Pro Life!

The process of a partial birth abortion begins when the doctor places the woman before him. He gently inserts forceps into the womb and turns the baby so that the feet will exit the birth canal first. The doctor expertly delivers the entire body of the baby save for the head, and as he holds the squirming baby in one hand, he deftly stabs a pair of scissors into the base of the innocent baby’s skull. Studies by AGI show that only forty days after conception, the developing baby can sense touch. At four and one half months, when a partial birth abortion commonly takes place, a baby can experience pain. With the scissors inserted in the skull of the baby, the doctor then widens the scissors to broaden the opening. When the cavity expands enough, the doctor enters a suction catheter, which immediately sucks out the brains causing the skull to collapse. The doctor continues to remove the remainder of the baby from the former mother’s womb.
On July 11, 1995, AMA’s official journal submitted a tape-recorded interview with abortionist Dr. Martin Haskell, in which he states, “…The majority of fetuses aborted this way are alive until the end of the procedure.” This type of abortion, performed many thousands of times a year, victimizes babies in their trimester or ninth month. According to Merrian-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. At the moment of conception, an entire life begins, and to abort this innocent life is murder.
You may argue about the child with a lifelong disease who will die a slow death or live his life as a burden to his family? He will have no friends. He will not go to college. He will not lead a successful life. Some argue that the population boom can lead to problems such as not being able to feed the people we have now. Or in cases such as rape or incest, trauma closes in on the sanity of the woman. How can she possibly give birth to a child conceived like that?
To answer a question with a question, in response to the diseased child, should we end the life of all the people with disabilities who burden loved ones? Are we to say that these children will not experience the love of someone else who cares? Are we to say that when an elderly mother, who raised her children from birth with the utmost care, falls ill, we are to abort her life? Are we to say that people who long to care and provide and love these disabled ones lead a meaningless and pointless life of sympathy for the sick? If these statements speak truth, then why do we have doctors? Why not hire more executioners?
I do not believe that we will have much of a problem with feeding the population of America. The population growth of the world grows one percent a year, however, statistics on www.census.gov show that the population in America declines annually, not including immigration. The population growth equaling the current number of reproductive age individuals over the number of babies being born results in the American population decent.
The trauma from rape or incest will live forever with the woman whether she decides to murder her newly conceived baby or not. Why return the violence of killing a baby for the violence of rape? Legalizing abortion due to rape and/or incest provides the mother with an emotional screen, which in the end will not have erased the past.
On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in the famous Roe v. Wade decision. By a vote of seven to two, the U.S. Supreme Court held that until a child in the womb can sustain his own life, the mother’s wish for an abortion should take authority over the baby’s right to life. The state can protect the unborn unless the mother’s physical, emotional, or psychological health, life, age, marital status, or the babies’ probability of a distressful life and/or future provides a way of escape for the mother. Basically the court granted the mother permission to legally kill her children up to the time of birth. If abortion isn’t murder, then why can someone murder a pregnant woman and suffer two murder charges? The murderer wronged the woman; shouldn’t that mean that a woman wrongs a child that she aborts?
According to former Surgeon General, Dr. C. Everett Koop, abortion provides a pathway to convenience. Only three to five percent of the reasons for abortions include rape, incest, the possibility of a deformed or disabled child, and the possible threat of a mother’s life.
Between the years of 1973, where 744,600 abortions were performed, to 1996, where 1, 400,000 abortions were performed; a stunning 35,273,792 babies have been killed without the right to life. Scientists have proven that the heartbeat of the fetus begins twenty-one days after conception and that the brain can function as early as forty days after conception.
For one to say, “Pro-family, pro-child, pro-choice,” states that they advocate the choice to kill innocent unborn children. Portraying such a thing is as logical as saying “Pro-women, Pro-rape.” The whole ordeal reeks with absurdity.
In closing, one cannot prohibit the issue of abortion from moral standards. To eliminate abortion from any form of morality excludes it from decency. We have laws in the United States that forbids anyone to murder, steal from, rape, or molest anyone else. These laws stem from morality, as does the movement to stop abortion. We live in a democracy, which means we, the people, have a voice. Our voice can put an end to abortion to provide an opportunity for life. With the voice of the people we can change the choice of those who desire to abort a life not yet lived.