Culpable Homicide – Silent Holocaust
cash advance warsaw indiana
The recent revelations on abortion in Sri Lanka has been traumatic. Sexual abuse in Sri Lanka is 90% of the time domestic and is perpetrated by near relatives such as father, uncle or brother. A father from Anuradhapura , who was arrested for abusing the daughter, said, ” Who else should enjoy the fruit more than the one who planted the tree”. In another case, the mother encouraged the paramour to molest the 13 year old daughter and now she is a mother of a baby at the age of 13. Some researchers think that as many as 1000 abortions are done in Colombo alone. Though abortion is legally permitted only when the mother’s health is at risk, abortions are openly done with authorities turning a blind eye, in clinics and NGOO, whose existence is well known. The argument of many in dealing with the abortion issue is that, science alone should define the status of the fetus. They submit that before the fetus begins to feel pain (ie. Up to the 18th week), abortion. should be allowed freely on demand.”. The theory of the survival of the fittest when applied to human society leads to the concept of super-races and the elimination of the inferior. As Hitler attempted. This theory also makes people believe that might is right. When abortion is allowed on the basis of the individual is free to decide, infanticide of the unwanted infant and euthanasia will also have enthusiastic proponents.
If men and women say that we have a right over our body and wish to commit suicide, Will that too be granted ? Killing, because the baby is unwanted will leave the door for the elimination of all kinds of unwanted persons. eg. old age. mentally retarded, some races.
Why was the Hippocratic oath liberalized ? At a time when abortion was practised secretively, Hyppocrates deemed it necessary to put his students on oath against it. Today the medical and legal professions are in the forefront of the pro-abortion debate. It is the common citizen who should decide on this as it concerns all of society. Hence the abortion – issue cannot be based on nature’s inequality – argument. A career women or any other woman has only to plan her pregnancy and abortion cannot be a mode of contraception. Why have all societies initially been unwilling to legalize abortion and why did all cultures consider abortion undesirable and unethical? This is confirmed in the Hippocratic oath; the practitioner was required to say ‘I will not aid a woman to procure abortion. HISTORY What is not known by most is that many ancient civilizations had laws that proscribed abortion. An ancient Assyrian Law, dating between 1450 and 1250 B.C. recommended death sentence to those who procure abortion. (Middle Assyrian Law 53. Sumerian Laws 1-2, Lipit Islitar Laws III, 2-13, & Code of Hammurapi 209-14, Hittite Law Code 17-18 similarly censured abortion. Among the Hebrews, the Bible laid down strict penalty for those who practised abortion. Exodus 21:21-24. Plato and Aristotle suggested that in their ideal societies abortion would be mandatory, chiefly to limit family size. Such thinking led to widespread abortions and also infanticide by exposure in the Greeco Roman World. Even in such a context, Hippocrates clearly laid down a prohibition on abortion to his students. Hastings in his authoritative Encyclopaedia of Religions, points out that Christianity as it spread re-established the sanctity of the life of the unborn. Russia in 1920, legalized abortion for economic reasons. Roe vs Wade decision in 1973 in the USA and the UK abortion Act of 1967 were completely against the flow of legal. premises that obtained at that time. In both countries these landmark decisions have come under severe censure. We in Sri Lanka should be guided by our own premises of law making and not by erroneous precedent.
RIGHT TO THE BODY
Abortion was viewed as an issue that concerned the very basis of life and society. Marriage was a social institution (a social contract) and not a private act. Sexual intercourse was meant to be a responsible contract within the contract. Two individuals by their free will initiate a new life, a new individual by the act of copulation Once the new life has come to be as the zygote, it has unique features, that neither father nor mother has. Once. fertilization has begun, one should know, that he/she creates an irrevocable individuality. Neither (father or mother) has the right to destroy the individuality. To create that new life is delegated authority from nature. There are many methods available to prevent fertilization, Once the unique potential life in the zygote is made by the. will of two, socially contracted with the approval of society, then no one individual should be allowed to destroy that life. Restrictive laws of abortion were brought in the 19th century only because prior to that abortion was considered murderous. In every culture abortion was done in secrecy. The issues involved in abortion are not scientific,. but moral and societal. Who ought to opine on abortion and formulate laws are not doctors or lawyers but the woman on the street and certainly the entire family unit. Let all our women, not merely the elite, give their verdict in a referendum. Each country must decide for itself. We should not be governed by what America , Russia or any other country thinks and does. “Woman must have the right to control her body” is the usual slogan. Even in a marriage contract the woman compromises her right. When a woman demands abortion for the person in her womb she is not asking to control her body but the murder of another. When a woman allows the fertilization of an ovum, she ceases to have control of that new unique life in the zygote. Surely, the fact that a mother conceives a male baby shows that from the outset, he is a separate person. “Unwanted child” is the victim not of his own shortcomings but of those in a society attempting to solve its social, economic and personal problems by the sacrificial -offering of its children.
So when does human life begin ? When the tiny human organism developing inside the mother actually become a human being ? When is it a real person, an individual with all the basic rights that all human beings have – particularly the right to life ?
At the moment of conception/fertilization , all the necessary elements that create a new human being are present. When the chromosomes of the father and mother unite, they are in absolutely unique, never-to-be duplicated human person. At that moment, life begins. From that moment on
any further formation of the person is purely a matter of development, growth and maturation. From the moment of conception, the child grows . And keeps growing until life ends.
At three weeks, the tiny human being, only one-tenth of an inch long, already has the beginnings of eyes, spinal cord, nervous system, lungs, stomach, intestines. The primitive heart, which began beating at about 18 days, now pumps more confidently. At this or before the mother may even be aware of this new life within her. By six and one-half weeks, the child is making body movements, a full 12 weeks before the mother may notice such stirrings. At eight weeks, the developing child can make a tiny fist, get hiccups, suck a thumb, wake and sleep. All bodily systems are working. At eleven weeks, while the placenta continues to supply food and oxygen, the child can make complex facial expressions and even smile. All bodily systems are becoming more efficient, At sixteen weeks, only 5 1/2 inches long, the child can use hands to grasp, can swim and turn somersaults. The eighteen week old child is active and energetic, flexes muscles, punches and kicks. Now the mother feels the child’s movements. Before modern science, some said that at this time – the time of “quickening” – life begins. But the child’s development actually began at conception, 18 weeks earlier. While growing within the mother , the child develops separately from her, with a separate, individual blood supply. The child’s life is not the mother’s life, but a separate, individual life. And the child has as much right to this as the mother has to hers. Or as any other human being of any age have to theirs. This right to life is the most fundamental right of every human person. To violate this right, to destroy a life, to kill a human being at any age or stage or development – whether in the womb or out of the womb – is crime against God and humanity. CONSERVATIVE CONTRACEPTION
Sri Lanka has an excellent record on the success of conservative family planning methods. Legalizing abortions invariably provides away out of the conservative methods. Some have attempted to recommend and legalize abortion for failed contraception. If such a door is kept open, one opens the opportunity for any and every abortion under that loophole. Legalizing abortion is the sure way for unscrupulous husbands to impregnate the wife at random and demand that she goes to the abortionist. The pains, morbidity, guilt-have all to be born by the mother. Legalizing abortion will only threaten the woman’s position further, absolving the husband of responsibility, to adopt prevention. No mention was made in HJ’s article at all about the mental trauma that a woman undergoes during and after abortion. The mental trauma will not be eliminated by legalization as evident in countries where abortion is freely available STATISTICS
1. Scrutinizing abortion statistics in UK brings out some interesting facts.
|abortion because of risk of mother’s life||4146||549|
|abortion because of injury of mother’s mental or physical health||– 131,126||158,389|
This clearly proves how liberalization of abortion has caused an upsurge in unnecessary abortions.
2. In USA statistics. ( US-CDC annual abortion surveillance summaries)
Abortions 1973 1980
Age under 15 years 11,600 15,300
Age 15-19 years 232,400 444,800 Married women 216,200 319,900 Unmarried women 528,400 1,234,000 No prior live births 375,200 900,000 One prior live birth 137,400 304,800 Three prior live births 61,700 82,900
These statistics clearly underscore the moral slide that results from legalization of abortion. In 1973 number of unmarried women who sought abortion was double that of the married. In 1980 the number of unmarried women was four times the number of married women. The largest category who seek. abortion are those who have never had a live birth. These statistics speak volumes for the moral tragedy that results from legalizing liberal abortion policies. How many are honest to record about what happens when a live baby of 20 weeks is delivered after abortion. How many such live babies have been obliterated by all kinds of techniques after birth. Is this not murder ?
At 8-12 weeks of gestation baby’s heart beats, baby can respire, and responds to maternal emotion.
Idea of dependence and independent existence is central to the debate on the viability of the fetus. How viable is the neonate without material or supportive care? At present even a 20 weeks fetus may be kept viable by intensive support systems. Hence viability is a variable factor. Fetus is. dependent on the mother in one way, and the newborn too is dependent on the mother in another way.
MEDICAL HAZARDS OF ABORTION Often abortions are the commonest cause of maternal mortality. Death rates: 8 weeks — 1.7/100,000 abortions. 9-12 weeks — 3.8/100,000 abortions. • weeks – 24/100,000 abortions. Morbidity aspects of abortion, its effect on subsequent pregnancies is often not highlighted. Psychological trauma too is great. The problem with assessing medical sequelae of abortions has been the bias of the observer towards a pro-abortion position. Often studies were restrospective assessing data given by those had abortions. Longterm morbidity of abortion ought to be studied against an exact matched group of women who have not had abortion,Immediate complication: 1. Bleeding 2. Infection Pregnant uterus is highly vascular. Hence the dilatation and curettage done for abortion is not comparable to the usual D and C. Uterine wall is fragile. Excessive bleeding, damage to uterine wall, perforation (needing abdominal operation and sometimes hysterectomy), and damage to other abdominal organs, are all known to occur. Bleeding from cervix in a first trimester abortion can be severe and permanent damage to the cervix can occur. Though antibiotics may prevent fatal infection, salpingitis can cause permanent infertility; chronic pelvic infection is not uncommon following an abortion. Anaesthetic misadventures, amniotic fluid embolism, Disseminated intra vascular coagulation are well known fatal complications, usually not explained to the mother asking for abortion. In a clinical trial involving 6000 women in UK , 10 % had some form of morbidity. (RCGP/RCOG study 1985). 2 % had major complications.
Longterm complications Infertility, spontaneous abortion premature birth are commoner in women who have had abortions. A review showed that first trimester abortion by vacuum. aspiration doubles future mid-trimester spontaneous abortion rate. (Wendy Savage, British Journal of Hosp. Med. Oct 1982). An important complication is deep long lasting mental depression. Suicide risk rises considerably in susceptible cases after abortion (op.cit. Sim and Neisser). Murphy and O’Driscold did not find a single case of suicides in 74,000 deliveries in the Republic of Ireland where abortion is illegal. (Irish Medical Journal. August 1982 Vol. 75).
Abortion is the third commonest of all surgical operations performed on women in England and Wales . Conscientious objection
Section 4(1) of the UK Abortion Act (1967) states that ‘No person shall be under any duty, whether by contract or by any statutory or other legal requirement, to participate in any treatment authorized by this Act to which he has a conscientious objection.’ This covers all persons participating in the procedure, but as noted by Cook and Dickens ‘In jurisdictions incorporating conscience clauses, medical professional associations usually insist as an ethical requirement that exempted physicians refer applicants for abortion to another physician. This undermines the stance taken by any doctor who believes the abortion is morally wrong. For, if he or she is of the opinion that termination is not in the patient’s best interests or that the grounds are insufficient, a more ‘sympathetic’ physician can always be found who will accede. SENTIENCE
Sentience (the point of time at which a fetus can be presumed to feel pain) can advance as medical science develops. At present neocortical activity of the baby can be detected by the 6th week. If so who knows when the baby actually feels pain. Therefore I submit that life should be respected from its very inception
The patient who would ask for a lethal remedy for pain is not in his right mind, and any right thinking doctor ought to relieve the patient and counsel him. If we give into Dr. Kevorkion philosophy, others may claim their mental pain is unbearable and ask for a lethal remedy. Legalizing abortion is the gateway to infanticide and euthanasia, The legitimized way to prevent the unwanted child is to not conceive. One has to take responsibility from that initial decision which inevitably leads to creation of life. After a moment’s pleasure (that affects a whole life time ) to claim that the resulting child is unwanted, is a dangerous philosophy. Some refer to a common law that recognised fetal age of 18 months as the point of sentience, before which abortion was considered legitimate, one must emphasize that no such common law was recognized till the dawn of the 20th century. Roe vs.Wade decision opened the door wide for abortion. Prof. A. W. Liley, Research Professor. in Fetal Physiology in Auckland , New Zealand , is known as the “Father of Fetology.” As an internationally recognized researcher on life before birth, Dr. Liley pioneered the first successful treatment of the unborn child: the intrauterine blood transfusion. His intimate knowledge of unborn patients had led him to oppose abortion and to make the following comments: • In a world in which adults control power and purse, the fetus is at a disadvantage being small, naked, nameless and voiceless. He has no one except sympathetic adults to speak up for him and defend him.
• Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother. Genetically, mother and baby are separate individuals from conception. Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in change of the pregnancy. • It is the embryo who stops his mother’s periods and makes her womb habitably by developing a placenta and a protective capsule of fluid for himself. He regulates his own amniotic fluid volume and although women speak of their waters breaking or their membranes rupturing, these structures belong to the fetus. And finally, it is the fetus, not the mother, who decides when labor should be initiated. • This, then, is the fetus we know and indeed once were. This is also the fetus whose existence and identity must be callously ignored or energetically denied by advocates of abortion. (Garton: payday loans about Who Broke the Baby. P41)
FETAL TISSUE “A utilitarian approach would dictate to a reasonable man without personal biases, that there need not be any restrictions on research on fetal tissue” said once a pro-abortionist. On the contrary there is global anxiety even in the scientific community about fetal research. Utilitarian approach cannot be
the basis of decision for civilized society. To discard the aged who are an economic burden was recommended by some on an utilitarian basis. Justifying fetal tissue research on the basis of the development of the Polio vaccine, hides the fact that Polio vaccine was developed on fetal kidney tissue obtained from fetuses aborted for other natural reasons. Already abortions and surrogate pregnancies have increased to supply fetal tissue for research and even plastic surgery.
SITUATION IS SRI LANKA Proliferation of illegal abortions is no reason to legalize the malpractice. On a similar basis one would have to legalize pornographic papers that recently proliferated giving easy access to school children, bribery, beach boy trade, prostitution and many other social vices. The government should crack down hard on this social evil (namely abortion). It is common knowledge that a clinic with an impressive name is available islandwide for this exclusive purpose and the authorities turn a blind eye. In one district, this infamous clinic is cited opposite the office of the Registrar of marriages !!, by a very busy road. These clinics seems to promote “no marry-no stops” philosophy!
A recent workshop in this country on ethics recommended, liberalization of abortion to include victims of rape and failed contraception. The latter will be claimed by all who demand abortion. In UK the rape~victim got into such an unprovable position, that it means nothing and abortion is granted anyway to all who demand on any pretext.
RELIGION AND ABORTION One final word on religion and abortion. Many know that the religious ethos of this country will not permit abortion. Even in the west, abortion became an accepted social norm, not because Christianity accepts abortion. “Thou shalt not kill” applies to the unborn child. Sanctity of life and sexual chastity are advocated and honoured in the teachings of Christ. Who legitimized abortion in the west, were a few activists and interested professionals who had thrown out the Christian bases on which the American constitution was founded. Even today, the “Moral Majority” of the USA , that speaks for the silent majority, campaigns against the tragedy of the legalized abortions. In UK too an amendment was proposed to the abortion law in 1979, to; offset some of the disastrous ill effects of the 1967 pro- abortion policy-. I repeat, it should not be a few medical, legal and political technocrats who should decide on the abortion issue, the people should My appeal is let there be a referendum islandwide. An “informed” few (the oligarchy) deciding for the whole populace ends up invariably with oppression of the most cruel kind. THE HISTORY OF THE ABORTION BATTLE IN UK I quote from, Abortion: The Crisis in morals and medicine (Cameron and Sims) Page 36,37. Infant Preservation “Under the terms of the 1929 Act of the UK an offence has not been committed if the pregnancy is terminated to save the mother’s life. Similar provision is made in the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. Why then was there such dissatisfaction with the act as it stood?
It seems that a very vocal minority persuaded the public, and Parliament eventually, that reform was necessary. The Abortion Law Reform Association (ALRA) was formed in 1936 by three women, By the mid-60s it was a force to be reckoned with (though still with a membership of around a thousand only).
It is important to realize that the agitation of the ALRA had far more to do with the rise of the ‘women’s liberation’ movement concerned with rights over their own bodies than strictly medical consideration. While undoubtedly there were deaths occurring each year due to illegal (‘back- street’) abortions antibiotics were bringing down the death rate oven prior to 1967. It is extraordinary in retrospect that parliament’s response to an evil in society (for hitherto it had unquestioningly accepted that abortion was wrong) was simply to make it legal. The Abortion Law Reform Association initially wanted abortion in three situations: 1. When it is necessary for preserving the physical or mental health of the woman. 2. When there is a serious risk of a defective child being born. 3. When the pregnancy results from a sexual offence (such as rape, incest, or intercourse with a girl under sixteen). By 1966 a fourth had been added: 4. When the pregnant woman’s capacity as a mother will be severely overstrained. In 1938 one Aleck Bourne, a London gynaecologist, was espoused to their causes. He was prosecuted for carrying out an abortion on a 14-year-old girl who had allegedly been raped. The Rex V. Bourne case resulted in something of a watershed in the practice of abortion. The judge, in his summing up, was of the opinion that termination was allowable if the continuation of the pregnancy was likely to make the woman a ‘physical wreck’ or a ‘mental wreck’. He felt that these conditions could be construed as life threatening, On the basis of this case, for the next thirty years, gynaecologists practised abortion -. depending upon their view of what constituted a ‘wreck’. The most common indication for abortion became psychiatric. Though a rape victim was the trigger to liberalize abortion, the law applied now to any abortion on demand. A further notable fact, before we leave Aleck Bourne, is that by the end of his career we find him almost regretting his acquittal. He came to recognize its undesirable aftermath. Latterly he turns up on the executive committee of SPUC (!) – but alas, the damage was done.(Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child)
The bill which eventually became Law was introduced in 1965 by David Steel. Earlier attempts had been made in 1952 and in 1961 (in the wake of the thalidomide disaster). By the mid – to late-sixties the ALRA were in full cry, organized opposition was too little and came to late. The medical profession was rather divided. Psychiatrists on the whole were rather liberal in their views, whereas gynaecologists were considerably
less so. As R. F. R. Gardner says ‘ many saw themselves cast in the role of executioner, there was widespread disapproval.’ (Abortion: The personal Dilemena p 32). Unfortunately that generation of gynaecologist is fast disappearing from the scene. In their place are many of a new breed who see abortion as a normal, admittedly rather unpleasant, aspect of gynaecological practice. A new generation has grown up on the Abortion Act on 1967 and sees little wrong with it – or even if it does, finds no easy escape. As claimed back – street abortion have not been reduced in the UK in spite of legalizing abortion. Do-it-yourself kits for abortion are being openly promoted. Since legalization of abortion, Baby battering has increased, Since 1967 (Abortion Act) illegitimacy rate doubled to 75 % while it was a steady 4~5 % in earlier decades. Single parenthood had increased as well as premarital and extramarital intercourse. The majority that opt for abortion have no other children, debunking the theory of legalizing abortion to reduce the strain on the family. Abortion also precipitates severe psychosis. (Psychological Aspects of Abortion-Sim and Neisser). The prognosis of post-abortion psychosis is poorer than post–parthum psychosis. Hence abortion is proved to worsen mental health rather than improve. Happily in the UK pro life mothers prefer to consult obstetricians who do not practise abortion. There is a rising sentiment that the doctor who is up to feticide in the morning may not do his best to save a life in the evening when it comes to a live birth. Can a doctor honestly say that his effort to resuscitate a desperate baby is not affected by how he views the personhood, of the fetus? Much of the abortion issue in the USA is mere economics, Newsweek July 4, 1977 – “Abortion Who Pays ?” This article dealt with a June 20 1977, Supreme Court ruling on abortion. With the conservative consensus abortion thrown out, the argument slides into the issue of which will cost society more – free abortions or caring for the babies who are born. Newsweek reports’. “According to HEW estimates, the price of a Medical abortion in the first trimester is $150, while the first year cost to taxpayers of cacti unwanted child is $2,200.” When the World Conference on Population Control in 1974 can. refer to abortion as ‘a retrospective method of fertility control,” we know that the euphemisms for infanticide and euthanasia can be many indeed In England, some call starving a child with spina bifida (cleft spine) putting it on a “low calorie diet”! Language itself is a subtle indicator and a powerful tool. Think of the deliberate changes in Language that have been used to soften the stark impact of what is actually happening. Abortion is merely the “removal of fetal tissue-,” or “discontinuing” or “termination’ of pregnancy. Childless couples are now “child free,” a term that subtly establishes children as an unwanted burden. Language has power The language we use actually forms the concepts we have and the results these concepts produce. Think of the Nazi use of the name The Charitable Transport Company for the Sick for the agency conveying people to the killing centers. But let us not be naive. Exactly the same language power is being used when the unborn baby called a’ fetal tissue ‘a (Francis Schaeffer; Whatever happened to the Human Race). About the UK abortion act of 1967, Dr Gordon H. Stirrat writes: When Parliament passed the Act it was trying to correct social ills by surgical means – a dangerous precedent! There was at that time a rising. number of unwanted pregnancies being terminated by illicit abortions in dangerous circumastances. Something had to be done. The stimulus for the Act coming before Parliament was the work of a determined minority pressure group. (Legalised Abortion). Roe vs Wade ( Peril of Sociological Law) Law making process in the USA as at present should not be our standard. There is a danger that without a sufficient base modern science will become sociological science; so civil law has moved toward being sociological law. Distinguished jurist and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmens, Jr. (1841 1935) took a long step in this direction. In The Common Law (1881) Holmes said that law is based on experience. Daniel H. Benson (1936-), assistant professor of law at the Texas Tech University School of Law, quotes Holmes: ‘Truth is the majority vote of that nation that could lick all others. In a 1926 letter to John C. H. Wu, Holmes wrote,
“So when it comes to the development of a corpus juris the ultimate question is what do the dominant forces of the community want and do they went it hard enough to disregard whatever inhibitions may stand in the way.” Thus within a wide range, the Constitution of the United States can be made to say what the courts of the present want it to say based on a court’s decision as to what the court feels is sociologically helpful at the moment. At time this brings forth happy results, At least temporarily; but once the door is opened, anything can become law and the arbitrary judgements of men made king. Law is now freewheeling, and the courts not only interpret the laws which legislators have made, but make law. Lex Rex had become Rex Lex. Arbitrary jundgement concerning current sociological is king. On the Roe vs Wade landmark case, to quote Professor Joseph P. Witherspoon (1916-), professor of jurisprudence at the University or Texas School of Law, in the Texas Tech Law Review, Volume six, 1974-1975: “In this 1973 decision the Court …. held that the unborn child is not a person within the meaning and protection of the term ‘person’ utilized in the fourteenth amendment so as to strip all unborn children of all constitutional protection for their lives, liberty, and property.”
Thus, the failure of the Court in Roe vs Wade (the abortion case) to have examined into the actual purpose and intent of the legislature in framing the fourteenth amendment and the thirteenth amendment to which it was so closely related and supplementary thereof when it was considering the meaning to be assigned to the concept of “person” was a failure to be faithful to the law or to respect the legislature which framed it. Careful research of the history of these two amendments will. demonstrate, to any impartial investigator that there is overwhelming evidence supporting the proposition that the principal, actual purpose of their framers was to prevent any court, and especially the Supreme Court of the United States, because of its earlier performance in the Dred Scott case, or any other institution of government, whether legislative or executive, from ever again defining the concept of person so as to exclude any class of human beings from protection of the Constition and safeguards it established for the fundamental rights of human beings, including slaves, peons, Indians, aliens, women, the poor, the aged, criminals, the mentally ill or retarded, and children, including the unborn from the time of their conception. Supreme Court Justice White, in his dissent to the Court’s action stated, “As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but in my view its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court ” Upon’ this arbitrary ruling medically and legally, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on this subject of abortion of almost every one of the states in the Union. Abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia are not only questions for women and other relatives directly involved – nor are they the prerogatives of a few people who have thought through the wider ramifications. They are life and death issues that concern the whole human race and should be addressed as such. Applying pressure on the public and on legislators to accept a lower view of human beings, has been th estrategem of those few who pushed through abortion legislation in other countries. Small groups of people often argue their case by using a few extreme examples to gain sympathy for ideas and practices that later are not limited to extreme cases. These then become the common practice of the day. Abortion, for example, has moved from something once considered unusual and now in many cases is an accepted form of “birth control.” Infanticide is now following the same pattern. The argument begins with people who have a so-called vegetative existence, There then follows a tendency to expand the indications and eliminate almost any child who is unwanted for some reason. The same movement can be seen with euthanasia. The arguments now being put forward centered on the “miserable” person in old age one dying of cancer, for instance. But once the doors are open, there is no reason why the aged, weak, and infirm will not find that as they become economic burdens, they will be eliminated under one pretext or another. At first we hear much talk of compassion for the unwanted, The discussion moves on to “right,” then to my rights and soon to pure economics.” The discussion of life must be brought back to where it belongs – not to emotional, extreme examples, not to selfish questions of rights, not to expedience, and certainly not to economics, The matter should be discussed in terms of right and wrong. Now arbitrary abortion has opened wide the door at the point of life and death for “sociological medicine” – not just for the yet unborn but for all human life, When abortion is allowed on demand, would the protagonists justify abortion of the female child after prenatal sex determination as happens in India today ? Tertullian, wrote forcefully in A.D.197, for us murder is once for all forbidden; so even the child in the womb, while yet mother’s blood is still being drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful for us to destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes no difference whether one take away the life once born or destroy it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be. a man; the fruit is always present in the seed. (Apologeticus), Nan Mizrachi acknowledges that abortion is killing but advocates same in her book, “Eliminating the medical Hazards of Delayed Abortions.
“Arguments that the fetus is only “human” at a particular stage of gestation violate biological reality. It attempts to oversimplify a complex issue. Whereas the reality that abortion is killing should not, in my view, remove abortion as a socially acceptable surgical procedure, I do think we should face up to the reality of what the decision to abort entails.” It is nothing but murder.