A video to introduce my son, Hunter Alexander, and explore the so-called "pro-life victories" of late...
The Introduction
The Introduction
|
A video to introduce my son, Hunter Alexander, and explore the so-called "pro-life victories" of late...
The Introduction
0 Comments
by Kevin M. Nelson, CIA (Conservative Independent American)
22 January 2013 While there is no perfect way to attempt creating analogies or arguments that will properly reflect the sanctity and indescribable value of an innocent human life, I am always searching for new and better ways to unlock the closed minds of those who would rather put the convenience and circumstance of one human, above the God-given unalienable right of another, completely innocent human, to live. Two questions come to mind when attempting this difficult task of unveiling the motives behind people’s casual willingness to destroy innocent human life: 1. Does the inability to see or fully understand something truly diminish the value of the unseen or mysterious- and/or- does not seeing something give people a calculated self-justification as a defense mechanism for deniability? 2. What do You value, if not innocent Human Life of another- your own life, the lives of wild animals or pets, inanimate objects, or philosophical concepts? 1. The Unseen and Misunderstood. I am often amazed at the uninformed assumptions people hold regarding children at the fetal stage or what “terminating” the child actually involves, but even more so by those who become enraged by graphic images that do nothing more than depict the very same act they claim to condone, support, or advocate for. The most staunch supporters of abortion never seem to address this hypocrisy, most notable on social media sites where one minute Miss Pro-“choice” is ranting and raving about the “fetus” being a blob that a women should not be “forced” to carry for nine months, only to absolutely freak when faced with an image of that “blob” with its torn limbs and pierced torso, all of which is followed by this staunch supporter “reporting” the image as “inappropriate” to the site’s governing powers, who most certainly seem more concerned about protecting liberal agendas and hate, while censoring truth and reality. On the other end of the “unseen” spectrum is the first part of the question- is there a diminished value? Perhaps better stated- is it easier to classify the child as “less-than” when the world has not seen the baby’s face, or has not come to terms with understanding their own human prenatal development- several years or decades before holding a pro-abortion philosophy? Consider, if you will, these imperfect analogies that inadequately, but hopefully at least somewhat effectively, describe things similar to the unseen forces of life: The sun does not cease to exist simply because there is night. (The baby does not cease to be a baby because it is hidden in the womb) The sun does not cease to burn brightly because of a rain storm. (The baby does not cease to be a baby because of an external circumstance) Lightning is no less powerful simply because you cannot hold it or explain it. (The baby is no less alive because it cannot yet be held in one’s arms or does not yet possess the features it will develop before birth) A young White Oak (Quercus alba) sapling, uprooted by the wind and left to whither in the sun, does not, by definition, instantly become anything less than a dead White Oak (Quercus alba) sapling, no longer able to become the towering tree it might have been. (Killing a Human (H. sapiens) baby in the womb does not cause it to suddenly become anything other than a dead Human (H. sapiens) baby. Often stated as- “abortion doesn’t make you un-pregnant, it makes you the mother of a dead baby”- author unknown) 2. What You value, or suddenly- Don’t value. Is there anything more hypocritical than a self-described pro-abortion advocate (though they still often hide behind the popular term “Pro-choice”) being seen holding a baby, or attending a baby shower? I submit to you that such actions are evidence of a selfish ideology that does not value innocent human life, at all, for anyone, but rather simply values people’s ability to have what they want, when they want it. Their actions reflect this clearly, if you observe and listen carefully, though they may or may not actually say the following out loud: “I want to focus on my career or education right now. I shouldn’t be forced to put those things on hold with a pregnancy” Translation: My career or diploma/degree is more important than an innocent Life. “My body- my choice. The government shouldn’t tell me what to do with my body” Translation: My body is more important than the other body growing inside me. Government can tell people not to kill other people, unless the other person is a living preborn human baby. “No Man is going to tell me I have to stay pregnant” Translation: No one (not even one of those “brain-washed” Pro-Life women)can tell me killing a baby is wrong, but since men can’t give birth, I will target them. This makes me sound like a strong independent woman, and a champion of feminism. My independence to do what I want is more important than protecting the innocent human life I want to destroy. “I’m still young. There are so many things I want to do before becoming a mother” Translation: I planned the sex part, but didn’t plan on the getting-pregnant part. My personal freedom to have fun is more important than the innocent Life of the human baby that, by definition, means I’m already an expectant mother. “Everyone is different. It’s a complicated issue. What’s right for you is not always right for someone else” Translation: Morality is subjective. Dismembering and extracting a living human baby from the womb is only wrong if someone thinks it is wrong, or if personal desires and circumstances are conducive to motherhood at this time. My desire to avoid motherhood is more important than the fact that someone will die as a result of my personal moral standards. “I am personally pro-life, but think others should have the right to decide for themselves” Translation: I would never kill one of my own babies, but someone else’s freedom to decide whether or not to kill their baby is more important than the Life they may decide to destroy. Career, Education, Fun, Independence Vs. An Innocent Human Life If you’ve read down to this point, you probably fall into three categories: Pro-Life, Undecided and seeking answers, or Pro-Abortion seeking a reason to change or to find the best line to formulate an angry response with. Whoever you are, please bear with me just a little longer. At the end of the day, some would rather focus on perceived “viability” of the human babies being discussed, rather than letting go of everything other than the simple fact- It is an innocent, Human Life. Unfortunately, the “viability” argument is deceptive, as it most always focuses on “Viability in the absence of any other assistance”. Webster defines ‘viability’ a few different ways. Strangely, when describing humans, the term means such things as “able to exist as an independent unit” or “capable of survival outside of the womb”. Yet when discussing other life forms such as eggs or seeds, the meaning somehow suddenly changes to “capable of growing or developing”. I challenge the notion that seeds or eggs should be categorized in a way that transcends the discussion of human life, but will work to address both views. If we continue to base the sanctity of life on concepts like “viability” we are destined to become even more murderous than we have been in allowing 55,000,000 babies to be murdered since ‘Roe V. Wade’. There will be countless Terri Schiavo-like court-sanctioned dehydration murders at the behest of adulterous spouses. The dark society in which we live is only a degree away from allowing the “Viability” argument to justify murder of the elderly, the mentally or severely physically handicapped, or infants. Do not these other groups of people require some sort of assistance that prevents them from living as an “independent unit”? I know beyond reasonable doubt that my precious two year old little girl simply cannot survive as an “independent unit”. Though a completely healthy child, without assistance to eat or drink or bath or use the “potty”- she would die of starvation, dehydration, or disease. Does this mean that she therefore does not meet the “viability” standard and consequently does not have the same right to life as her eleven year old sister? Now let’s look at the other definition of “viability” that more accurately describes the preborn baby in the womb, and my two year old daughter. Both are “capable of growing or developing”. The baby in the womb only loses that type of viability when outside forces including the deadly procedure of abortion, ends the baby’s life- which obviously ends all potential for growth or development. Sadly, many severely disabled people do not meet most of these “viability” definitions. Though not dependent on the womb, they are dependent on others to feed them, sometimes machines to help them breathe, and cannot survive as an independent unit, and depending upon their age and disability, may no longer be capable of growth or development. Does this mean that the severely disabled, not meeting the “viability” standards that many use, are lawfully or morally subject to neglect or execution? In closing, I’ll leave you with a few words from a man who was there for the ‘Roe V. Wade’ ruling, Supreme Court Justice Byron White: Senior Dissenting Justice, Byron R. White, called ‘Roe V. Wade’: "a constitutional barrier to state efforts to protect human life and by investing mothers and doctors with the constitutionally protected right to exterminate it." Also saying the Court: "values the convenience of the pregnant mother more than the continued existence and development of the life or potential life that she carries." (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade) Words cannot adequately express the intensely devastating and tragic events that occurred in Connecticut today that has left friends, relatives, neighbors and countrymen, with a deep wound tonight.
As a parent, I am heartbroken for those who lost their little ones today, and thankful for the health and safety of my own. As a man, I am angry that another man would inflict such pure evil upon others, especially children, stealing so many bright futures, shattering the innocence of even more left behind. As a human, this cowardly act defies understanding, but as a Christian I must acknowledge that nothing less than evil was present in Newtown today, and that only God, who allows all men to commit acts of free-will, but is never more than a heart’s cry away to bring peace and comfort when those acts contradict His goodness. As an American, I am troubled that the leader of our Nation would deviate from an otherwise honorable speech, even if ever so briefly, to say “we need to do something meaningful about guns in this country”, leaving millions upon millions of upstanding American citizens concerned about their firearms being more heavily controlled or confiscated, all because a cowardly madman committed a heinous act unthinkable to most. We as a Nation among nations need to do something meaningful about evil that breeds violence, or else even the butter knives best be locked away. I ask you to join me in sincere and faithful prayers that God Almighty would help the community of Newtown find hope, peace and comfort in the coming days, and feel a touch from Him that transcends the outpouring of love we as a Nation now embrace them with. Kevin M. Nelson to read this post on the SelfGovernment.US site, click HERE A Precious Thing Kevin M. Nelson, November 29, 2012 They search in the oceans, and probe planet Mars Concoct diet potions, design hybrid cars Seeking this “thing”, or to make this “thing” last This “Unalienable Right”, or so was in the past Now lust reigns supreme, no more husband and wife This “thing” now created, they reach for a knife They chant “what now then- if this “thing” from a crime?” Thinking justice to end it, though this “thing” so sublime But for most who destroy it: “ a mere end to an issue” Lest they acknowledge this “thing” so much more than “tissue” But what of control of her personal “power”? Their freedom to snuff out this “thing” twice per hour? Money and dreams be cold justification- For ending this “thing” throughout our whole nation Though conceived of two humans, and plain basic science- They deny this “thing” is there, with lies and with silence Despite knowledge and sense, once common to most- Some still label this “thing”- “just some cells with a host” But God will judge all in our failures to act- This “thing” gone. Bodies broken. Limbs no longer intact. Then cursed be the ones who care more for the whales, And this “thing”- not of humans- but of creatures with tails. This great “thing” is a LIFE, and it’s end be a Death And when that of a Human, I’ll proclaim with last breath “We must stop killing children! No more calling it Choice!” Their death no more righteous for lack of a voice Their blood no less innocent, when shed by election Their “thing” no less real before heartbeat detection Their value no less high when a tough circumstance Their futures no less bright if just given a chance Their worth not diminished if troubles now loom So much promises await outside of the womb Dispel all the slanderous myths and the lies They are no less human if you can’t hear their cries! They are no less human if killed in blind haste! (Now sentenced to die and be medical waste) They’re no less a baby because liberals approve- Or just because you can not yet feel them move And if these sad truths bring one guilt upon shame They need only repent, and pray in His name- That Jesus forgive and cleanse murderous past, And thus bring new life- for eternity last. Now take all these things that you know to be true, And share them with many, else we save but a few Expect fierce resistance and some comments of strife For Satan deceives to bring end to each Life Now go, don’t delay, there isn’t much time A wretched court opinion makes it no less a crime Be bold, but in love, as we clean up this mess Giving glory to God with each life-saved success. 11.29.2012,KNelson
(as originally posted on ProLifebook.com) As I watch people I have held in high regard, otherwise principled men of authority, succumb to compromise once again, I find myself struggling with the thought that perhaps we, who classify ALL innocent Life as sacred and worthy of protection, are growing to be a rare breed. When a man, who not only has a dark past but a compromised current view of abortion, is touted by some Pastors, "pro-life" groups, and otherwise principled citizens as being one who stands for Life, when his own public statements make it clear that a percentage of innocent babies will die with his apathetic approval, and his obvious judicial supremacy ideology will translate into the same status-quo stand, who will rise up and usher-in an end to the forty years of bloodshed? Some members of this very site, whose organizations are looked to as champions for Life, have gone out of their way to portray this compromised man as a pro-Life candidate. In my pro-Life opinion, we are allowing someone who will undoubtedly turn his back on a segment of innocent babies, be the new poster-boy for a principle he simply does not subscribe to. Those who endorse such a man for the sake of defeating another, simply because that other man allows "more" murder, are sending a message to all those of struggling conscience that "pro-abortion for some" is OK, because it's not pro-abortion for all. When people and organizations, whose alleged stated purpose is the protection of the unborn, will disregard a third-party candidate whose primary platform plank is his intent to make a Presidential finding on Personhood and immediately battle abortion from the Oval Office, all because they don't like his odds of winning, they are just as compromised as the man they are endorsing. These people know who Tom Hoefling is and what he is doing, yet would rather be on the side of popularity and "good odds" by supporting Mitt Romney, who not only has a very deadly record, but supports abortion for some babies. They are sending a clear message to those on the fence- "a little murder is OK if it's less murder than the previous administration" and sadly even that is not a certain outcome. These compromised organizations and people are showing the Nation who looks to them for Pro-Life direction, "we won't support the Personhood Candidate because of name-recognition, and we won't do anything to improve his chances- which could mean the abolition of abortion. No, we will instead put our money on a compromised man, who may or may not allow less to be murdered, and we'll just cut our losses". Well folks, those "losses" you are nonchalantly willing to "cut" (good word) amounts to a MINIMUM of 54,000 innocent babies in one Presidential term, and that is under the unlikely assumption that he will be successful in his plans for legislation and judicial opinions. I refuse to accept the fact that because leaders in the pro-Life community won't do the Right thing, we are somehow obligated to follow suit. A vote for Obama is a vote for death. A vote for Romney is also a vote for some Death. So "Mr.Pro-Life Organization Leader": if you don't like Tom Hoefling's chances at winning this election, what have You done, or what could You do to change that? Writing him off comes with 54,000 deaths, and that sir, is Not Pro-Life! Don't worry, that was just a child conceived in rape. Mr. Romney and those who support him say it doesn't matter.
Missouri Congressman’s Dark Remarks Have Silver Lining
Kevin M. Nelson 8/20/12 In a recent St. Louis television interview, a Missouri Congressman seeking a U.S. Senate post, Todd Akin, made some unfounded remarks on conception resulting from rape. He reportedly remarked "…If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down," alleging that pregnancy from rape is rare as the result of some sort of female biological defense mechanism. As you can imagine, these remarks created quite a fire storm of criticism from all sides of the issue, and rightfully so. But for uncompromising pro-Lifers who make no exception on the murder of babies in the womb, this tragic misstep on Akin’s part came with a silver lining of sorts… Romney’s incomplete and compromising stance on the protection of innocent life is publicly stated once again for all to see. "Gov. Romney and Congressman (Paul) Ryan disagree with Mr. Akin's statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape," Romney spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg said. Rape is a horrific violation of a human body. Rapists should be punished with a fierce and heavy hand, and their victims treated with compassion and support of the community. However, executing an innocent unborn child for the crimes of their father is no more admirable or righteous, than executing an unborn child as an act of after-the-fact “birth control”. When we attempt to differentiate between which innocent babies are worthy of execution, and which innocent babies are worthy of life, we have lost sight of the fact that ALL innocent babies are nothing less than innocent human life. Adding to the physical and emotional wounds of a rape with the execution of an innocent baby, only compounds the tragedy, and brings a new immoral injustice to the situation. Bottom line, if you support Romney, you support the execution of over 13,505 innocent babies each year (though ironically, those who advocate for abortion claim rape abortions are as many as THREE Times this many), and that’s putting a lot of false hope in his judicial supremacy position of waiting to appoint conservative justices being successful, as well as assuming that if Planned Parenthood receives no federal funds of any kind, that other abortion mills will somehow disappear as well. In other words, by supporting Romney, who will not make a bold stand for Life from the Oval Office, you endorse the murder of a minimum of 13,505 babies per year at best, and more than 1,350,500 if his status quo stance reaps the same results as the similar weak efforts of others. If everyone who claims to be pro-Life would settle for no less than a total ban on murdering innocent human babies, and stop rejoicing over baby steps of incremental legislation that only serves to codify which babies are eligible for protection, or how abortions are paid for, we would see an end to the abortion holocaust. K.Nelson 8/20/2012 I'm a Baby Human by Kevin M. Nelson 07/24/2011
I’m a baby human. I was born today. I didn’t look this way overnight. Like You, I started very small, and went through many changes over the past few months. I hear I will go through new changes when I become a teenager. I hear I will go through even more changes later in life. I guess physical changes are just part of Life. I didn’t just become “alive” today. I have been actively growing for 9 months. I didn’t just become “human” today. I have always been a human. Three months ago, some said it was OK for me to be torn apart and killed. I was no less alive 90 days ago. Six months ago, some may have considered burning me with saline. I was no less human 180 days ago. The President once supported allowing babies like me to die……. Today. Did you know that 8 months ago I already had my own circulatory system and a detectable heart beat? Some of those politician people think that as soon as I feel pain I should be protected. Look at my face and tell me I deserved to die a week before that. Can you look at my face and tell whether my Mom was raped? Would I really be any less human because an adult did a bad thing? Can you look at my face and tell whether my Mom planned to have a baby? Would I really be any less alive if I was made in the heat of the moment? I’m not being judgmental. This is my Life we’re talking about. Please stop referring to me in terms of convenience or circumstance. Who are you to tell my mother she has the “right” to kill me? Easy for you to say. It’s not Your life on the line. Not once have I been ANY different than YOU were at one point in your life. Not today. Not nine months ago. Read my little newborn lips “No one should have ever been given the “choice” to take my life” After the Forty Years of Death
Kevin M. Nelson 11/10/2011 Three hundred sixty-five days in a year. Currently, three thousand seven hundred deaths by abortion each day. A deadly era spanning forty years that will claim the lives of more than fifty-four million (54,000,000) babies just in the United States of America. Someone somewhere is doing the math frantically, growing increasingly arrogant and formulating a literary crucifixion in the name of "choice", because it has been thirty-eight years since Roe V. Wade, not the "forty years" indicated in the title. I assure you this discrepancy is not an oversight.... After watching what occurred in Mississippi regarding personhood, it is becoming more than blatantly obvious that the bloodshed will not simply cease across this country overnight. As our commander-in-chief once supported live birth abortion (live babies being left in a room to die), to think he will start upholding the Constitution by protecting all innocent life is as unrealistic as thinking he will wake up tomorrow as a conservative. The members of Congress continue to cower to the Unconstitutional court opinion of 1973 and put forth legislation that, by definition, is not truly Pro-Life, legislation that almost all of the other presidential candidates support. For these reasons, and with a mustard seed sized amount of faith that I will have the opportunity to uphold the Constitution and protect ALL innocent life in 2013, I am boldly declaring that the bloodshed will finally end after forty years. I remain prayerful that it will not actually be forty-four or forty-eight years, as other candidates have already made it clear they would leave these life and death decisions to the States. As no innocent person can justly be denied their unalienable right to life, making this a "State's Rights" issue is in direct conflict with our founding documents, and ignores a very basic truth: a Human Life in Kentucky does not become a disposable organism in Tennessee, just because of public opinion on the issue. How did we become a society willing to allow more than 54,000,000 babies to be murdered? First, the scientific term for a developing human baby, a "fetus" became synonymous with something incomplete and strange-looking, and therefore somehow disposable, as many lost sight of what a "person" truly is. The "person" label was given to birthed humans, other living things, and even corporate entities, and eventually altered to no longer include any human who was dependent on another to sustain life. According to this new definition of convenience, we could also assume that infants, the eldest elderly among us, and thousands of hospitalized humans are not persons due to their state of dependency. No longer were pregnant women described as being "with child" or "expecting" in certain circles. Instead, these women were simply just called "pregnant", and left to make a "choice" about what to do next. Even among those willing to admit that the unborn child is a Live Human Being, convenience and circumstance, both of the conception itself and the economic circumstance of the mother, became the "justifiable" terms by which these lives could be ended. Economic circumstance? Do they know that the highest percentage of abortions are performed for women in the $30,000-$59,999 annual income category? Circumstance of conception? Yes, no longer was it sufficient to punish the perpetrator of a rape. The unborn child could now be sentenced to death for their father's crime. The issue of rape became the ultimate smoke-screen and distraction by pro-aborts to attempt justifying abortion's legality, despite the fact that abortions after rape account for about one percent (1%) of the three thousand seven hundred (3,700) abortions in the United States every day, and the child who is killed took no part in the criminal act. People attempting to justify abortion sometimes go to even more extreme lengths to further their cause by creating strange hypothetical scenarios, like "what if it was your fifteen year-old daughter and she was raped by six dirty low-life scumbags" (as if the fact that the young girl was actually raped by one, clean-cut pervert would make the situation better?) Strangely, in many states, the murder or manslaughter of a pregnant woman can carry a penalty for Two deaths (taking Two Lives), yet if that Same woman chose to go to a clinic and have the unborn child violently and fatally removed from her womb, she can do so under protection of the law. Men are often told to "shut-up" on the issue because, after all, a man doesn't have a womb so that somehow equates to being unable to understand why "sometimes it's OK" to kill a baby. "People are going to do it anyway" is yet another flawed attempt at justifying this legalized murder, when in fact abortion rates drastically soared after the Roe V. Wade opinion. People still do heroin, despite laws, should we make it legal? Maybe throw some clean needles into the mix? No. (Ron Paul and I disagree on this one) People still speed to work despite speed limits. Should we do away with speed limits and let people do 120MPH in a school zone? Of course not. What about all those "unwanted babies that are beaten and neglected"? With the thousands of infertile couples wanting to adopt babies, there is NO excuse for a child to be born and beaten because it is allegedly "unwanted". That is a cop-out and a sad attempt at a criminal defense. What about "the health of the mother"? or "What if the baby has a disability"? No one goes to an abortion clinic because they have a "feeling" they cannot bring the baby to a viable point of the gestation without dying in the process. Only a Doctor can determine if an Ectopic pregnancy can be brought to a viable point without intervention. I don't know of any credible people that say "let both die", and this type of emergency intervention would NOT be outlawed as the result of a nationwide ban on abortion. Even my friends at : http://www.abolishhumanabortion.com/ make that distinction. You might be surprised however at how many of these high-risk pregnancies can be brought to a viable point. Now if you ask about a eugenic abortion, where there is a disability, That would not be allowed under a nationwide ban. If there is any question why, one need only go tell a person with Downs Syndrome, or a person born with no legs- "Hey, sorry your Mom didn't abort you" and see how kindly they respond. You see, there really is no credible explanation for why we are allowing more babies to die each day than the total number of human beings killed in the 9/11 attack on America. We can address the economy, and energy, and tax reform, and border security, and immigration enforcement, AND stop the slaughter of ALL babies by ending abortion completely, nationwide (it's called Multi-tasking, something we all do every day). The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, Science, Medicine, Common Sense, and Natural Law will be our justification. You just need to be willing to support a candidate who will reject judicial supremacy and justly use the authority of the office of President to take this bold step. As a Christian, I believe that our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, is returning soon. Five years? Ten Years? Scripture makes it clear "No man knows the day or the hour of His return", not even Jesus Himself, who will be sent by the Father. One need only look at the fall of the global economy, the rise of radical Islam, and the immoral/amoral culture that continues to thrive to know that it is "sooner than later". Will we have blood on our hands when He does? Will we stand before the Father and justify ourselves by saying the other guy was a more seasoned politician, or sounded really articulate at the latest presidential debate? Heartbeats and Pain;
Time is Not on Their side, Are You? Kevin M. Nelson 09/16/2011 Meet Monica. Monica is a 19 year old college student from California starting her second year at a University in Ohio. Monica just found out she is pregnant, and sits anxiously in an exam room of a local clinic, waiting for a doctor to come in and discuss her options. After a few tense moments, the doctor comes in. Monica and the doctor have a brief conversation, he checks his calendar, and tells Monica that she is approximately two weeks pregnant, but an ultra-sound will be necessary before discussing her plans any further. A small amount of cold gel is applied to Monica’s abdomen and the doctor begins the ultra-sound. The doctor finds the small peanut sized child on the screen and confirms that she is less than eighteen days pregnant. The doctor then resumes the conversation they started earlier, with “You just made it. A few days more and we could not do the procedure”. Monica aborts the child. Had Monica only gone to the doctors a week later … The small peanut-sized child would have had a detectable heartbeat and grown to be a healthy baby boy named Jason. Jason would have been adopted by a young couple from Columbus who recently found out they could not conceive a child on their own. Knowing only that his birth mother was from California, Jason would grow up studying geology and earthquakes. He was destined to invent new computer technology that could predict an earthquake three hours before impact. His machine would have saved his mother, who later returned to California. Monica died during a very damaging earthquake, 26 years after the abortion. Because of the Heartbeat Bill, Jason was sentenced to die via abortion because Monica went to the doctor on a Friday, and not the following Wednesday. Now meet Emily. Emily is a thirty-four year old journalist from Boston who is in her first year of on-site reporting for a local television station. Emily is already starting to show physical signs of pregnancy, but just found out how far along she is. She is seventeen weeks pregnant. Her friend, who has been by her side for this appointment, tells her “think of your career” as they discuss the option of abortion. The doctor comes in and says “Have you made a decision?” After a long pause… Emily tells the doctor that she is going to keep her baby. Though her baby now has a heartbeat, fingers, and toes, Fetal Pain legislation would have allowed Emily to abort the child anytime for the next two weeks. Emily gave birth to a baby girl named Allison. Allison would later go to MIT, where she was destined to meet Jason, work with him on his earthquake detection device, and fall in-love while doing so. Allison was at a technology conference in California when the earthquake struck that killed both her, and Jason’s mother. Do you now understand why I cannot support incremental legislation like the Heartbeat Bill or Fetal Pain Bills? By their unintended flawed design, they still allow babies to be murdered because they don’t meet the absolute criteria of a certain number of days or weeks. These types of legislation are comparable to the Allied Forces calling up Hitler and saying “Ok, Adolph, we’ll make you a deal. You can keep Poland and Germany, kill all the male Jews and Elderly Jews, but you have to promise not to harm the women and children Jews and pull out of the other places you’ve invaded.” Many proLifers are jumping for joy over these legislative measures. Why? The moment we publicly acknowledge that the developing child is both Alive and Human, yet put parameters on when it is “OK to kill them”, we should be disgusted with ourselves, not proud! |