|
Evading Planned Parenthood's
Clutches
Part One of Two
By Dave Andrusko
Editor's note: Please post these TN&Vs on your
social networking pages by going to
www.nrlc.org/News_and_views/Mar09/nv040209.html
and clicking on the "Share" button.
Part Two discusses
"A
Hole in the Head 'Holistic' Approach to
Abortion."
Please
send your comments on either or both of these
columns to
daveandrusko@gmail.com
It's always fascinating to take a
close look at what is the newest terrain on
which pro-and anti-life forces are locked in
combat and then to try to decide what that tells
us. Right now clearly that battlefield is the
use of ultrasounds.
In my naivete I used to think
that it was really odd that the Abortion
Industry, which has more money than many
countries, would go to Defcon 1 whenever a state
would propose the creation of a "Choose Life"
specialty license plate. If enacted, it meant a
small amount of money would go to crisis
pregnancy centers. Then it became clear, and it
had nothing to do with allegations that CPCs
gave out "false" information.
Like all bullies, Planned
Parenthood can't stand it when someone stands up
to them. If CPCs, which operate hand-to-mouth,
are given just a few bucks, some women who
otherwise would abort won't.
And there is nothing that
makes pro-abortionists angrier than a woman, any
woman, evading their clutches.
Consider the use of ultrasounds.
To protect women's health, most abortion
facilities already use ultrasounds. Why? So they
can zero in on the child's precise location and
then, after killing her, make sure that all the
parts of the baby's body have been removed. (If
any remain, it could lead to an infection.)
But I was never so naïve as to
think that the Planned Parenthood types would
sit idly by as a piece of equipment that is used
to polish the killing technique is transformed
into something that would give women a genuine
opportunity to make a truly informed decision
whether or not to abort her child.
I thought of this as I read an
hysterical editorial that appeared in the
Orlando Sentinel Tuesday. The usual measured
words were on display--"ugly," "bunk,"
insulting," etc., etc., etc.--as the paper
vented its displeasure over a bill that had
passed out of committee giving women
contemplating an abortion the chance to see live
ultrasound images of their kid.
Check this out this reasoning. A
colonoscopy on men
after the age of 50 is "proven to save lives,"
the Sentinel tells us. Is the state going
to make that mandatory? No, "it's not law
because it's none of government's business how
citizens choose to get informed when making
medical decisions. Abortion should be no
different."
At the risk
of offending anyone who has attained the age of
reason, getting a colonoscopy and having an
abortion is not remotely equivalent. For one
thing, a colonoscopy is intended to increase the
likelihood you won't die from a disease.
An abortion is desired as a 100% guarantee that
someone will die.
For another
thing, a colonoscopy is conducted voluntarily on
a patient at his or her request. An abortion
involuntarily takes the life of someone else--a
baby--who has no voice in the decision.
Anything
that gives pro-life forces a lift up (no matter
how tiny), or which increases the chances that a
woman will see whom it is they are dispatching
to oblivion, will always drive "pro-choice"
forces crazy.
Good
Orwellians that they are, in their lexicon,
"choice" does not mean actually having different
options and choosing among them. "Choice" means
doing everything possible to eliminate all
choices except one: the choice for death.
Part Two --
A Hole in the
Head "Holistic" Approach to Abortion |