Abortion based SOLELY on the fact that the baby has a disability is very common. As if abortion wasn't bad enough as it is. In The Telegraph's January 18, 2016 article, Tim Stanley states that "Down's Syndrome people risk 'extinction' at the hands of science, fear and ignorance," as "around 90 per cent of pregnancies that involve the condition end in a termination." Stanley also states that the 692 abortions in 2014 due to Down's Syndrome is a 34 per cent leap since 2011. If these babies are not alive or even human beings, then how are they being diagnosed with Down's Syndrome and other disabilities? They are very much alive and human, and to abort them based on a disability is nothing short of barbaric and murder.
In this National Post article, Tom Blackwell outlines how "better testing for birth defects has given rise to [the] growing rates of abortion ending in 'accidental live births.'" To ensure that the baby is "stillborn," doctors will "inject a substance to kill the fetus first," and "when they decline the injection, accidental live births sometimes occur." When this happens, the live babies are NOT resuscitated. Babies that are "accidentally" born, after lethal injections failed to kill them, are simply left to die. They are murdered while inside the womb and die either inside or outside.
First, second, and third trimester abortions are all murder. Need more proof? Just type in "first trimester abortion" into Google Images. In fact, type in "fetus abortion" as well, take a long, hard look at all of those images, and try to say to yourself with a clear conscience that abortion is anything other than murder.Photo Credit
First photo by American Life League
Second photo by Joris Louwes
Third photo by Steve Rhodes
Fourth photo by American Life League
Search Engine Optimization
By using Google Trends, I was able to research which terms would be best suited for my headline. 'Abortion' is an obvious keyword, but I had to research the others. 'Death' outnumbered 'murder' by an almost five to one margin, 74-15, 'sentence' has outnumbered 'penalty' since 2009, and 'babies' was extremely higher than 'unborn,' 84-3, thus making my headline SEO-friendly.
I appreciate the passion behind the article. I do however think that the topic of abortion isn't as black and white as this post makes it seem.
ReplyDeleteMy three main points are as black and white as it gets.
DeleteThere are many variables that are active when speaking of such a touchy subject. One has to take into consideration the reason behind someone's decision to abort. Was it rape? Lack of funding to support a child? Ineffectiveness of contraceptive? In any case a decision shouldn't be based on the parent simply not 'wanting' a child.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the day, the three reasons you bring up all fall under the "parent simply not 'wanting' a child" category. A pregnancy under those circumstances is no different than any other, as it is still the exact same process.
DeleteWhile I respect you're conviction, the case you set-up has a few errors which collapse it. "The sheer fact that the dictionary states that a fetus is a human being is evident enough that abortion is murder", that proves nothing. The dictionary definition is irrelevant. "A Tennessee woman who attempted self-abortion was charged with first-degree attempted murder", Tennessee is a right-wing state, so this does not bolster you're case. I believe a good review of this post would be to say that it is overly condemning and does little to convince a skeptic.
ReplyDeletePlease enlighten me on how a dictionary definition is irrelevant. Why even bother having the dictionary then? Might as well just make up our own definitions that fit our own personal opinions, right? I bet you only said "irrelevant" just because I said it on your post. So what if Tennessee is a right-wing state? What's your point? Last time I checked, laws are laws and they all hold the same amount of power, regardless of what kind of state they're coming from, so it actually does bolster my argument and would do so even if the woman had not been charged or if it had occurred in a non-right-wing state. The child was born. Enough said. You know what else is "overly condemning"? Abortion. This post is hardly condemning enough.
DeleteI like the point you made about how unborn babies with down syndrome get aborted. People who want to have a baby shouldn't decide to give up on their baby just because it had down syndrome. However, I feel like this article just didn't have enough facts to back up your points.
ReplyDeleteI backed up each of my three main points with an article, each of which provided plenty of facts about what I stated. Please explain how I didn't have enough facts.
DeleteThere are so many different reasons to why abortions are needed. It typically involves either the mother or the child dying. I agree abortion for the sole fact of the child being disable is wrong, but if a mother could not afford to sufficiently care for them then I understand abortion as an option.
ReplyDeleteThere may be reasons why abortions are "needed," but that doesn't suddenly make it all fine and dandy. Typically, it does not involve the mother or child dying, as that is not one of the main reason why women get abortions. Even in these situations, there have been many cases where doctors have been wrong and both the mother and child turn out perfectly fine. If you can't afford to sufficiently care for a child, then put it up for adoption or get help from family or friends. Simple.
Delete