Skip to main content

A "Non Issue"

Q: "Have you ever in your career had a surgical abortion where the whole fetus came out without collapsing its skull?" A: "Yes, it has happened five to ten times, during the gestational age of sixteen to twenty-four weeks." Q: "If a woman was seeking an abortion, would it be a concern that the intact fetus could live?" A: "Yes, especially if the fetus was the gestational age of twenty to twenty-four weeks." ... The abortionist's testimony indicated that although the Plaintiffs continue to claim that there are health benefits from removing an intact fetus, and that a more dilated cervix is safer than a less dilated cervix, the abortionists intentionally reduce dilation in order to ensure that the fetal head does not come out, because then they would have a live birth instead of a termination.
This is testimony from the partial birth abortion ban trial in the U.S. right now. Another article describing abortion procedures is here:
"[the doctor] introduces a small rod with an abrasive ring at the end. The ring isn't sharp, but the scraping hurts a lot of women and they cry or scream.

"When the baby is less than three months, the baby disintegrates completely. When the doctor feels that the baby has been dislodged completely, he introduces something similar to a straw. The exterior opening of the straw connects to a vacuum. Then he vacuums up everything that has broken apart. All that he vacuums goes into a jar. You see blood, and bits and pieces of tissue that look like chopped meat. It all comes out in pieces."

Those are the words of the assisting nurse. If you think that's bad, read the article yourself and see what happens to more mature infants. Remember how the sky crashed down on the Conservatives in the last election for merely suggesting that counseling prior to scheduling the event might be useful. Remember that in Canada we have absolutely no laws restricting abortion. Remember how proud some people are about that. Is that enlightened? Progressive? Humane? Remember that it was Liberal appointed judges that brought us to this point. Remember, according to the MSM, this is a non issue. You're a blogger or a blog reader: you have the ability to find out for yourself. Are they right? You don't have to settle for the party line, the MSM line, your parent's line. How can an infant be the one thing or another, depending on what the mother thinks? How is it that this queer status evaporates when it is born, even though it is viable before that? Why is it that there is nothing else in the universe that has such malleable and arbitrary properties? Why are we so confident that we will not be tempted to turn a similar eye to other things (or people) that get in our way? Are we Enlightened simply because we are Westerners? Or because we act in a certain way? One answer is chauvinistic, bigoted and arrogant. Which one is it? Tip: Conservative Life

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi