Choice is a Moving Target

In the early days of the abortion battle, the pro-choice mob’s central argument was that the unborn are not human.  Of course, for this to be true, a woman would have to have the ability to be pregnant with something that is not human.  After discovering that they were unable to defend such a loopy assertion, the abortion lobby quietly dropped it. 

Their follow-up was to grudgingly concede that the unborn are human – but not human beings.  When this also proved to be logically unsustainable, they were once again forced to move on.  

Over the next few years, their position became that the unborn might indeed be human beings but they are not persons.  The problem is, the English language contains no word for a human being who is not a person.  In short, this argument is not based on any generally accepted concept.  The best that the abortion lobby has been able to come up with is that personhood is a legal definition and not a biological one.  But even some of them are uncomfortable with the Orwellian idea that the Supreme Court can take rights away from selected categories of human beings by simply declaring them non-persons.  Despite that, however, this argument is still floated around from time to time.  

There are numerous other examples of how the defense of abortion has been forced to change over the years, but the reason why they have had to do this has remained constant.  Simply put, at its core, the pro-choice position is not based on any fundamental or observable truth.  Whether the standard is scientific, biological, legal or theological, the humanity of the unborn is simply undeniable and, given that reality, there is no way to rationalize their slaughter. 

The problem our enemies are having with their “moving target” strategy, is that all of their quasi-lucid arguments have been exposed and they now have to resort to the absurd.  The good news is that these moronic defenses of abortion are the most compelling evidence yet to support my long-espoused claim that the pro-life movement is winning.

The best place to see this firsthand is on the ProLifeAmerica.com Forum.  One recent argument seen there, and one I have heard repeated elsewhere, is that abortion is justified because the unborn are not sentient.  This basically means that it is okay to execute them because they have no awareness or perception.  It is a completely undocumented argument, but no less so than any of the others they’ve used over the last 35 years.  Moreover, I would argue that, on this basis, we should be allowed to hang almost every member of Congress – but that’s an issue for another time.            

As it regards abortion, the reality is that the sentience (or lack thereof) of the unborn is irrelevant.  Even if it were possible to scientifically prove that the unborn are not sentient, that would provide no moral justification for their execution.  They are living human beings and what they are aware of, or unaware of, has no bearing on that.

I also noticed a bizarre irony in this “sentience” argument.  At the same time that the Choice Mafia is saying it is okay to kill the unborn because they are not sentient, the federal courts are taking the opposite position regarding capital punishment.  Their position is that they will not allow executions unless the condemned is sentient.  This prevents states from executing someone who is in a coma or someone whose IQ falls below a certain point. 

As someone who is opposed to both abortion and capital punishment, I am a little bewildered.  Are we saying that we can legally kill innocent people because they are not sentient, but we can only kill guilty people if they are sentient?  Apparently, I’m just not smart enough to understand that the sentience” target not only has the ability to move, it also has the ability to be in two places at the same time. 

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.

Counting the Costs

Today, the American holocaust is 34-years-old and, so far, it has claimed about 50 million victims.  These children had committed no crime, they were given no trial, there was no judge, no jury, no appeal, and no stay of execution.  They were simply carried into an American death camp and killed.  

It is easy to expose the incoherent logic used by the Supreme Court to justify its Roe vs. Wade decision.  We can also make a perfect case that the justices responsible for it – and those who have reaffirmed it since – were not just wrong, but willfully evil.

However, what is often overlooked about Roe vs. Wade its implied suggestion that a nation can execute millions of innocent human beings without consequence.  That assumption is a testament to the unfettered stupidity of man.  There is always a price to pay for tolerating evil. 

Think about this.  Those of us who are baby boomers didn't give America legalized abortion.  The 1973 Supreme Court was made up exclusively of people from the World War Two generation.  However, it has been baby boomers who have had the most abortions. 

Now shortly, we'll be reaching retirement age in numbers that are going to financially overwhelm the Social Security and healthcare systems.  And so the question becomes: in a nation that morally bankrupted itself by using child sacrifice to address social problems, why would any solution to the social problems created by the elderly be unthinkable? 

After all, if we believe God was serious when he said that man reaps what he sows, we cannot ignore the fact that a generation which killed one quarter of its own children because it saw them as inconvenient, unhealthy or expensive, is about to become inconvenient, unhealthy and expensive itself.

Like I said, evil always has a cost. 

Double Talk

In Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that state prohibitions against abortion are unlawful because the unborn are not  “persons in the whole sense.”  In other words, the Court concluded that whether the unborn are living human beings or not is irrelevant.  It’s okay to execute them by the millions as long as we tell ourselves they are not really persons. 

This is a textbook example of what George Orwell meant when he wrote that some things are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them.  The reality is, this loopy idea that someone can be a “partial-person” or a “non-person” doesn't exist in the real world.  In fact, even the deceased are often called “dead persons.”

When confronted with the reality that the English language does not even have a word for a human being who is not a person, abortion defenders often reply that the unborn are not really human beings but only “potential human life.” 

Of course, for this to be accurate the unborn would have to have the possibility of becoming either a human being or some other form of life.  Perhaps a parrot or a spider. 

The problem is, there's no record of any such thing having ever occurred.  Even though it may be a difficult concept for the pro-choice crowd to grasp, the fact is that every time a human female gives birth, she gives birth to another human being. 

So while it is entirely reasonable to say that a fetus is a potential major league baseball player or a potential schoolteacher, it is idiotic to say that a fetus is a potential human being.  Even Orwell could not have predicted that a time would come when people would actually suggest that the product of human reproduction may or may not be human.  From the moment of conception, the unborn child is a living human being because that is the only thing it can be. 

Another argument we sometimes hear is that the unborn are not really human beings because they are not fully developed.  The flaw in that is that human beings develop for their entire lives.  A fetus is less developed than a newborn just as a five-year-old is less developed than an adult.  However, no one can logically claim that the five-year-old is less human.

In the end, the driving force behind the abortion lobby’s catalogue of rhetorical nonsense is obvious.  Throughout history, whenever one group of people has wanted to justify the extermination of another group of people, they assign their victims labels intended to take away their humanity.  From the beginning of time, this “de-humanizing” process has been the mechanism barbarians have relied upon to make their particular brand of killing seem palatable.  

The good news is, history shows that this sort of deception inevitably unravels.  And that will happen in this case as well.  When this holocaust is over – and one day it will be – it will be universally seen that our enemies were never anything more than cold-blooded serial killers.

They are simply the barbarians du jour.


Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics