Pro Choice Hypocrisy

All of us have come across stories where a pregnant woman is attacked and in the process loses her baby. I cannot imagine a more tragic circumstance, and, in my opinion the attacker needs to undergo a dark age’s style execution...on television. What is surprising is the number of so-called pro choice adherents who agree with me.

---

These are people who voted for Obama because he declared that children still in the womb were not actually living, but could in fact be considered a “punishment” of the mother if she was “forced” to give birth. They think doctors (if these people could actually be considered doctors) should be allowed to ram a pair of scissors into the back of the partially delivered fetus’ head, killing it and then tossing the body into a nearby garbage bin. They applaud Obama’s fight to kill a law that would have allowed doctors to maintain the life of babies who survived abortions. So where is the difference? Is there some magical process whereby during one set of circumstances concerning what is carried in the womb has no rights and in another those rights are suddenly conferred? With nothing else changing? Perhaps it is that one killer carries a medical license and the other doesn’t. Perhaps it is in one case the mother’s choice and in the other…a lack of choice? If the technology existed, would the pro choice crowd ask the baby? Obviously, the animals that attacked these mothers cared nothing about that, but they are not the point in this column. The point is the hypocrisy of politics. If the pro choice crowd is to be consistent they have to change their terms. Anything else is hypocrisy. By simple definition “pro choice” actually means “pro death”, because in the operating room no one in those ranks allows a choice for life. They live in a world of semantics. “Pro life” is called anti choice, even though pro life is the closer term in dealing with the rational behind that stance. How can an 18 week fetus be alive and be worthy of the same rights as a child in one case and not even be considered living tissue in another? What is even worse; how can so many usually intelligent people even consider such a dichotomy of logic be a valid argument? Why does a serial killer elicit from them a flood of compassion and an unborn child, the epitome of innocence, nothing but contempt? I think that the reason is that these normally intelligent people have taken a path that, in any other circumstance, would have them declared legally insane, or at the least mentally incompetent. It comes down to a hatred of what they see as them being judged. It comes down to the philosophy of “the soul”. They hate the Christian religion. They even hate the idea of there being a Christian religion and they have schooled themselves in this hatred to that it has become a visceral response to anything that smacks of Christianity. The other religions are not so bad, but Christianity…evil. They believe that anyone who professes Christianity is automatically judging their actions, their lifestyle and their person. It makes it difficult to discuss such a hot button issue with any decorum. All right, so let’s take religion out of the mix. Let’s throw out the argument about when the “soul” enters the fetus and it magically becomes a baby. Let’s use measurable medical evidence with regard to an 18 week old fetus. Is there measurable brain activity? Yes. Does the fetus react to external stimuli in a measurable sapient manner? Yes. Is there a heart beat? Yes. Does non-living organic matter grow? No. Then by this evidence, in addition to many more tests, medical science would have to declare an 18 week old fetus alive. How about the human factor? Where did this fetus come from? Are its parents human? Was the genetic material that began the process of growth from humans? If it is not a form of human life, than what is it?

Abortionists and their supporters will battle to the death to prevent an unborn child being called “human”

Shocking, right? What is really shocking is that most liberals refuse to take that logical step. It is almost as if you are asking the pro death crowd to become apostate. So, why do abortion supporters absolutely refuse to acknowledge this evidence? If the fetus outside of the operating room wasn’t human, much less alive, where is the crime? If we assume the living part, there is still the question of humanity. Currently the abortionists and their supporters will battle to the death to prevent an unborn child being called “human”. If that is the case, the animals that attacked these women could not be charged with manslaughter. The charge would have to be something far more politically correct. Many will take this column as being insensitive, even mean. The heart-wrenching tragedy families go though in such circumstances cannot be measured in any rational sense, and in my opinion they are deserving of justice in the highest order. Of course, that opinion will fall on deaf ears because I had the temerity and bad taste to even bring this subject up. That is the same attitude that gave us Barrack Hussein Obama.