web space | free website | Business Web Hosting | Free Website Submission | shopping cart | php hosting

RealChoice

When Life is Short
Creating a perceived "need"
 Explore This Site
  Related Resources
• Abortion Practice Before Legalization
• Analytical Tools
• Back-Alley Butchers vs. Main-Street Maimers
• Behind Closed Doors
• "Dolores" Meets George Tiller
• Glimpse Into Abortion's Past
• More Invisible Pro Choice Violence
• Post-Legalization: Is This an Improvement?
• Unwanted Abortion of a Wanted Child
• Unwanted Abortions
• Women Who Change Their Minds
 Elsewhere on the Web
• Expose Deceptive Abortion Practices
• Feminists for Life of America
• Fighting the Stereotypes: Pro-Life Feminism
• Women at Risk
 

1 2 3 4

Call it what you will -- D&X, Intact Extraction, Partial Birth Abortion -- proponents of late abortions have defended their practice by creating a percieved "need."

It's clear that the "need" is purely an invented one, because if you propose limiting late abortions to just those cases, they balk. For over a quarter of a century, abortion enthusiasts were willing to concede that there really is no reason to kill a baby when the pregnancy is more than halfway through. After all, if the mother's life is in danger, it's a lot faster to do an emergency c-section than to muck about for three days dilating her cervix so that the baby can be dragged out and stabbed. So they had to come up with a circumstance under which it would at least seem to make sense to go to all that trouble just to kill the baby. The reason they finally settled on as effective with the public was "fetal deformity incompatable with life."

That still leaves us with an interesting question. Why, if the baby's condition is incompatable with life, do you have to stop in the middle of the procedure and kill him? Why not just let nature take its course? Or, if you're sure that the baby won't survive until term and the mother wants to shorten the ordeal, wouldn't you deliver the baby live? When pressed on this issue, abortion proponents shove forward to the podium some hapless woman who has been guilt-tripped into a late abortion for severe fetal abnormalities, and evade the issue entirely by making it seem as if the questioner is attacking the woman, rather than attacking the whole sordid mess that she's been sucked into.

Up until the invention of intact extraction, there was no bloc of abortion proponents crying about a "need" to kill moribund fetuses. When a state instituted a late abortion ban, it would go unchallenged. The Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act contained a late abortion ban, and when Planned Parenthood challenged the Act, they specifically did NOT challenge the aspect of the Act banning late abortions. Women whose babies were going to die tried to time delivery so that they could hold and say goodby to their babies. But the timing was right for something else -- the sale of fetal tissue -- and intact extraction alone provides the newly dead (or still alive) bodies needed for tissue "donation." So the abortion industry changed its tactics.

Creating a Perceived "Need"
Sales and Recruitment
Short Lives, Long Legacies
Are People Really That Mean?

Previous Articles

Like this link graphic? Click here to learn how to add it to your web page.

Search this site powered by FreeFind
View the Cemetery of Choice Calendar
Free Calendar from Bravenet.com Free Calendar from Bravenet.com

Send me your feedback!
Name:
E-Mail:
Comments:

Cemetery of Choice

RealChoice Blog