During last November's elections, there was an amendment on the Colorado ballot that, if passed, would have granted Personhood to the unborn. To no one's surprise, America's most vicious death merchants, Planned Parenthood, was alarmed at the prospect of seeing their innocent and helpless victims protected by the state's constitution, so they conducted a massive political campaign to defeat the measure.
While this was going on, there were many public debates on the issue and some of them turned out to be quite revealing. In one of these events held at Ft. Lewis University, Advocates for Choice – a student's group affiliated with Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains – made several idiotic statements such as claiming that a woman sheds a fertilized egg once a month and that when an X chromosome combines with a Y chromosome the result is a female. Then, in perhaps their most astounding display of stupidity, they asserted that the human heart does not start beating until 24 weeks after conception.
Of course, shooting down all of this nonsense was easy and it was soon obvious that the baby-killers were being pummeled by the pro-lifers. In an effort to stop the carnage, a local mouthpiece for Planned Parenthood slithered forward to inform the audience that, in the debate over abortion, any argument regarding the humanity of the unborn is irrelevant since, "We are not going to try to use science or evidence. The fact of the matter is, this is opinion. We all have our opinions as far as when human life begins."
So there you have it. In the abortion lobby's little corner of the world, truth is not to be determined by evidence or science. Truth is simply what someone wants to think is true and, by using this principle, each of us can create our own little realities. The irony about all this is that these are the same people who have spent decades telling the public that they are the intellectuals and that you and I are sub-moronic knuckle-draggers who rely on an irrational belief system to justify our position. Yet they are perfectly comfortable taking innocent human lives by the millions based on nothing more than the subjective opinions of those who want to do the killings.
This episode in Colorado reminded me of a debate I was in many years ago at a university in San Antonio. At one point, someone from the pro-abortion side accused me of being "unenlightened" because I would not agree that there were at least some circumstances in which it was acceptable to butcher an unborn child. She went on to explain that I was simple-minded because I saw morality as black and white and could not understand that the "human experience" is made up of what she called "nuanced colors" and "many shades of gray."
My response was to ask whether the existence of color and shades of gray meant that black and white do not exist. In other words, is there nothing that she would say is always wrong and nothing she would say is always right?
Sensing that she had painted herself into a corner, she began to regurgitate some incoherent new-age drivel about life being a "tapestry" and a "continuum with no beginning and no end," etcetera. Meanwhile, the pro-abortion moderator of the debate saw that this woman was making a complete fool of herself and, by extension, the pro-choice position. In an effort to control the damage, she conveniently declared that time had expired for the debate and, with that, the curtain came down.
I had completely forgotten about this incident until I heard about the one at Ft. Lewis University. It also reminded me of the role that the internet is playing in the war over abortion. The fact is, the pro-aborts and their media stooges no longer control the flow of information and that could be a major factor in the dramatic shift we've seen recently toward the pro-life position. Consider this. When the debate in San Antonio happened, no one saw it but the hundred or so people who were actually there. But the Colorado situation ended up on YouTube where it could be seen by millions.
Not surprisingly, the pro-choice mob went into damage control mode in this case just as they had at Ft. Lewis. They clearly understood that the idiotic statements being made by their fellow travelers placed their movement at risk of being exposed as a collection of nitwits, so they launched an effort to have the recording removed from the internet. It was the sort of naked hypocrisy and censorship one must always expect from people who have chosen to defend an indefensible position.
But the good news is, these people will not be able to stop the onslaught of new technology. Moreover, they will not be able to do anything about the fact that every single piece of new technology that comes along supports the pro-life position.
Every single one.
A perfect example of that is sonography. It is hardly a secret that when women see their unborn babies on a sonogram screen, those babies are less likely to be murdered by abortion. This is precisely why our enemies fight so viciously against any effort to require that women considering abortions are shown such images. Make no mistake, the abortion industry knows better than anyone else that their survival depends on keeping their customers in the dark.
But ultimately, their contempt for "science or evidence" and their fight against technology are battles they cannot win. The fact is, we now have a generation of young adults who can go into their own homes and find a VHS tape or a DVD sitting on a shelf that contains a sonogram image of themselves before they were born. And if the abortion lobby thinks that this phenomenon is not having an impact on the conflict over abortion, they are whistling past the graveyard.