Guest Post: Late Term Abortion aka Partial Birth Abortion

''It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish. I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is 'Abortion', because it is a war against the child... A direct killing of the innocent child, 'Murder' by the mother herself... And if we can accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?...“The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts--a child--as a competitor, an intrusion and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the dependent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters. And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners...If a mother can kill her own child - what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me - there is nothing between.''

-- Mother Teresa

The following post is provided courtesy of a good friend, TM.  TM wishes to remain anonymous for personal reasons, and I will respect this.  I will say that TM is a female who has worked in or around the medical field for 42 years.  For 17 of those she was employed by world renowned Institutional Review Board (IRB) and attended Review Board meetings for all 17 of those years.

Note:  Since 1982, approval of an IRB has been a legal requirement by the U.S. government prior to any medical and/or scientific research, regarding the use of "investigational" drugs or devices, which can be conducted on human research subjects.

Prior to her retirement, TM was a National Certified IRB Professional (CIP) and held that certification for 6 years.

TM shares my concern for children and we have had many discussions concerning abortion issues.  We see eye to eye on many, and disagree on a few.  This is one abortion issue we see eye to eye on.  Immediately following her post I will continue commentary and opinion.  That being said, I will preface the post with a cautionary note:

CAUTIONARY NOTE:  WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ MIGHT BE LESS THAN PLEASANT FOR SOME.  I HAVE ANNOTATED THE PARAGRAPH IN BLUE.  READING IT IS ENTIRELY YOUR CHOICE.

--------------------------------------------------

Late Term Abortion aka Partial Birth Abortion

For the past several years every time there is an election, one person will throw out to the public that their opponent voted “against a woman’s right to choose,” or that they are "anti-woman,” and other such non-sense all because said opponent is against “late term abortion” aka “partial-birth abortion.”

The issue here is not about abortion, as was originally mapped out in Roe vs Wade and subsequently made possible for a woman to have an abortion inside of the first 4-5 months of gestation, rather it is about whether or not American law should permit what is now referred to as “late term abortion,” but was originally referred to as “partial birth abortion.”

Partial birth abortion (late term abortion) means that a woman can wait right up until minutes before she would naturally go into labor to give birth to have her abortion.  

What it entails is the following:

A woman decides she does not want to have her baby (for whatever reason).  She goes in for a procedure to terminate the pregnancy before she would naturally have “gone into labor.”  She is chemically induced to force the beginning of labor and eject the fetus (yes, the “baby” is not a baby until it takes its first breath in accordance with medical/scientific jargon ~ it is a “fetus”).  The fetus then proceeds to make its way down the birth canal and “be born.”  The doctor is sitting there waiting for the head to begin to crown.  He/she then places his/her hand on the head to prevent it from exiting the vagina and possibly taking its first breath.  (Once the first breath is taken, then legally, it would now be murder.)  A scalpel is then used to stab the fetus in the neck just below the scull and sever its spinal cord.  This ensures it will be “born dead.”  This is called “late term abortion.”

There are various films available showing this procedure.  I have personally seen one and strongly feel that the American people need to be informed as to what many Americans are criticizing Congress and the Senate about every time that a vote comes to the floor and it is “voted down.”

Solution:  Take the vote to the general populace.  Do not leave such an important issue in the hands of an inept governmental body that is expected to vote on behalf of the people.  They constantly prove they are not our friends.

 

How:  Hold a special election where the only issue on the ballot is “late term abortion.”  It would be nice if only legalized citizens with appropriate I.D. were allowed to vote since the outcome directly affects continuing to pay for illegal aliens to take advantage of this procedure at our expense.  It would also be good if they could view a video of what they are voting for, after all a picture is worth a thousand words.  In lieu of that, a simple paragraph of what the procedure entails, such as was stated above, should be presented and signed prior to voting.

Since this is such an important issue, no one should be allowed to cast their vote unless they fully understand what they are voting for.  Once the American People have seen for themselves what all of the controversy is about, then they can make a collective decision whether or not to allow the passing of such a law in the U.S.

Keep in mind:  Concerning stem cell research; it is a scientific fact that fetal cells are far more effective than embryonic cells.  The scientific definition of a fetus is that the unborn child is viable (i.e., able to survive outside of the mother’s womb).  An embryo is not able to survive.  An embryo is a group of cells (or “blob” if you wish) that once outside of the mother’s body, is not viable and stops dividing and multiplying.  In layman’s terms, it dies.

Unknown to the American Public at large is the fact that there are companies who have paid millions (conservatively speaking) in the advancement of stem cell research.  The success of their research, and subsequent “treatments,” depend on how “mature” the fetal cells are that they use in the process.

Again, such an important issue needs to be placed on an open ballot to the general populace.  Should the general populace agree that the “end justifies the means” and that such a procedure should be allowed by law and paid for by their tax dollars, then once and for all the issue is not debatable, and it should be made into American law.

No more controversy.  No more name calling.  The issue has been voted on by the American people and they have spoken. 

END OF GUEST POST

-------------------------------------------------

There is something about nationally sanctioned murdering of children that is just wrong, and I fail to see how a this nation of bleeding hearts lets it continue.  More insulting to any moral argument is that it continues at the behest of large corporations that stand to reap the financial benefits of these immoral acts.  Dr. Mengele would be proud to know that we continue his horrific scientific experiments at the expense of our souls.

“I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is 'Abortion', because it is a war against the child... A direct killing of the innocent child, 'Murder' by the mother herself... And if we can accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love... And we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts...”

-- Mother Teresa

I have seen the video clip taken before a birth via C-section, of a small hand and arm emerging from the mother's womb to grasp the finger of the surgeon.  To watch this clip (attached) it is hard to conceive of any intelligent society that would define life as something taking its first breath much less condone this murderous practice.

I found the item below while cruising the net in search of the "Hand of Hope" article which has been the topic of much debate.  I think this follow-up article is so much more important than the controversy.  See this Snopes.com page, Hand of Hope, and then read the follow-up, below.

"On August 19, 1999, photographer Michael Clancy shot the 'Fetal Hand Grasp' — his picture of a 21-week-old fetus grasping a doctor's finger during innovative surgery to correct spina bifida. Nearly four months later, on Dec. 2, Samuel Armas was 'born famous. 

The photo, which first appeared in USA Today on Sept. 7, 1999, quickly spread across the globe as proof of development in the womb and was later cited during congressional debates on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which passed in 2000. 

'It's just a miracle picture, a miracle moment,' Clancy told FOXNews.com. "It shows the earliest human interaction ever recorded.' 

Samuel, now 9 and living in Villa Rica, Ga., said the photo likely gave countless 'babies their right to live' and forced many others to debate their beliefs on abortion, something he's proud of. 

'It's very important to me,' Samuel said of the photograph. 'A lot of babies would've lost their lives if that didn't happen.' Julie Armas, Samuel's mother, said her eldest son has a 'very strong sense of right and wrong' and understands the impact of his unconventional first baby photo."

Story source; Fox News, Joshua Rhett Miller, May 6, 2009

What would Jesus think? 

Editor's Note:  

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion.  It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other.  An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so.

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and then engaging in peaceful, constructive, discussion and debate in an arena of mutual respect concerning the opinions put forth.  After over twenty years as a military intelligence analyst, planner, and briefer, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human.  God's test for us is what we do afterward, and what we learn from the experience.
  

Pastor Frank Anthony Villari

Pastor Tony is founder of the Congregation for Religious Tolerance and author/editor of "The Path," the Congregation's official blogsite.