A Discussion on the Act of Abortion
With the Democratic National Convention happening this week and the Republican National Convention scheduled for next week, one of the hottest topics of the day is centered around abortion and the human rights of the unborn child and its right to life. Unfortunately, for the unborn child, the Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama, is likely the most hard-core right-to-life opponent to ever run for this office and his record as an Illinois senator supports this anti-Christian, anti-Catholic fundamental concept. Our great nation was founded on the basic rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and we Americans have fought for over two hundred years attempting to live up to these founding principles. Since our becoming a nation, much controversy has arisen over the pursuit of happiness as concerns religious and economic liberty. Issues such as the right to bear arms, slavery, right to vote, and today one of the most basic rights of all: the right to life.
In 2001, then state senator Barack Obama fought dynamically against any legislation protecting the right-to-life issue for the unborn child because he felt it might undermine the right to abortion-on-demand during pregnancy. He stated, "Whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a nine-month-old child that was delivered to term." He then warned during debate over three state bills that would have offered protection to babies who are born alive after unsuccessful abortions. "That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place."
During the recently televised question and answer session conducted by Rick Warren at his Saddleback Church between Senator Obama and Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee for president, Obama made some very revealing remarks about his own character and his personal stance as concerns our very basic right. When asked at what point was a baby entitled to human rights, Obama answered, "Well, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." Somehow, he decided he was not qualified to define his own opinion as to when life begins. He follows with, "I am in favor, for example, of limits on late-term abortions if there is an exception for the mother’s health," and adding, "Now, from the perspective of those who, you know, are pro-life, I think they would consider that inadequate, and I respect their views. I mean, one of the things that I’ve always said is that on this particular issue, if you believe that life begins at conception — and you are consistent in that belief — then I can’t argue with you on that because that is a core issue of faith for you." By this response, he reveals his own belief that life does not begin at conception because that is a core issue of his own faith and his view should be respected as well.
Obama has voted against prohibiting tax-funding of abortion, instead believing people should pay for their own procedures. He also voted no to legislation requiring parents to be notified about their minor children obtaining out-of-state abortions. He then voted for expanded research on lines of embryonic stem cells from the unborn fetus as well as support for the cloning technology already pioneered. His wife, Michelle, supports her husbands positions, stating her concern over the rise of conservatism in this nation, and that the ‘so-called’ partial-birth abortion was a legitimate medical procedure that should be protected. Following his wife’s lead, Obama was the only Illinois senator to speak out against the Illinois version of the "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act" and when it arrived on the floor of the Senate, as chairman of that committee, he killed the bill. "The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act," or the BAIPA as passed by the U.S. Senate, provides for the protection and treatment of a child who survives an attempted abortion such as in a Dilation and Extraction (partial-birth) instead of simply leaving the baby in some remote area of a hospital to allow the child to die on its own through neglect. Medical science and the Supreme Court has determined the horrendous practice of partial-birth is, in truth, infanticide and is never a necessary procedure. However, Obama disagreed, describing the ban, "a concerted effort to roll back the hard-won rights of American women." He apparently feels, as does his wife, Michelle, the mothers, the doctors, and the hospitals, should show no regard for the infant’s right to life, a right guaranteed by our U.S. Constitution.
Presidential candidate Obama has now named as his running mate Delaware Senator Joseph Biden, one who is also in line with Obama’s thinking on the abortion issues. He, on the record, has supported the no-vote for public funding of abortion but supports the ban on partial-birth abortion but not withdrawing the Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court. He voted the same as Obama in legislation requiring notification of the parents of minor children crossing state lines for abortion and has supported embryonic stem cell research expansion along with human cloning. He seems the perfect candidate for the vice-presidential seat, being in lock-step with the proposed presidential candidate. Thus, the corrupt and demented character of the Democratic Party in general and in the Obama/Biden ticket in specific is clearly defined and illustrated.
It simply cannot be believed either of these men or their wives or those who support their anti-Christian views fully understand of what the act of infanticide through abortion consists. If they did, they would certainly reverse themselves on their views…unless, of course, they so completely depraved and immoral as to genuinely be unconcerned of the consequences. The Bible teaches all life is a gift from God and human life especially is looked upon by Him as His special creation, to be protected throughout life unto physical death after which that life is returned to Him. If we insist upon killing our babies, His personal creations, we are denying His right of ownership and defying His Will.
In order to supply the understanding of what an abortion consists, the basic development of human life should be looked at followed by a study of the existing procedures used in abortions. The result of fertilizing the female egg, called the gamete or oocyte, by the male sperm forms a single cell called a zygote, a highly specialized cell marking the beginning of a unique individual. This cell, marking the moment of conception, is the belief commonly accepted by Christians as the point at which life begins and a new spirit is created for the soul given by God, the Creator of all things. Through the natural order of life set in motion by His Will, this cell divides and multiplies continually, creating the shape of the human being into the form of a fetus by the 12th week, or the first trimester, of gestation with all the major organs and structure formed. The fetus, about 4 inches in length and weighing about an ounce, has developed the heart and a heartbeat, lungs, eyes, ears, fingers and toes, teeth buds in the gums, and the kidneys begin to secrete urine, aiding in forming the amniotic fluid around the baby. Within another four weeks, the baby is about 6 inches and five ounces and has begun to move about. By the end of the second trimester at 28 weeks, the baby is about 9 inches or more, weighs about three pounds and has defined sexuality, a soft fuzz covering its body, swallows amniotic fluid, sucks its thumbs, blinks its eyes and begins to have sleep periods along with restlessness between. The final trimester, up to the 40th week, the baby can gain as much as a half pound a week and grow to an average of 18 inches and seven and one-half pounds.
For a variety of reasons, a pregnancy may terminate at the 28th or 29th week by premature delivery. The baby can easily survive during this period through the excellent technology and specialized care available today to the premature infant. This second trimester is also generally considered the cut-off time for most abortions.
Originally, few laws on abortion existed in the U.S. at the time of our independence and those which did were derived from the Common Law adopted from the English system of law at that time which held abortion to be legally acceptable if occurring before the "quickening" which was the moment the fetus began its first movement. One of the framers of the Constitution, James Wilson, explained this as follows: "With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger." Even at this early stage of our nation, the belief the unborn child was viable and in need of protection had existed for many years. Consequently, anti-abortion statutes appeared beginning in the 1820’s in Connecticut outlawing the sale of poisons to women for purposes of abortion and made post-quickening abortions a felony. Pre-quickening abortions was changed to a misdemeanor in 1829; so already, the moral issue was being modified.
This view was almost universally legally accepted in the United States until the landmark decision in 1973 by the Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade, wherein any statute forbidding abortion except when necessary to save the life of a woman was declared unconstitutional. They arrived at their decision by concluding that the issue of abortion and abortion rights falls under the Right to Privacy, listing several other landmark cases where the court had previously found that right implied by the Constitution. The court held that a first trimester fetus was not a person under the Constitution, and that a right to privacy of the female existed and included the right to have an abortion. The court further ruled that the state could intervene to restrict abortion in the second trimester of development and could outlaw it altogether in the third trimester.
A central issue in the Roe case, as well as in the wider abortion debate, is whether human life begins at conception, birth, or at some point in between. The Court declined to make an attempt at resolving this issue, noting: "When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer." Instead, it chose to point out that historically, under English and American Common Law statutes, "the unborn have never been recognized...as persons in the whole sense" and therefore fetuses are not legally entitled to the protection afforded by the right to life specifically enumerated in the Fourteenth Amendment. So rather than asserting that human life begins at any specific point, the court simply declared that the State has a "compelling interest" in protecting "potential life" at the point of viability, which is to say at that point at which it can survive birth outside the womb.
The 1973 Companion case to Roe, Doe v. Bolton, expanded the right to abortion after viability even up to the moment of birth if her doctor "in his best clinical judgment", in light of the patient's age, "physical, emotional, psychological and familial" circumstances, finds it "necessary for her physical or mental health". However, this definition of "health" allowed any doctor, willing to perform a late-term abortion, the legal option to do so, thereby removing the trimester requirements of Roe, although they were not officially overturned until 1992. In the news reporting and televised discussions of abortion, the Roe v. Wade case is always noted, but the more potentially damaging decision made, according to the dispensation of the wisdom of our eminent and exalted Supreme Court justices, the Doe v. Bolton decision is never raised but is no less abhorrent in its reality.
Here, in the United States, more than 90 percent of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy (up to twelve weeks from the last normal menstrual period). Most take place in outpatient clinics specially designed and equipped for this purpose. Nearly all abortions are performed by physicians, although at least two states (Montana and Vermont) permit physicians' assistants to do the procedure. A limited number of physicians in specialized clinics perform abortions during the second trimester of pregnancy, but only a few perform abortions after pregnancy has advanced to more than twenty-five weeks. Although some hospitals permit abortions to be performed, the number is limited because the costs are greater and hospital operating room schedules do not allow for a large number of patients. In addition, staff members at hospitals are not chosen on the basis of their willingness to help perform abortions, while clinic staff members are hired for that purpose.
The chart, Figure 1, shows the number, ratio, and rate of abortions in the United States by year from 1973 to 2003.
It should be noted abortions are much more common among minority women in the U.S. In 2000-2001, the rates among black and Hispanic women were 49 per 1,000 and 33 per 1,000, respectively, vs. 13 per 1,000 among non-Hispanic white women. These figures should not be seen as some method of oppression of the minorities, but recognized that the pregnancies generally resulted because of lesser moral standards combined with the general practice of having children in order to increase one’s household income through the nation’s welfare agencies’ entitlement programs.
This following section is most graphic in both its descriptions and illustrations. It outlines the various acceptable methods of abortion techniques used in the first and second trimesters.
First Trimester (1-23 weeks)
1. Suction curettage - The physician dilates (opens) the cervix with mechanical dilators or laminaria (a porous substance [medically prepared seaweed stalk] that is typically inserted a day before the abortion). During the abortion, the doctor attaches tubing to a suction machine and inserts the tubing into the uterus. The suction created by the vacuum pulls the live, but unborn, baby's body apart and detaches the placenta from the wall of the uterus, sucking the fetal parts and placenta into a collection bottle.
2. Dilation and Curettage (D&C, or sharpe curettage) - This method is not as common since it requires more dilation and more time, and is considered less safe than suction curettage. The cervix is dilated and a curette, or loop-shaped knife, is inserted into the uterus to pull the unborn baby's body apart and detach the placenta from the wall of the uterus. All body parts and membranes are then scraped out of the mothers body.
Second Trimester (13-26 weeks)
1. Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) - At this point in pregnancy, the unborn baby's body is too large to be broken up by suction and it will not pass through the tubing. The cervix needs to be dilated more than in a first trimester abortion. This is usually accomplished by inserting laminaria a day or two before the abortion. The physician then systematically dismembers the body parts by cutting and breaking the arms and legs and abdomen. Finally, the skull is crushed and the spine is broken to facilitate removal.
2. Saline, Prostaglandin, and Urea Instillation - These methods, more common during the 1970's and 1980's, are rarely used now, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which reported that they accounted for only 0.7% or approximately 11,200 of all reported abortions in 1991. In a saline abortion, the physician injects a concentrated salt solution through the mother's abdomen into the amniotic sac surrounding the baby. The fetus absorbs the solution, which causes burning, hemorrhage, edema, shock, and eventually death. The saline also causes the uterus to contract and expel the baby.
3. Intercardiac Injection - At about 16 weeks, ultrasound is used to pinpoint the location of the baby's heart. A needle injects a fluid into its heart, causing an immediate heart attack, killing the pre-born baby. Used commonly in "pregnancy reduction" abortions when multiple babies are present and some are killed to give others better chance of survival, or they are killed because of defects. Prostaglandin abortions are performed by injecting a protaglandin hormone into the amniotic sac. The hormone stimulates uterine contractions to expel the fetus, who has usually died, although a 1978 study showed that up to 7% of babies aborted with prostaglandins showed signs of life. Urea abortions are similar to saline abortions but are not as effective. Urea infusion is more commonly combined with later-term D&E abortions to soften fetal tissues for easier, safer, and less painful removal.
Second and Third Trimester (27 to 40 weeks)
1. Dilation and Extraction (D&X) - This technique, does not dismember the fetus; rather, the fetus is delivered intact, without infusions. As described and performed by an abortion doctor, D&X abortions, also called "partial-birth" abortions, take three days to complete. In the first two days, the woman's cervix is dilated with laminaria in two or more sessions, with medication given for cramping. On the day of the procedure, the laminaria are removed, and the patient is injected with Pitocin to induce contractions. The abortion doctor next determines the fetus' orientation in the uterus through ultrasound and locates the legs. Grasping a leg with large forceps, he pulls the baby, wriggling and kicking, anxious to be born into the world, into the vagina and delivers the baby up to the baby's head with his hands and stops the delivery there. Next, the doctor slides his hand up the baby's back and hooks his fingers over the shoulders of the baby while attempting to hold it still. Then a pair of surgical scissors are inserted into the base of the skull of the fully-awake and conscious infant to create an opening. Removing the scissors, he inserts a suction catheter into the opening and suctions out the skull contents. Minus its brains, the skull decompresses and is easy to remove without excessive discomfort for the mother. Finally, the abortionist removes the placenta with forceps and scrapes the uterine walls with a suction curette.
The question must indeed be asked: "Does the fetus feel pain?" While to those who perform these acts of abortion, fetal pain is not a consideration; if it suffers pain during the procedure, it is secondary to the reason for the procedure which is because the mother wishes it. The notion an unborn child does not feel pain is foolish because the newly born child is certainly capable of feeling pain and it is not because some magic switch was turned on at the moment of birth; the fetus feels pain just as intently as the newborn. As any mother will say, the fetus also feels anxiety and fear as well as comfort and serenity.
If it is accepted the fetus is capable of feeling pain as intensely as anyone, how can one with conscience put their child or another’s child through the trauma of the abortion? Even under a local anesthetic administered to the fetus, the horrific pain suffered while being broken and dismembered a piece at a time cannot be diminished. Nor, it must be suspected, can the psychological impact of the initial invasion and the fear it creates be discounted. Even the seemingly more humane method of abortion using the saline solution into the amniotic sack causes intense pain by burning and blistering the skin, hemorrhaging of the surface vessels, swelling of the tissue causing the joints to pulled apart, and finally shock and at last death.
One must certainly know it would indeed be a blessing not to hear the shrieks and screams from the child undergoing such physical torture. Why else would the doctor, using the D & X method or the "partial-birth" method, stop extraction at the shoulders of the child, who is getting more panicky by the moment, where he can use the scissors to cut into the baby’s neck at the base of the skull large enough to insert a suction catheter to suck out the brain before crushing the skull to make the final extraction more comfortable for the mother. He does not wish to hear the tortured screams of the child either.
From the literal millions of abortions performed just in the United States, doctors and clinical technicians have compiled a list of the typical characteristics of the mothers following their act of having their child killed while they watched, as it were. They begin to suffer such great psychological stress afterwards so as to make one believe such is their penalty for having done such a thing in the first place. These include uncontrolled re-experiencing of the abortion combined with unsuccessful attempts to put away negative memories and pain of the abortion, even experiencing symptoms not present before the abortion. These symptoms encompass guilt over having consented to the act leading to anxiety and depression filled with sadness, sudden and uncontrollable crying, poor self-concept, loss of sleep and appetite. Conflicts in their relationship to other is affected along with sexual problems, self-motivation and thoughts of suicide. Each anniversary they experience grief and flashbacks of the abortion. They become preoccupied with becoming pregnant again and worry over their fertility and other childbearing issues. They even find themselves incapable of bonding with other children, regardless if their own or someone else’s. The mothers almost always develop a survival guilt over their act of having their child destroyed when they, themselves, come away relatively unmarked. Often eating disorders and alcohol and drug abuse are present and reactive psychosis leads to other self-punishing and self-degrading behavior. While it would seem just they go through these things after such a horrific step, compassion still needs to rule and proper care must be given so they can receive some degree of healing to cope with their misery. No such list of characteristics as applied to the doctors and technicians who actually perform these hideous acts on the innocent has been found available.
These men and women who allow such actions against innocent children are no less mass murderers than any on death row today. Not only do they show no remorse over causing their deaths, but no regard for the rights of these innocents. They demonstrate they have no compunction against inflicting the most horrid tortures upon the human body in the most evil manner man could ever devise…all disguised under the cloak of Civil Rights, a deceptive and hypocritical assemblage of laws meant to protect the individual, but in truth actually restricts the rights guaranteed by our Constitution. Many of these people profess to know God and follow His Word, but they deny him by their abominable conduct. Their behavior demonstrates they are devoid of judgment, displaying a detestable character wholly reprobate in the site of God. They believe themselves wise and pious, providing for the nation’s well-being; but they merely deceive themselves, for no true Christian is deceived. God will deliver them to their own hearts’ desires and will indulge them in their wishes allowing them to work out their successes and happiness in their own way to ultimately see for themselves what it means to forsake God and His children.