Ending Abortion

There is some debate within the pro-life community regarding how abortion ought to be banned: completely, all in one act of legislation, or incrementally, bit by bit and over time. No one argues that abortion, in any form or at any time ought to be legal, but can it be outlawed all at once?

Doug Wilson on how, and why, abortion will be eliminated. Excellent read.

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/books/inescapable-incrementalism.html

No, Gun Control is not a pro-life issue!

Well, maybe gun control is a pro-life matter if it is admitted that guns are effective tools to protect the weak and vulnerable from criminals. It is a pro-life action to save a life from harm. But this blog post is about something else.

Christians are often scolded for failing to include better gun control (or banning) in their arguments against abortion and euthanasia. As defined, abortion is the taking of a human life which is yet unborn. Euthanasia is the taking of a human life who is deemed too disabled, ill, or old to be allowed to survive. Abortion is always involuntary for the baby; euthanasia may be voluntary but is increasingly being made involuntary by families and authorities. To be pro-life, the Christian argues, is to be against these acts of murder.

As the gun control argument is presented, Christians are inconsistent if they do not likewise seek to limit access to firearms so that mass shooting tragedies could be reduced or avoided completely.

But if the argument is made this way, it ignores the fact that the most vocal opponents of firearm access are also the most likely to be proponents of abortion and euthanasia. The irony is that those who would control firearms through state regulations are the same people who invoke the powers of the same state regulators to pay for abortions and euthanasia, to train doctors to perform them and limits protestors’ freedom of expression to protest against it.

The government that enforces laws against murder does not at the same time train killers and provide their weapons. It does not protect them from the consequences of their acts and rightly condemns them.

Comparing abortion, euthanasia to mass shootings and murder doesn’t acknowledge this significant difference, while at the same time refusing to see the one similarity: all kill the innocent all are murder.

No one should listen to anyone who calls for a surrender of firearms but pushes for the government-sanctioned murder of the most helpless people in society. Such a mindset is so skewed, so schizophrenic, so depraved as to be disqualified from the discussion. It matters little if the pro-choice crowd has the peoples’ support, state authority and finance, church support, popular media praise, or the approval of educational institutions. The fact is if they will kill the helpless they will eventually get around to you.

Mass shootings are rare. Abortion and euthanasia are not. Jesus warned against swallowing a camel but chocking on a gnat. Failure to know the difference is what damned the Pharisees of His day and it can do the same today.

Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Body Parts–Whistleblowers Are Indicted

Planned Parenthood is a criminal organisation, but those who expose them face prison.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20, ESV)

The following is from Doug Wilson’s blog. Video is disturbing–how can it not be?

“This last summer, the pro-abortion world was rocked by the release of a series of sting videos that showed Planned Parenthood illegally serving as merchants of baby parts. I hesitate in using that word illegally because their practices are ghoulish and appalling long before they become illegal. What they do is manifestly illegal, but that is not the heart of what is wrong with it.

In other words, we live in a country where it is perfectly legal to turn a healthy baby into baby parts.That part is okay. It is just that when you do this, you can’t sell any of the parts afterward. Selling them would be an indignity and grossly illegal, while throwing them into a furnace, dumpster or landfill is somehow consistent with American core values.

And it is, too, because American core values have come to include high levels of hypocritical hairsplitting.

Chopping little Billy or Sally into unmerchandisable bits is not an indignity. Being very careful in how you kill them, so that the kidney, heart, thymus, and femur remain usable, is against the law. This highlights pro-choice hypocrisy, even though the inconsistency was created through pro-life pressure that made the merchandising against the law.

Insisting on the arbitrary illegality of this is pro-life shrewdness, because it spotlights the central lie of the abortion industry. They got away with the killing itself because of their insistence that what we were dealing with was a nondescript lump of tissue. We were removing a cyst-like thing that later on becomes a human being. Okay, said an America that had never paid too much attention in high school biology. But now all the cyst-like characteristics have disappeared, and we discover that if Planned Parenthood could figure out how to make a buck selling tiny fingernails, they would most certainly be doing so.

The general public may not know rudimentary biology, but they do know enough to know that you can’t have it both ways. If you pass a law concerning lumps of tissue, you must treat the lumps of tissue as that thereafter. And if you go on to set up a big business selling parts that are highly valuable precisely because they are distinct human parts, you have undercut your whole project — and have not a shred of moral credibility left.

So the thing about hypocrisy is that it never knows when to quit. Knowledge of when to quit is called repentance, and so, failing that repentance, the hypocrisy just gets more and more bizarre. Less repentance, the only thing you can do is double down. And then, after that, you triple down. After that comes Hell.

Because we have banished the true God from the public square, we have in effect said that we only have to obey the laws established by the true god of our system, the god Demos, the god who serves as the voice of the people. If it is illegal, then we won’t do it. Cross our hearts. Promise. This is a democracy.

Ah, but they are doing it. How shall we account for this? Grandiose narcissism is always sold as the noble service of Us, but it always translates, by the end of the day, into the ignoble service of Me.

So however much it makes no sense within their larger system, it is illegal to sell baby parts, and Planned Parenthood in Houston was manifestly selling baby parts. So what happened? Texas has a pro-life governor and pro-life lieutenant governor. The prosecutor’s office was told to look into it. Were the sting videos reliable? They “looked into it” and came back with an indictment of Daleiden and Merritt, the investigative journalists who uncovered and documented the corruption of Planned Parenthood.

Correction: I am informed by a reader that a detail in the above is incorrect. The state investigation is ongoing. The indictment was the doing of the Houston prosecutor, trying to get out in front of things.

In response to this unconscionable indictment, the Center for Medical Progress has courageously released another video — and good on them. This is a showdown, and we need to not blink. We need to help the CMP to not blink.

If the indictment is not thrown out ipso pronto, to use the technical legal phrase, then Gov. Abbott of Texas should simply pardon them. Or rather, he should promise to pardon them if they are eventually convicted of anything — because while they are on trial they can use the process of discovery to perhaps uncover more than their videos ever did. The promise of a gubernatorial pardon will mean that the bad guys, regardless of what they do, will be in a lose/lose situation.

In addition, every candidate for president needs to be pressed on this same question. We are now in the midst of primary season, which means that many ordinary citizens will have opportunity to ask such questions. The question should have two parts — if Daleiden and Merritt are convicted, and if that case wends its way into the federal system, can you commit yourself to a presidential pardon for them? And secondly, would you be willing to consider awarding them the Medal of Freedom regardless of the status of their case?”