Your cart is currently empty!
Obama-nation or Abomination? (Part 2)
“If you say you love babies, and don’t hate abortion, you don’t love babies” -Paul Washer
“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” -Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood
“Real feminists don’t kill their babies for anyone or any reason” -Anonymous
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” -Yahweh (a.k.a. God)
Because of my significant burden over the ethical issue of abortion (which has brought me to tears the past few nights), in this post I hope to offer a brief yet cogent presentation regarding the issue of Obama and abortion. I admit that this post is political in the sense that it encourages civil action, yet its focus is foundationally about ethical considerations themsleves. Politics and law are really practical applications of philosophical ideas. I would ask that the readerbe very thoughtful and open to the ideas which I present here. Please don’t allow the common and popular rhetoric or what you think you already know to cloud your ability to think clearly, listen deeply, and learn ideas which are likely consistent with the Truth. I would encourage the reader to seek wisdom as they consider the reality that whomever becomes the next President of the grand ole US of A will make decisions and promote actions and laws based upon their worldview- in the very same way that we all act according to our worldview. I.e The President will develop policies and laws that reflect his personal beliefs regarding various philosophical and theological ideas.
My hope in this post is simply to challenge and question the veracity of the philosphical presuppositions of pro-abortionists- especially Barack Obama. I.e. I want to point out the apparent problem with Obama’s worldview in one specific and utterly crucial area- ethics. In most cases I could care less about Obama’s philosophy of law, healthcare, economics, domestic or foreign relations, etc. I do not deny that these are important factors but they pale in significance to the issues stemming from his philosophy of value, i.e. his ethics (especially his stance on abortion). The following will contain: A Very Brief Case Against Abortion, Abortion Killing Methods, Photo’s of Aborted Babies, and What about Obama?
A Very Brief Case Against Abortion
Of course the abortion issue has been significantly convoluded over the past few decades. It is undoubtedly a very emotional and controvercial subject, to say the least. However, it is not at all complex and a well reasoned intellectually justified position is possible to form and maintain. Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason remarks:
Abortion is a straightforward issue. There is only one question to resolve for both sides of the debate. Once answered the only option is to do the right thing…The one question that matters is: What is the unborn? The answer to this question trumps all other considerations. If the unborn is not a human being, then no justification for abortion is necessary. However, if the unborn is a human being, then no justification for abortion is adequate. It’s simple. If we’re not talking about a human being then you don’t have to give any reason to have an abortion. It’s like having your appendix removed. no big deal. Have the abortion. However, if the unborn is a human being, then there’s no reason one can offer to have an abortion because it kills an innocent human being. The unborn’s right to life trumps unwantedness, financial hardship, the freedom to choose, the right to privacy, or any other reason given to have an abortion.
Let’s think about this for a second (much appreciation to ethicist Steve Wagner for the following insights). To use an illustration from Koukl- suppose my son comes up behind me and asks the question: “Daddy, can I kill this?” What is the first question I must ask in response? How bout “What is it?” If he says “it’s a cockroach” I would probably allow him to kill the cockroach (though I would even here encourage his respect for life). If however, he said “It’s the neighbors dog,” I would say, “hold on now!” You see, you can’t answer the question, “Can I kill it?” unless you know what it is. Every one in the abortion debate agrees that abortion kills something. However, whether or not it is right to kill something depends on what it is.
Therefore, the question “what is the unborn?” trumps every other question in the debate. The question of the unborn’s unwantedness, the question of the financial hardship of the mother, the question of the freedom to choose, or the right to privacy or any other question become irrelevant if the unborn is a human person. Would any of these questions be relevant if the issue was over a one-year old toddler? A six-month old infant? No! there is no debate over infanticide. If a mother comes to find that keeping her two-year old son or daughter is too expensive, Would we suggest killing him or her? Of course not! So poverty is irrelevant if the unborn is a human person. Even the question of a woman’s right to choose becomes irrelevant if the unborn is a human person. The statement, “women should have the right to choose” is an incomplete sentence. Choose what? We all agree that women have the right to choose things like their husband, career, etc. but some choices are wrong- like killing toddlers. So the question remains- what is the choice of abortion? What is the unborn?
One thing I find extremely baffling is the genuine lack of knowledge and thoughtfulness on this issue of abortion. People find themselves making irrational decisions and holding to morally ridiculous ethics for unjustifiable reasons. Consider the following question: What if we were to ask- “What are the key differences between a baby that has just been born, a baby that is partially born, or a baby that is only 4 months in the womb?” The answer: location and age. So if the unborn baby is not qualitatively different than the two year old in that they are both human beings/persons, then the only difference between them is their location and age and those factors absolutely should be a ground for ending a human life. Steve Wagner argues that if the unborn is growing (no matter what stage of development it is in after conception), it must be alive. If it has human parents, it must be a human. Living humans, human beings like you and I are valuable aren’t they? So if the unborn (no matter its location or stage of development) is a human being and if it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, then aborting an unborn human being is wrong as well. However, the pro-abortionists don’t get this and yet they have no basis for determining at what stage the baby becomes unworthy to abort. The only difference between partial birth abortion and infanticide is location and this is not an appropriate factor for taking a human life.
Abortion Killing Methods (from lifedynamics.com)
First Trimester The most common first trimester abortions are vacuum aspiration and suction curettage. Vacuum aspiration is performed with a machine that uses a vacuum to suck the baby out of the uterus. The vacuum is created by a hand held pump (manual vacuum aspiration) or by electricity (electric vacuum aspiration). The electric machine is far more common in the US. Generally, the manual pump is only used to kill children who are less than 6 weeks old. Except in the very earliest abortions, the mom’s cervix will be dilated large enough to allow a cannula to be inserted into her uterus. The cannula is a hollow plastic tube that is connected to either the hand or electric pump by a flexible hose. As a vacuum is created, the abortionist runs the tip of the cannula along the surface of the uterus causing the baby to be dislodged and sucked into the tube – either whole or in pieces. Suction curettage is a variation of vacuum aspiration in which the suction machine is used to get the baby out, with any remaining parts being scraped out of the uterus with a surgical instrument called a curette. Following that, another pass is made through the mom’s uterus with the suction machine to help insure that none of the baby’s body parts have been left behind.
Another form of first trimester abortion is the D&C (dilation and curettage). During this procedure, the mother’s cervix is dilated and a curette is scraped along the sides of the uterus to dislodge the baby. Suction is not used for this type of abortion, but since the mother is usually asleep the abortionist can dilate the cervix large enough that many passes with the curette are possible.
Some first trimester abortions are not accomplished using surgery, but chemicals. This procedure begins when the mom is given either mifepristone (Mifeprex; RU486) or methotrexate. Mifepristone causes the baby to become detached from its mother’s uterus while methotrexate is actually toxic to the baby and, therefore, kills it directly. Once the child is either detached or dead, the mom is given a labor-inducing drug which causes the uterus to cramp and expel her dead baby. This type of abortion only works up to about the 9th week of pregnancy.
Second Trimester The D&E (dilation and extraction) is the most common type of second trimester abortion. During this procedure, the mother’s cervix must be dilated much more than in a first trimester abortion simply because her baby is now too large to pull it from the uterus solely by using the suction machine.
After sufficient dilation is accomplished, the abortionist begins the D&E procedure by rupturing the amniotic sac which contains the unborn child. He then begins the process of dismembering the baby and pulling it out of the uterus in pieces. To do this, the abortionist uses suction as well as surgical forceps which basically act like a pair of pliers. He inserts this instrument into the uterus and starts to open and close it until a part of the baby or placenta is grasped. That piece is torn off and is pulled out. This process is repeated until the abortionist feels that the procedure has been completed.
Sometimes, the baby’s skull is too large to pull out of the uterus, so the abortionist must first crush it with the forceps. The abortionist will know that the child’s skull has been sufficiently collapsed when the baby’s brains flow out of the uterus. Among abortionists this is called the “calvaria sign” and it signals that the skull will then be much easier to remove.
Once the abortionist has pulled out everything he can feel with the forceps, he will use a curette to scrape any remaining parts off the sides of the uterus. After that, the suction machine can be used again to vacuum up whatever debris is still in the uterus.
Throughout a D&E procedure, all of the extracted baby parts are placed on a tray where they are then reassembled. This is done to make certain that the entire baby is accounted for and that no parts are left behind.
One way that the D&E procedure is often made easier is by killing the baby a day or so before the procedure is scheduled. This extra step is generally referred to as a “ditch” and is accomplished by inserting a long needle through the mother’s abdomen and into the heart of her baby. Then, a chemical agent – usually digoxin – is injected through the needle causing the child’s death. The advantage of doing this is that the feticidal agent (digoxin) causes the child’s body to soften, making the dismemberment and removal process much easier. Despite that advantage, however, ditching does have one potential downside. Because the chemical used to kill the baby is toxic, it is crucial for the abortionist to know that he has inserted the needle into the baby and not the mother. To verify that, the abortionist will sometimes let go of the needle before injecting the drug and see if it jumps around independent of the mom’s movements. If so, he knows that he has hit the baby and can proceed. (This part of the ditching process is sometimes referred to as “harpooning the whale”).
A variation of the D&E is called intact D&E. In this procedure, the baby is not pulled out in pieces but removed whole. Normally, the abortionist will use a feticidal chemical to kill the baby first or he will position the baby so that he can crush its skull. However, in some cases the baby will actually survive the procedure and emerge alive. In the abortion industry, live births are referred to as “The Dreaded Complication.”
Since most Intact D&E abortions are performed on babies who are too young to survive once separated from the mother, the usual response to a live birth is to simply set the child aside and allow it to die on its own. The abortion industry calls this practice “comfort care.” In some cases, abortionists have been observed actively killing the child by drowning it, crushing its tracheal tube, or snapping its neck.
Another type of second trimester procedure is known as instillation. This procedure begins with the abortionist sticking a long needle through the mother’s abdomen and into the baby’s amniotic fluid sac. A substantial amount of amniotic fluid is then drained from the sac and replaced with either a saline or urea solution. This usually kills the child, but it may take hours during which some women report feeling their baby violently thrashing around. Photos of children killed by instillation procedures generally show massive chemical burns covering the child’s entire body.
Once the process of killing the baby has been initiated, the mother is given drugs to induce labor so she will eventually deliver the dead child. Because there have been cases where babies have survived this process, some abortionists inject a drug into the baby’s heart prior to delivery to make sure it is dead. (Urea has also been used as a prepping agent for D&E abortions. The urea is inserted into the amniotic sac but instead of inducing labor, a D&E is performed. The advantage of this is that the urea solution helps soften up the baby and makes it easier to dismember and remove.)
Another type of second trimester procedure is called induction. The mother is given a drug – usually prostaglandin or oxytocin – that causes her to go into labor. Often the abortionist will kill the baby at the same time in order to avoid the possibility that the mom will deliver a live baby. In other instances, the labor-inducing drug which was given to the mother will kill her baby. However, it is well established that live births are a real possibility with induction procedures. As in the case of Intact D&E abortions, these procedures are usually performed on babies who are too young to survive outside the womb. Again, if the baby emerges alive, the usual response is to set the child aside and allow it to die on its own, or for the abortionist to kill it once it’s delivered.
The final methods of second trimester abortion are hysterectomy and hysterotomy. Of the more than one million American babies killed by abortion every year, approximately 5000 are destroyed in this manner. The relative rarity of these procedures is driven by the fact that they have a higher incidence of maternal complications and death than other second trimester abortion methods. During a hysterectomy abortion, the mother’s entire uterus (including the baby) is removed and the baby usually dies during the procedure. The hysterotomy abortion is similar to a cesarean section. The abortionist does not remove the uterus, but cuts it open and removes the baby. If the child was not killed prior to removal, it is set aside to die
Third trimester abortions are generally accomplished with the same basic procedures used in the second trimester. However, because the babies being killed are larger and more likely to survive the procedures, modifications are made. For example, because her child is larger, the mom’s cervix must be dilated more than it would be in a second trimester abortion. Additionally, chemicals that are used to soften the baby and make it easier to pull apart and remove are administered in larger a quantity. They are also given earlier so they have a longer time to soak into the baby’s tissue and bone. As for avoiding “The Dreaded Complication” (live birth), babies killed during the third trimester are more likely to be given feticidal drugs and they are given them in greater dosages.
Sometimes, the procedure itself is modified. For example, one of the most common third trimester abortion procedures is the intact D&E described earlier. This method is also known as D&X (dilation and extraction) or partial-birth abortion. When this procedure is used in the third trimester, the abortionist maneuvers the baby into a breech position (feet first) and then pulls the baby out of the uterus up to its head – leaving the baby’s head just inside of the uterus. It is not at all uncommon for the baby to still be alive at this point. Now the abortionist pushes a long pair of scissors into the base of the baby’s skull and creates a hole. He then inserts a suction tube into the hole and sucks out the baby’s brain. This modification to the intact D&E procedure insures that the baby is not born alive, and it helps make the head smaller so that it is easier to pull out of the uterus.
Photos of Aborted Babies
What about Obama?
I said in my previous post that voting for Obama would be equivalent to if not worse than voting for Hitler. If it is true that since the 1973 decision of Roe vs Wade, 49,000,000+ unborn human beings have been killed in America through legal abortion, then this is undoubtedly the greatest holocaust/genocide the world has ever seen. Over 4,000 babies are killed every day in America. This is staggering and it amounts to an atrocity which has far surpassed the in-human treachery perpetrated by the Nazis of Hitler’s day. Obama has made it very clear that he supports abortion and that voting for the Freedom of Choice Act would be his first priority. He said at a Planned Parenthood event, “Well, the first thing I’d do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. [Applause.] That’s the first thing that I’d do.” Not only does he support and advocate abortions in every trimester of pregnancy including partial birth abortion, but he has even voted to allow babies born alive (who have survived botched abortions) to die (which is infanticide). Folks this is intolerable. Please do what you can in your sphere of influence to help stop abortion- don’t vote for Obama. If you do may God have mercy on your soul.
One response to “Obama-nation or Abomination? (Part 2)”
The presentation of your ideas was well done, very insightful, and thoughtful. I think the issue is trying to get America (and other countries) to realize that an embryo is life. Once that occurs, the comparisons to genocide hit a lot harder.Loading…