they state that in 2% of cases of medical abortions, there are “retained products of conception”. This means that an abortion was not complete so that the contents of the uterus, sometimes including parts of the unborn baby, were not completely removed during the abortion. This in turn can lead to infection.’https://www.lifenews.com/2021/11/08/31-year-old-woman-dies-from-botched-legal-abortion-that-caused-lethal-infection/
Psalm 139:14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. The audience laughed when they should have cried.
‘In between making balloon animals and squirting a fake flower that sprays water, a Saturday Night Live comedian joked about aborting her unborn baby on the show over the weekend.
Dressed in a clown suit, Cecily Strong claimed she “wouldn’t be a clown on TV here today” if she had not had an abortion at age 23, Breitbart reports.
“Here’s my truth. I know I wouldn’t be a clown on TV here today if it weren’t for the abortion I had the day before my 23rd birthday,” Strong’s character, Goober the Clown, said. “Clowns have been helping each other and their pregnancies since the caves. It’s going to happen, so it oughta be safe, legal and accessible.”
The skit attacked the Texas heartbeat law, which prohibits abortions once an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable, about six weeks of pregnancy. Texas is the first state to be allowed to enforce a heartbeat abortion ban, and already it has saved thousands of babies’ lives.’https://www.lifenews.com/2021/11/08/disgusting-saturday-night-live-skit-jokes-about-killing-babes-in-abortions/
‘All would agree that life is precious – all, that is, except liberal-minded politicians and evolutionary-thinking scientists. Their lives are precious to them, but no one else’s is, especially those who cannot protect themselves, like the unborn (abortion) and the elderly (euthanasia).
Is abortion a sin? Is it murder? The answers for any Christian depend solely on what God’s Word says about it. According to the creator of life and the foremost authority on life, life begins at conception. A human being is a human being the instant that first fertilized cell comes into existence. At that point, everything about the one to be born nine months later is intact: all
the genes and chromosomes that will develop into a fully viable body of flesh.
According to Hosea 9:11, Ephraim was a living creation “from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception.” Not only are we human beings when we are born and take our first breath of air, but also while we are developing in the womb. But that is not far enough back. We are fully human “from the conception.” From birth, i.e., from the first breath of air; from the womb, i.e., from the forming of the body; from conception, i.e., from the very moment life begins, we are fully human.
In the womb, God is actively forming our bodies (Jer. 1:5; Psa. 139: 13-16). Then abortion is a direct and deliberate
interference with the work of God.
That same verse in Hosea mentions Ephraim’s glory, and says it “shall fly away.” How will it fly away? In the same
chapter (v.13) we are told that Ephraim “shall bring forth children to the murderer.” Is that not what mothers the world over
are doing, even some Christian mothers?
Babies are human from their conception, but many people do not consider their unborn children to be human. The
unborn are viewed as just a blob of protoplasm with no real value before birth. In the Roe versus Wade case, U.S. Supreme
Court Justice Harry Blackmun said that until viability, the state has no compelling interest in protecting the fetus. (Viability
means able to survive outside the womb.) (We also object to the scientific terms “fetus” and “embryo.” Such words dehumanize unborn babies, promoting the idea that there is something there, but it is not yet human.)
May we say in passing that abortion, the deliberate murder of unborn children, is just as heinous as what Dr. Josef Mengele (called the Angel of Death) did to countless children (and adults) in the Nazi Auschwitz death camp. Some abortion techniques would rival some of Mengele’s cruel methods. One record of Mengele’s dealings with children states, “…afflicted children were killed so that their preserved heads and organs could be sent to the SS Medical Academy in Graz and other facilities for study.” Sounds
like some of the atrocities done to aborted babies in the name of scientific research, such as embryonic stem cell research. (To quote “science”: “To obtain embryonic stem cells, the early embryo has to be destroyed.”
Ephraim’s glory, mentioned in Hosea 9:11, is the glory of human life (Psa. 8:5). The more we sin (murdering babies
in this discussion), the more God turns that glory into shame (Hos. 4:7). Isaiah wondered what we will do in the day God visits
our sin (Isa. 10:3), and asks, “where will ye leave your glory?” Could we say in this context that our human glory will be left
in the trashcan of aborted babies!
So, let’s answer the questions. Is abortion murder, that is, the deliberate taking of a human life? Yes, it is. Then is
abortion a sin? Yes, it is.
What if the mother’s life is at risk, would God not allow murdering the baby in such a case? Actually, the risk of a
mother’s life during pregnancy is about 1%, per pro-abortion UCLA Professor of Obstetrics Dr. Irving Cushner. In a multistate survey of why women obtain abortions, of the 1.3 million surveyed women who had had abortions, only 1.03% replied
that it was to protect their lives. So much for the scarecrow of threat to the life of the mother.
Interestingly, Alan Guttmacher of Planned Parenthood and great promoter of abortion on demand said, “Today it is
possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal disease such as cancer or
leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save the life.”
Or, consider this statement by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, American Bioethics Advisory Commission: “There are no
conceivable clinical situations today where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother. In fact, if her health is threatened
and an abortion is performed, the abortion increases risks the mother will incur regarding her health.”
There is only one purpose for abortion, to end the life of the child. Thus, all other reasons or logic are nonsense.
We all know the Catholic Church stands against abortion. While we do not stand with the Catholic Church, a statement
by Pope Pius XI, spoken decades before abortion was legalized, is appropriate. He said, “However we may pity the mother
whose health and even life is imperiled by the performance of her natural duty, there yet remains no sufficient reason for
condoning the direct murder of the innocent.”
Well, what about a victim of rape? Should not the woman be allowed an abortion? Again, the numbers are miniscule,
only .39% due to rape or incest. Even those numbers have been proven to be greatly exaggerated. Under the Pennsylvania
Abortion Control Act, records stated that many women admitted they were reporting rapes just to justify getting an abortion.
People in authority have even promoted such lying. Congresswoman Nita Lowey, trying to get federal funding for abortions,
said, “I’d tell my constituents, ‘Send a letter. Say you were raped. Say it was incest. Say you have heart disease.’”
We do not belittle the fact that there are real women who suffer the trauma of rape and then discover they are with child from it. Even so, abortion is still murder. Could not the victim have the unwanted child and give it over for adoption, rather than having it
murdered? Many rape victims blame themselves. Adding abortion will only increase their remorse. And think of this. Those who cry so loudly about having a rape-conceived child aborted, say nothing or little about the rapist. Do they not know that God’s law requires a rapist to be executed? (See Deut. 22:25-27.)
The pro-abortion Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice says that pro-lifers must never condone a single
abortion and must never apologize for fighting abortions due to rape and incest. They said, “Opponents of abortion rights walk
a fine line within their own movement when they condone any abortion. Based on their own definition, they are guilty of being
accessories to ‘murder’ in certain circumstances by accepting rape and incest exceptions.” Why can’t Christians see that
connection?
While rape and incest are horrible crimes (sin) against innocent victims, there are many famous people who were not
aborted when their mothers were victims (and certainly many, many more who are not famous). The well-known Gospel singer,
Ethel Waters was the result of rape when her mother was only 12 years old. Eartha Kitt, Zahara Jolie-Pitt, Jesse Jackson, Layne
Beachley, Janet Sheen, and many others came into this world because their mothers were victims of rape or incest. (We are not
condoning any of those named. They are noted only to make the point that abortion destroys future lives and future
accomplishments.)
The sixth commandment, “Thou shaly not kill” (Exo. 20:13), should settle the matter once and for all for all Christians. When Jesus reworded that commandment, He defined the word “kill” as “murder” (Matt. 19:18). Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a person especially with malice aforethought. (That definition eliminates warfare, self-defence, and legal execution as being murder.) God’s decree for violating that commandment is: “Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death…” (Num. 35:30).
May we Christians stand firmly against murder of any kind, including abortion and euthanasia.’ http://www.gcbi.org/Article3.pdf
You MUST watch these two videos. Freedom as we have known it has been put aside for WOKENESS!
‘The chief constable of Norfolk police has refused to condemn an officer who said that offending someone was the equivalent of punching them in the face following an assault on a pro-life campaigner in Norwich city centre. On 23 July 2021, instead of being supported by police after reporting that a female team member had been assaulted, Dave Brennan of the Centre for Bioethical Reform UK (CBR UK) was instead told that he could be equally guilty of having ‘offended someone’. For 13 years CBR UK have put on graphic educational displays on the reality of abortion in towns and cities across the country. The human rights group seeks social reform through the power of images and display images of pre and post abortion. They state that their aim is never to condemn anyone who has had a past abortion but to educate and protect future mothers and their children. The vast majority of their education events pass without incident and thousands of members of the public leave the displays informed on the reality of abortion each year. 700 abortions take place in the UK every day with 9 million in total since the 1967 Abortion Act, which Mr Brennan describes as ‘the silent holocaust of our time.’’
whatyareckon 