A Little Perspective, Please

As most of you probably know by now, the Supreme Court has ruled that the federal ban on D&X (partial-birth) abortion is constitutional.  The question is: just how significant is this victory for the overall effort to protect the unborn?

From a psychological standpoint, this is clearly an enormous shot in the arm for the pro-life movement.  To fully appreciate the significance of this ruling, all you have to do is imagine what the effect would have been on our people had it gone the other way.  The fact is, after years of being pummeled in the courts this decision puts a little wind back in our sails.        

Equally important, it appears to have truly demoralized our enemies.  Some are wringing their ice-cold little hands and wailing that the end of legalized abortion is near.  Apparently, the prospect of living in a world in which moms are not allowed to butcher their children by the millions has caused a large percentage of these people to start sleeping with the lights on.   

Meanwhile, more optimistic members of the Choice Mafia are threatening to turn this ruling into a rallying cry to re-energize their troops.  Only time will tell whether they are able to do this or not.  My prediction is that this ruling will not energize anyone other than the most rabid abortion enthusiasts and their numbers are so small as to be inconsequential.  But however it plays out, this decision is further proof that the pro-life side has the momentum and our enemies know it.

Beyond its positive psychological impact, the ban on partial-birth abortion is meaningless as it relates to the actual killing of unborn children.  That’s because this ban controls the how, not the whether.  Remember, even during the time that this procedure was allowed, most late-term abortions were accomplished using other methods – the most common being D&E.  Unfortunately, D&E and all of these other procedures are still legal which means that any baby who would have been killed by partial-birth abortion before will now be killed by one of these other methods. 

Some pro-lifers argue that the practical benefit of a ban on partial-birth abortion is that it prohibits a procedure that is especially barbaric.  Such people are poorly informed.  Be assured, anyone who thinks that a D&E is less brutal for the child being killed than a D&X knows nothing about abortion procedures.

In the final analysis, the psychological importance of this victory for the pro-life movement is enormous but its practical implications for the unborn are zero.  The real unknown is whether this Supreme Court ruling is a barometer for abortion rulings to come.   

Many observers have noted that there was some encouraging language in the majority opinion to indicate a willingness by the Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade.  Others counter that it was a 5-4 decision in which one vote (Kennedy’s) cannot be relied upon in the future.  In my view, each conclusion is equally valid and equally irrelevant. 

I will say this as succinctly as I can.  Trying to predict what the United States Supreme Court will or will not do is a fool’s game.  The reality is, when the Court abandoned the Constitution as the basis for its rulings – which it did years ago – by definition it became totally unpredictable.  Today, if there is one thing we know for certain about Supreme Court decisions it is that anyone with a Ouija Board can predict them as accurately as the most educated legal minds in the country.       

So my advice is (a) pause for a moment to celebrate the victory, (b) don’t read more into it than is actually there, and (c) get back to work. 

Babies are still dying.

Stem Cells and the Abortion Distortion Factor

The Godless Left and their media stooges continue to ridicule pro-lifers for opposing stem cell research.  We are routinely portrayed as cold-hearted knuckle-draggers who would deny medical treatment to Alzheimer’s ravished diabetics just to satisfy our own personal agendas.

Of course, the basis for this depiction is a lie.  In reality, I have never met one pro-lifer who was opposed to stem cell research – even embryonic stem cell research.  Let me say this one more time: the issue is not the research but where the stem cells come from and how they are obtained.  Cell lines derived from umbilical cords, or placenta, or from babies who died in some natural manner such as miscarriage, stillbirth or accident do not create a moral problem.  But we cross a line that should never be crossed when we use cell lines from babies who were intentionally killed by abortion.  And we obliterate that line when we actually create human life for the stated purpose of destroying it and using it in medical experiments. 

To appreciate that science unfettered by morality is the most evil and dangerous force on earth, imagine that a team of researchers has developed a drug that would cure cancer, heart disease and diabetes.  This miracle drug is produced from a chemical found in healthy people between 15 and 55 years old and the amount needed to treat the entire country would require only about 500 donors per year.  Additionally, clinical trials prove that the drug is 100% effective and perfectly safe. 

The only downside is that harvesting this chemical always kills the donor.  So the issue becomes, given that millions of people could be saved, should we create a national lottery to select 500 people a year to be killed to make the drug?  Out of a population of millions, each individual’s chances of being selected are tiny and some would have died from accidents or illness anyway.  Besides, a certain number of them would not have led productive lives. 

So why not sacrifice a handful of these people every year in order to save millions from the horror of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.?  All we have to do is be willing to say that where the chemical comes from is irrelevant, which is precisely what some people are currently saying about embryonic stem cell research. 

Don’t for a moment think that the hypothetical situation above is far-fetched.  If we could go back 50 years and tell people what’s happening right now in the field of medical research and bio-technology, they would call that far-fetched.  They would never believe that the things we see happening every day all around us would ever be tolerated in this country.  And only a fool would think this is anything more than the tip of the iceberg.

Today, some people are trying to rationalize using aborted embryos in medical experiments by suggesting that it is a way to “make something good come from abortion.”  They argue that these children are either already dead or that they are going to be discarded whether we exploit them or not.  The moment we buy into that philosophy, we become absolutely no different than the Nazi thugs who stole the gold fillings from the teeth of Jews they killed in their concentration camps. 

The point is, it is morally repugnant that we slaughter unborn children in the first place, and when we rob their graves to make our lives better we disgrace ourselves even further.  So, if the question is whether we should “discard” these dead babies instead of using them in medical experiments designed to benefit us, the answer is an unqualified yes.   We have no right to profit from our own evil. 

Finally, let me make one thing perfectly clear.  This myopic focus on embryonic stem cells is about finding a way to justify abortion.  If that is not true, then you explain to me why all the hype is about embryonic stem cells when all the medical breakthroughs have come from adult stem cells.

Mexico: Big Abortion's Safety Net

When the U.S. government began dropping the hammer on American tobacco companies, these corporations became alarmed that their prospects for long-term survival might be no better than it is for the people who buy their products.  Their response was to redirect their marketing efforts toward foreign countries where the governments don’t regulate the sale and use of these little white cancer sticks.  The plan worked and, today, an enormous percentage of the profits made by “Big Tobacco” are generated by cigarette sales in foreign countries. 

Now, another American institution faces a similar situation and embraces the same response.

If all goes as predicted, Mexico will soon legalize abortion and become a full-fledged participant in the most prolific holocaust the world has ever known.  To bring this about, the Mexican abortion lobby has regurgitated the same collection of lies and distortions that their American counterparts have used over the last 40 years or so.  They clearly operate on the assumption that Mexican politicians are as stupid, corrupt, immoral and cowardly as American politicians and the results show that the assumption is not unjustified.     

Interestingly, pro-life forces in Mexico are complaining that a major reason why they are losing is because American pro-abortion groups are on the ground there working around the clock to get abortion legalized.  They say there is also a significant amount of money flowing from the U.S. into this political effort. 

The question is: why?  After all, “Big Abortion” is sending out fundraising letters all across America warning their followers that Roe vs. Wade is about to fall and that the end of legalized abortion in America may be on the horizon.  If that is true, shouldn’t these organizations be concentrating their efforts at home rather than pouring valuable resources into another country? 

Or perhaps there is another dynamic at work here.

I have fought the American abortion lobby for many years and if there is one thing I have learned about these people it is that everything they do is driven by self-interest.  If you don’t know anything else about the abortion battle now raging in Mexico, know this: the only reason the American choice mafia is there is because they have concluded that there is something in it for them.  Fortunately, it is not that hard to figure out what that something is. 

Ten years ago, when Bill Clinton was in office and the “right to choose” looked safe, Canada and Mexico were not on the abortion lobby’s radar screen.  But now they see this “right” being threatened and a back-up plan has been launched. 

I have long predicted that when America returns legal protection to the unborn, the American abortion industry intends to set up a network of abortion clinics along the borders just inside Canada and Mexico.  Of course, Canada poses no threat to this plan since, as improbable as it may seem, the Canadian government is actually more godless and morally bankrupt than the U.S. government.  That means the only obstacle has been the fact that abortion is illegal in Mexico. 

That is what this battle is about.  Mexico is the missing ingredient in the American abortion industry’s contingency plan.  The fact is, the Mexican government is being played for a fool.  The legislation they are about to enact will not only result in the wholesale slaughter of Mexican children by the millions, but it will turn Mexico into a dumping ground for the moral decay that is already rotting the United States. 

To appreciate the level of hypocrisy being displayed here, all you have to do is reverse the roles.  Let’s say that 35 years ago Mexico had legalized abortion while America continued to legally protect its children.  Let’s also say that Mexico is now poised to reverse itself and shut down its death camps.  If that was the situation, and the Mexican abortion lobby came into the United States and tried to use its political muscle to legalize abortion, would there be one person anywhere in the world so stupid they could not see what was going on?  Also, is there any doubt that the American people would be outraged at this outside interference in our political process?  (In case you haven’t guessed, the answer to both questions is a resounding, “No!”)      

So while America would never tolerate this sort of intrusion against us, American death merchants are going into Mexico to do that very thing.  You can bet the family farm that if Mexican pro-life groups tried to come into the United States and influence our current legislative effort to outlaw abortion, the American pro-choice groups now in Mexico trying to influence their political process would be the loudest screamers.  They would be the ones on the evening news every night with beet-red faces and bulging veins bellowing that the United States doesn’t need advice from Mexicans about how to run our affairs.   

One of the great ironies here is that Mexico has always prided itself on having abolished slavery many years before the United States.  They will also point out that they did not need a bloody civil war to right this wrong. 

But today, whatever moral superiority Mexico might legitimately claim over that issue is being flushed down the toilet.  The American abortion lobby is manipulating the Mexican political process to turn this once proud nation into the abortion capital of the western hemisphere.  And once that happens, they will pour millions into the pockets of Mexican politicians to see that it never changes.  The inevitable result will be that the United States will be able to sit back and show the world that we are too good to tolerate the evil of abortion, while a steady stream of American women pour into Mexico’s death camps.

It’s called naked exploitation and it is the mother’s milk of pro-choice politics.

A Healthy Regret

The South Carolina legislature is considering a bill to require that every woman seeking an abortion be shown a sonogram of her unborn baby before the abortion is performed.  Naturally, the choice mafia is fighting this legislation viciously, having long ago recognized that it’s better to keep their customers in the dark until the money is in the bank. 

One important benefit of this legislation is its ability to reduce emotional trauma in women.  Today, all across America, post-aborted women are coming forward to say how much they regret their decision to have an abortion.  In fact, there is a rapidly growing organization of these women called Silent No More Awareness.  Many of the women involved with this group say that if they had seen an ultrasound image of their baby before the abortion, they would have made a different decision.   

The abortion lobby responds by claiming that most women don't regret their abortions.  Of course, they offer no proof of this, but even if it is true it is irrelevant.  Lack of regret relates to the morality and the conscience of the person acting not to the rightness of the act.  If some pervert sexually assaults his neighbor's five-year-old daughter, whether he regrets it or not has nothing to do with the fact that it is indefensible for grown men to have sex with five-year-old girls. 

Now, if we really want to see the role that regret plays in the abortion issue, I suggest we survey women who have dealt with unplanned pregnancies in their past.  Let's ask those who aborted if they now wish that they had given birth, and ask those who gave birth if they now wish they had aborted.  In fact, let's challenge the abortion lobby to start publicly identifying women who allowed their children to be born but now say they wish they had killed them through abortion.  The result will be that for every such woman they trot out, we could produce an avalanche of women who are living with debilitating guilt and regret over their abortions.    

Needless to say, abortion defenders are never going to accept this challenge, but that doesn't really matter.  My point is proven by the fact that there are literally thousands of support groups in the United States to help women overcome the emotional train wreck of abortion, but no one has found it necessary to start even one support group to help women deal with the emotional trauma of letting their children live. 

That's because there is no psychological trauma associated with not killing your child.  After more than 30 years of legalized abortion, the one thing we know for certain is that regrets about abortion are only experienced by women who have them, not by those who don't.

When women come forward to express their anguish over abortion, many reveal that they have needed years of counseling in order to deal with the guilt and regret of their decision.  In other cases, it is obvious that these women are still traumatized by their abortions and may be so for the rest of their lives.  In a breathtaking display of gall, some abortion defenders say that the pro-life movement is responsible for these emotional problems.  Their argument is that these women would be fine if it were not for us constantly harping about abortion being the murder of a baby and showing pictures of the corpses.  Apparently, these people not only prefer their customers to be in the dark before their abortions they would also like them to be kept there afterwards.  They probably figure that having a bunch of women running around the country crying about their abortions could be bad for business.    

For those abortion defenders who do not promote this “ignorance is bliss / the pro-lifers are to blame” philosophy, the normal reaction to women who say they were emotionally injured by abortion is to simply dismiss them.   Some claim these women had emotional problems before their abortions, while others assert that they developed their problems afterwards for reasons that had nothing to do with abortion.  To date, no one has explained how these people know all this.  Evidently, the rest of us are supposed to just blindly accept that the more enlightened members of our society (ie: those who are pro-choice) intuitively understand that emotional trauma following abortion is some sort of cosmic coincidence that only befalls women who were already a little loopy to begin with.

Meanwhile, the hidden irony in all this is that women who regret their abortions may actually be more mentally healthy than those who don't.  Think about it this way.  In modern America it would be all but impossible for any sane and intelligent person to be unaware of the biological fact that abortion causes the death of a child.  Given that, it is certainly reasonable to speculate that any woman who could submit to abortion and not be emotionally traumatized by the experience is either abysmally stupid, a psychopath, or someone with profound psychological problems.

This also applies to those people who have encouraged, arranged for, referred for, facilitated or forced women to have abortions.  Just because they may not express – or even feel – regret over the children they helped to execute, they are as responsible for their deaths as the women who climbed onto the tables and put their feet in the stirrups.  In fact, in some cases they are even more responsible.  The woman may have been tricked or forced; the same defense cannot be made for the enablers. 

In the final analysis, the question is whether America has degenerated into the kind of place in which adults can hire serial killers to butcher helpless children, have no remorse about it, and still claim to be both morally and mentally healthy.  If that is where we are, then ours is truly a nation without hope.  Only God knows – and only time will tell – if that is the situation.  Until then, the pro-life movement will continue to fight this holocaust with all the resolution and commitment necessary for victory. 

As for the significance of regret or lack thereof, we should remember that Adolf Eichmann went to the gallows saying he had no regrets about his role in the Nazi holocaust.  However, his cold-blooded lack of remorse did not justify the slaughter of millions who perished in Germany's death camps.  Nor will anyone's cold-blooded lack of remorse over abortion justify the slaughter that continues to claim millions in America's death camps.

Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics