Consider the views of those who care deeply about animal rights. What drives them? Animals are helpless creatures, often subject to terrible violence, and they cannot speak for themselves. Their dignity and value are quite inconvenient for those who want to exploit them, and their needs are pushed to the margins of our culture. Indeed, we are rarely forced to confront the dignity of animals, especially animals we eat. This is what drives the passion of activists in their attempts to speak for voiceless animals. And in their zeal to bring us face to face with animal suffering, tellingly, they regularly use undercover videos. These videos have been quite successful in bringing some terrible realities to light – for example, the conditions of chickens in the worst factory farms.
Anti-abortion activists are driven in similar ways. Prenatal children are also helpless and often subject to terrible violence. They obviously cannot speak for themselves. Their dignity and value are inconvenient for those who want abortion to be broadly legal and who want to use fetal tissue for research. They too are largely invisible, though this is changing because of ultrasound imagery and smartphone applications that can listen to a baby’s heartbeat in the womb. Words like “fetus,” “tissue” and “products of conception” help keep the reality of abortion at bay. But as we have now seen with the Planned Parenthood story, anti-abortion activists have also been successful in using undercover videos in bringing terrible reality to light – what in one setting is called the “products of conception” in another is a “baby bump,” and the antiseptic “tissue” means functioning organs.
Planned Parenthood’s latest. Viewer discretion very much advised. I suppose if you carve the organs out of a born fetus, otherwise known as a baby, then they would be intact.
Sometimes if someone delivers before we are able to see them for procedure then we are intact but that’s not what we go for.”
-Dr. Savita Ginde, Medical Director, Planned Parenthood, Rocky Mountains, Colorado
This refers to babies that are “accidentally” born before the abortion can kill them, thereby providing intact organs for research.
This investigative journalism into Planned Parenthood is making our world into an Edgar Allen Poe, and the silence from people who either overtly or tacitly support abortion is overwhelming.
This is not about whether the parts have been sold… though that’s the hook du jour. This is about killing people and then dissecting them and then having a bunch of ideologues defend it, usually on the premise that somehow this is a woman’s right.
Saying nothing makes a strong statement.
Planned Parenthood Federation of Canada has not warned you that their sister organization in the United States is currently embroiled in a ghoulish controversy involving the sale of preborn baby hearts, brains, lungs, kidneys, livers, and whatever other tissue they can sell.
Watch this. From the Center for Medical Progress.
Does Planned Parenthood Federation of Canada have any connection with the American organization? Regardless, they share a name. Will they stand up and condemn this?
Where there are human parts there are human beings. These macabre episodes from the Center for Medical Progress show that. For so long pro-choicers have claimed the fetal pictures are false.
We need to put an end to this and by “this,” I mean abortion.
Interesting. Hard to say they are making it up or fudging the footage. Hard also to believe that there is worse to come.
Great column from USA Today. Just great.
This is stomach-turning stuff. But the problem here is not one of tone. It’s the crushing. It’s the organ harvesting of fetuses that abortion-rights activists want us to believe have no more moral value than a fingernail. It’s the lie that these are not human beings worthy of protection. There is no nice way to talk about this. As my friend and former Obama White House staffer Michael Wear tweeted, “It should bother us as a society that we have use for aborted human organs, but not the baby that provides them.”
I think they may well have many, many, many of these videos. I have long thought the main way one is an abortionist as a career is to deaden one’s soul to the reality of what one does. Once that happens, then organ sales are not that big a deal.
I’m looking forward to reading this book, Girl in Glass. Just heard an interview on NPR yesterday with the author, who is the mother of the “distressed baby” born at 25 weeks. Here’s an article about the story. I never heard about the initial controversy.
At a town hall with employees, AOL Chief Executive Tim Armstrong explained his reasoning behind the cuts that had recently been made to the company’s retirement benefits: He blamed rising costs linked with the Affordable Care Act — and, more specifically, he blamed the costs of covering two “distressed babies.”
Some other highlights:
On her daughter’s time in the neonatal intensive care unit
The first time I reached into her incubator, she held onto my hand. Her fingers were so tiny that they hardly felt like fingers, but they grasped my finger, and from that moment on, I could see, you know, she’s fighting for her life, and the least that I can do as her mother is to be here with her.
On any given day I might feel, you know, that this is a good day — she gained an ounce, her oxygen levels are steady, her heart rate is steady — and then, three hours later, her lung had collapsed or her weight had plummeted. And, you know, I have to say there’s nothing like having a child on life support for three months to give you perspective on what matters.
What a painful time this must have been. I love the respect the author shows this tiny person, fighting for her life.
Of course all the pro-choicers in the world say they too love this story. Because the mom wanted to have this baby, it was right and good for her to be born. But if she had not wanted the baby, then it would have been right and good to have an abortion. For anti-choicers like me, we are saying some things are not a choice. Everyone is anti-choice in some ways. So the question is what are legit choices for you? And by what standard do you decide?
It’s May Day. So I asked my friend Paul Malvern, who stands up for working people AND is pro-life to offer his comments. Here they are:
While many people associate May Day with big military parades held decades back in the Soviet Union and other communist countries, the reality is quite different since this special day is as American as apple pie and as Canadian as hockey.
For, starting out in the 19th century, workers and their families in these two countries have used local May Day events to celebrate advances made in achieving fair pay and decent working conditions, and building a better life for their families. Sadly, since the 1960s, workers have had less to celebrate as parties on the Left – and not a few trade unions – have downplayed working class issues in favor of ever-so-trendy identity and sexual politics that has little to do with workers and everything to do with elites and the more affluent elements of society. A good example being support by the Left for abortion on demand – which views working class people as a liability to be reduced rather than a valuable human asset to be treasured and nurtured.
So on this particular May Day it is well to remember the original goals of this celebration. And rededicate ourselves to focusing our efforts on the real needs of our country and those unknown, unheralded, ordinary citizens who are doing their level best to build strong families in a culture where the sanctity of life and importance of children and families are no longer hallowed principles.
I just watched this little video from the Christian Medical Dental Society . We all have to get along in a diverse society, and forcing people to do things they don’t believe are right isn’t the way to go. Neither does conscientious objection always have to do with with religion. There have been longstanding feminist concerns about the birth control pill, for example.
Since freedom of conscience and religion is enshrined in our constitution, I’m not really clear on how this case can lose, but I’ll leave the prognosticating to the lawyers.
This morning a press conference was held in Toronto to announce that a group of physicians are launching a Charter challenge of a policy of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario whichs requires physicians to violate their conscience or religious rights:
Christian medical professionals are challenging Ontario’s College of Physicians and Surgeons in court over a policy that requires doctors to provide or at least refer medical services, even when they clash with personal values. […]
The new Ontario policy requires doctors unwilling to provide certain care, such as prescriptions for contraception, to refer patients in good faith to a “non-objecting, available, and accessible” physician. The policy also says in medical emergencies, the doctors would be required to perform procedures themselves.
Doctors who violate the policy could face disciplinary action, the college policy states.
There is definitely more to come on this story. I wrote about this issue previously, read here.