Roe at 43

43 years ago today (Jan. 22, 2016) the Supreme Court made the most lethal decision in American history. This decision has since allowed for over 56 MILLION innocent human beings to be brutally murdered..... What are YOU doing to make a difference?



Like Ministers For Life on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/ministersforlife

Download our free resource guide on our website http://ministersforlife.wix.com/home

My Conversation with CNN Journalist Chris Cuomo

“If you want to be a leader of the future, that’s a question that deserves an answer that is definitive beyond your faith. When does life begin?”

Last Friday, August 7, 2015, Republican Presidential Candidate Senator Marco Rubio was on CNN’s Chris Cuomo’s show discussing abortion.  After an excellent defense of his stance on abortion in the cases of rape and incest, Rubio went on stating that protecting human life under the law is a timeless principle.

Rubio: “The idea that human life is worthy of protection is a timeless principle, I don’t care how much the world changes.”

Cuomo: “You are deciding when it is human life

Rubio: “No! Science has decided when it is human life!”
Cuomo: “Science has not decided that it is at conception”

Rubio: “Let me correct you. Science has. Absolutely it has. Science has concluded that. What else could it be?”

They continued bantering back and forth with Cuomo stating at least 4 times that science does not say when life begins. He kept interrupting Rubio telling him that that was his faith telling him when life begins, not science. Rubio calmly restated that it was science. Towards the end Cuomo made a statement that I agree with. He said, “If you want to be a leader of the future, that’s a question that deserves an answer that is definitive beyond your faith? When does life begin?”

As much as I am a man of faith, I agree with Cuomo that if you are governing a nation of people with many different beliefs, you cant always make decisions and laws justified by just your religion. Not everyone will agree with you and there will be many issues. I personally believe that it is impossible to rightly govern a nation without the morals of the Bible, but there are many specific issue that are not covered much in scripture that we deal with in America. Abortion is alluded to in scripture and it is listed as a sin, murder. But to someone who doesn’t believe in the Bible, that doesn’t mean anything to them. Thankfully science backs up scripture on this matter.

When I first started getting involved with Pro-Life work almost 5 years ago, all I knew was that scripture says life begins at conception and that murdering another human being was a sin. It was pretty straightforward to me. But I quickly found out that that argument wasn’t good enough to those who didn’t believe in scripture. I was faced with an angry college student demanding scientific evidence, and I had nothing to give him. Thus began my journey looking into what science said on the issue. That summer I attended Summit Ministries’ Christian Worldview Conference. During those amazing two weeks I met and listened to two men who changed the course of my life. Dr. Mike Adams, an atheist-turned-Christian Criminology professor, and Scott Klusendorf, a pro-life apologist. It was by listening to them speak and later talking to them and reading their books that I realized that science was conclusive as to when life begins. The science of embryology and fetal development as well as all the leading medical text books in those fields tell that human life begins at conception. To quote Scott Klusendorf, “Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading Embryology Text books confirm this”. 

I have spent the past 5 years reading material from textbooks, scientists, and expert medical testimonies, all of which have confirmed that life begins at conception. So, knowing that, I was taken aback when Chris Cuomo said that science did not say when life began, and that he wasn’t stating his view on the matter. Well, Chris, it seems like that you WERE quoting your view, and it is a view that is out of line with what science has concluded.

I took to Twitter and sent him the following in a span of 32 tweets (curse the 140 character limit) :

"I just watched the abortion interview with Rubio. You should do your research. Science tells us when life begins. It's not faith. You shouldn't make such rash statements on TV based on your opinion when they are completely opposite of what science says. When life begins is NOT a matter of faith its a matter of science! Its answered with clarity by the science of human embryology.

Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading Embryology Text books confirm this. TW Sadler's "Langman's Embryology", Moore's "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology", and O'Rahilly & Muller's "Human Embryology and Teratology". Just to name a few. The facts of reproduction are straightforward. Upon completion of the fertilization, sperm and egg have ceased to exist, what exists is a single cell with 46 chromosomes (23 from each parent) that is called a zygote. The coming into existence of the zygote is the point of conception--the beginning of the life of a new human organism. The terms zygote, embryo and fetus all refer to developmental stages in the life of a human being. The preborn meets all the biological criteria for life: metabolism, cellular reproduction & reaction to stimuli. The preborn is human. She possesses a human genetic signature that proves this beyond any doubt. She is also the offspring of human parents, and we know that humans can only beget humans. 

The preborn is genetically and functionally distinct from (though dependent on and resting inside of) the pregnant woman. Her growth & maturation is internally directed. Her DNA is unique and different from that of any other cell in the woman's body. She develops her own arms, legs, brain, central nervous system, etc. To say that a fetus is a part of the pregnant woman's body is to say that the woman has 4 arms and 4 legs. Also if you say that then you are saying that about half of pregnant women have penises. 

The preborn is a whole or complete (though immature) organism. That is, she is not a mere part of another living thing, but is her own organism--an entity whose parts work together in a self-integrated fashion to bring the whole to maturity. Her genetic information is fully present at conception, determining to a large extent her physical characteristics she needs only a suitable environment and nutrition to develop herself through the different stages of human life. Thus, the preborn is a distinct, living & whole human organism--a full-fledged member of the species Homo sapiens, like you and me."

In 1981 a U.S. Senate judiciary subcommittee heard expert testimony on the question of when life begins. "Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being--a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings."

The report also noted "no witness [who testified before the subcommittee] raised any evidence to refute the biological fact that from the moment of conception there exists a distinct individual being who is alive and is of the human species. No witness challenged the scientific consensus that unborn children are 'human beings,' insofar as the term is used to mean living beings of the human species."

There are plenty of groups that are NOT religious and believe life begins at conception based solely on science Secular Pro-Life as well as Life Matters Journal. It's time you look into what science says rather than stating your opinions.

Most of what I posted is from Scott Klusendorf’s books “The Case For Life” and “Stand For Life”. Both books are amazing and I highly recommend reading them! I’m a stickler for facts, and if someone is quoting something to be true and it is not true, I will correct them on it. I do it to help them and to educate them on the truth, not to shame or embarrass them. (My grade school teachers called that talking back and being disrespectful, but I beg to differ. If they would’ve stated the truth to begin with we wouldn’t have had those discussions). I seriously doubted that he would respond, but lo and behold, the great Chris Cuomo DID respond. This was his response:

I quickly responded:

On the program you said nothing about personhood.  You said science. You said science hasn't said whether it's human or not. You won't find the issue of personhood in science. That's an opinion that people have when they don't want a group to be human. Hitler's views on personhood were that Jews were lesser of people. Slave owners' views on personhood were that blacks were lesser of people. Pro-choice people's view of personhood is that the preborn babies are lesser of persons. Science says that Jews, blacks, & preborn babies are all equally human. Oppressors of them are the ones who say they aren't people. Science has come to the consensus that the life of a human being begins at conception. That's a scientific fact.

Can you name any other group of human being that isn't considered a "person"?

As expected, I received no further response from him. As like many reporters and journalists, he misspoke and instead of admitting his mistake and then clarifying what he meant to say, he dodged the question and brought up an entirely different argument.

I know the “personhood” debate is big among pro-life and pro-choice debaters, especially those who like philosophy. After all, it is a philosophical issue. But, as much as people love philosophy, I never could understand it. The only thing I can remember in my college philosophy class was that we spent weeks discussing the question of  “do we really exist? Or are we just robots programed to think we are humans and exist? And if we are robots, how are we aware that we are robots programed to think we are humans?” Honestly, I think that many of the philosophers we studied were as high as a kite when they came up with some of these theories and questions. In fact, my crazy professor told us that most of them were in fact on opium or drunk. (Go figure!).  I tend to go by a simple logical approach. (Yes I know that can be considered philosophy too, but whatever). My simple logic approach tells me to look at the definitions of words. Lets look up “Human”. According to Merriam-Webster, a Human is “a person: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens)”. And a Person is “a human being”. Wow! Pretty straight forward, the two words are synonymous.

As I told Mr. Cuomo, the main three groups of human beings in our history that have been declared as a lesser type of human beings or persons are black slaves, Jews, and the preborn humans. It's always the oppressor who comes up with the claim that the people they benefit or profit from aren't equal humans. The slave owners and the Klu Klux Klan, the Nazis, and Pro-Choice people each began by systematically dehumanizing an entire group of people to justify savage acts of violence. The slave owners and the KKK called black slaves “3/5 of a person”, “Apes”, “property”, “weeds”, and “parasites”. The Nazis called the Jews “inferior persons”, “rats”, “swine”, “vermin”, and “parasites”. Pro-Choice advocates call preborn babies “non-persons”, “potential persons”, “tissue”, “clumps of cells”, “tumors”, “parasites”, and “products of conception”. All three of these groups of human beings are equally human to each other and equally human to their oppressors. They were given dehumanizing names so that the oppressors could treat them unlike humans. All three were not considered persons under the law, and they had no rights.

I have yet to legitimately see or hear of any other groups of people that qualify as humans but not persons.

Although I am honored (I use that word lightly) and glad that Mr Cuomo responded to my tweets, this exchange goes to show that not only does Cuomo not speak truthfully on air, but that he also holds to radical views that were prominent among the KKK and Nazis. He holds to the same ideologies that they do about the value of human life. It is quite sad; although an increasingly popular view today.

The conversation with Chris Cuomo only reinforces my view of reporters and journalists. I’ve been interviewed in local and national publications, both liberal and conservative, and they have all misquoted me or twisted my words in some form or another to fit their story. They don’t care about the truth; they just want a good story. To quote film director and screenwriter Joss Whedon, “The news isn't there to tell you what happened. It's there to tell you what it wants you to hear or what it thinks you want to hear.”

By the time you have finished reading this post, approximately 24 innocent human beings have been killed by abortion, adding onto the current 56 million killed since 1973. Regardless of one’s political party, religious beliefs, or occupation, we should all agree with what science says and we should all agree that all human beings have value and should be equally protected under the law. That, as Senator Rubio says, is a timeless principle.

Analysis of a Pro-Choice Graphic

I saw this info graphic on tumblr. As someone who has studied in depth the science of embryology and fetal development, as well as the social statistics of abortion, seeing these things presented as "fact" makes me cringe. I have decided to analyze and address each claim.
First off, searching through various dictionaries, I have found that there are several varying definitions for murder. Some use the adjective unlawful, some don't. The one thing that is common in all of the definitions is that murder is the killing of another human being with intention or aforethought. The unlawful part refers to a legal aspect. If we want to stick with this option, let me remind you that, as the great Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. said in his famous Letter from a Birmingham Jail, "everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was 'legal,". So with this definition that you proposed, none of the Jews that died in concentration camps during the Holocaust were murdered. I cover this more in point 4.
I have always considered murder the intentional killing of another human being. I've never heard of a murder that was not one human being intentionally killing another human being. So, for the sake of this response, I am simply going to keep the definition of murder as being "the intentional killing of one human being by another"
Before deciding how we should treat the unborn, we should first be clear about what the unborn is. This is a scientific question, and it is answered very clearly by the science of human embryology and fetal development.

1. "A fetus is not a person. You cannot murder non-persons or washing your hands would be murder."

A.)"A fetus is not a person"
As I cannot be sure what the author's definition of the word "person" is, I'm going to assume, for the sake of this post, that the definition of "person" is synonymous with human being, as the Merriam-Webster Dictionary says. So, if this is true, then the author says that a fetus is not a human being. This statement is completely contrary to what science tells us. Science tells us that from conception the unborn is a distinct, living and whole human being--a full-fledged member of the species Homo sapiens, like you and me, only at a much earlier stage in her development. Much like a toddler is at a much earlier stage in their development than an adult.

The facts of reproduction are straightforward. Upon completion of the fertilization process, sperm and egg have ceased to exist (thus the term "fertilized egg" is an inaccurate term); what exists is a single cell with 46 chromosomes (23 from each parent) that is called a zygote. The coming into existence of the zygote is the point of conception--the beginning of the life of a new human organism. The terms zygote, embryo and fetus all refer to developmental stages in the life of a human being.

This fact is confirmed by embryology textbooks and leading scientists. TW Sadler's "Langman's Embryology", Keith L. Moore's "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology", and O'Rahilly and Muller's "Human Embryology and Teratology", just to name a few.

"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female  unite to give the rise to a new organism, the zygote." -T.W. Sadler (Langman's Embryology)

"Physicians have now arrived at the unanimous opinion that the foetus in utero is alive from the very moment of conception.....The willful killing of a human being at any stage of its existence is murder" -Dr. Horatio Storer (1868) (Criminal Abortion: It's Nature, It's Evidence, & It's Law)

"[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being." -Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th Edition

"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte." -Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." - Dr. Jerome LeJeune (Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes)

"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." - Hymie Gordon (Mayo Clinic)

"The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception." -Dr. Watson A. Bowes (University of Colorado Medical School)

"The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual's unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated." -National Geographic (In The Womb) 2005.

In 1981 a U.S. Senate judiciary subcommittee heard expert testimony on the question of when life begins.
"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception" -Prof. Micheline Matthews-Roth (Harvard  University Medical School) (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981)

"The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter - the beginning is conception" -Dr. Watson A. Bowes (University of Colorado Medical Center) (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981)

The official subcommittee report reached this conclusion:
"Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being--a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings."

The report also noted that "no witness who testified before the subcommittee raised any evidence to refute the biological fact that from the moment of conception there exists a distinct individual being who is alive and is of the human species. No witness challenged the scientific consensus that unborn children are 'human beings,' insofar as the term is used to mean living beings of the human species."

Scott Klusendorf, president of Life Training institute best sums this point up, stating:
"In short, you didn't come from an embryo. You were once an embryo. At no point in your prenatal development did you undergo a substantial change or change of nature. You began as a human being and will remain so until death. Sure, you lacked maturity at that early stage of your life(as does an infant), but you were human nonetheless." -Scott Klusendorff (2009) (The Case for Life)

B.) "You cannot murder non-persons or washing your hands would be murder."
As already shown by science in 1A, the unborn are in fact "persons", thus this makes this argument completely invalid. When you wash your hands dead skin cells fall off. These skin cells are 100% you. They contain your unique set of DNA, nobody else's. A fetus has a completely separate set of DNA than either the father and the mother. The fetus, as stated above, is a distinct, living, and whole human being that has a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated. Thus, comparing a human being to skin cells lost during washing your hands.

2. " Lack of malice. People getting abortions are not getting them to punish the fetus or because they want to kill the fetus."Those are literally never the reasons for abortion. People get them because of poverty, work, school, their age, abusive situation, rape, medical reasons and fetal abnormalities. But not because they want to hurt or kill something." 

A.) "Lack of malice. People getting abortions are not getting them to punish the fetus or because they want to kill the fetus."
Of course nobody is getting abortions to "punish the fetus", the fetus hasn't done anything wrong to be punished for.

But purpose of an abortion is to kill the fetus. That is exactly what and only what an abortion does. I've talked with former abortionists and have heard testimonies from countless abortion clinic workers including a former director of Planned Parenthood, and all agree that that is what an abortion does, it kills the fetus. It kills an innocent human being (see 1A). I've even seen a video recording of a sonogram of a surgical abortion, it is very obvious that the intent of the abortionist is to kill the unborn child. I watched as the medical instruments ripped the arms and legs of the unborn child from its body. The unborn child tried to squirm away from the instrument as it was doing so. Finally, after the limbs have been ripped off, the head of the unborn child is ripped off and is crushed I between tong-like instruments. You can watch this by searching for "The Silent Scream" on Google or YouTube.
This whole point is like saying that people who point a loaded gun at someone's and pull the trigger aren't doing it because they want to kill a person. The logic is completely flawed here.

B.) "Those are literally never the reasons for abortion."
Although those aren't the reasons people have for getting abortions (which I address in 2C), abortion, as shown in 1 and 2A, the abortion IS the killing of a human being. This is like saying,  I didn't decapitate them because I wanted to kill them. (Harsh imagery, I know, but not that much of a stretch because in many surgical abortions, the unborn child's head is ripped from the body). I used this imagery because decapitation is simply a form of killing a human being, just as abortion is a form of killing a human being(although there are several methods of both decapitation and abortion).

C.) "People get them because of poverty, work, school, their age, abusive situation, rape, medical reasons and fetal abnormalities."
Yes. Poverty, work, school, age, and abusive situations, these are the socioeconomic reasons that women get abortions. According to the Guttmacher Institute, these make up over 90% of the reasons people get abortions. Whereas in cases of rape & medical issues with the mother or child, those make up less than 1% of the people who get abortions.

D.) "But not because they want to hurt or kill something." 
See 2A-C

3. "No premeditation. No one has sex just to get abortions."

A.) "No premeditation"
All abortions are premeditated. A woman comes to an abortion clinic because she has an unplanned pregnancy. The woman either doesn't know what she is going to do, or already has her mind made up about getting an abortion. If she has not yet made up her mind, most abortionists will suggest getting an abortion. The abortionist either gives the woman the abortion pill(s) or performs the abortion procedure. This isn't an accident or "act of passion", this is an act that is thought out ahead of time.

B.) "No one has sex just to get abortions"
Of course not. People have sex for pleasure and for procreating. I'm not even sure why this is mentioned in this point. It makes no logical sense.

4. "It’s not unlawful"
Well, it all depends on where you live.  Also, Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it is right. Slavery was legal, that didn't make it right. What Hitler and the Nazis did in Germany was legal, that doesn't make it right. As I previously stated in the introduction, the Nazis killed Jews in mass numbers. Most would consider what the Nazis did murder, but according to the author of the original statement, which I am analyzing, as well as anyone who agrees with them, what the Nazis did was not murder, because it was not unlawful. I have had the privilege of seeing a holocaust survivor speak in person at my university a number of years ago. Almost everyone in her family was, as she said, "murdered" by the Nazis. I would urge you to find her and tell her that her family was not murdered. She's up in her eighties, but I can imagine that she could work up enough strength to slap you in the face. As one of my professors once said, "Ideas have consequences," and bad ideas have bad consequences. The idea that killing someone is not murder because it might be legal, could have very bad consequences for you, depending on who you talk to.

5. "You have a lawful excuse, that being your right to bodily autonomy. No one has the right to use a persons body, resources or internal organs without that persons consent regardless of circumstance or reason."

A.) "You have a lawful excuse,"
 See 4

B.) "..that being your right to bodily autonomy. No one has the right to use a persons body, resources or internal organs without that persons consent regardless of circumstance or reason."
This is absolutely correct, nobody has the right to use your body or any part of your body without your consent. But according to the Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, in 99% of the times people get abortions, they have given consent. They willingly consented to engaging in the one natural act that results in a new human being being made (aka pregnancy).  Just because someone doesn't like the result of the action that they willingly engaged in, doesn't mean that they have the right to kill another human being.  The unborn is not an intruder. He/she is precisely where he/she naturally belongs at that point in his/her development. In other words, the unborn cannot be an unwanted invader that uses the mother's body without consent. If someone willingly engages in this action that creates a new human being, they have given consent. One must be responsible for one's actions.
Also, just because you have the rights to your own body, that doesn't mean that you have the right to kill another human being.

Further scientific facts on the humanity of the unborn:

Four features of the unborn (i.e., the human zygote, embryo or fetus) are relevant to his or her status as a human being. First, the unborn is living. She meets all the biological criteria for life: metabolism, cellular reproduction and reaction to stimuli. Moreover, she is clearly growing, and dead things (of course) don't grow.
Second, the unborn is human. She possesses a human genetic signature that proves this beyond any doubt. She is also the offspring of human parents, and we know that humans can only beget humans (they cannot beget dogs or cats, for instance). The unborn may not seem to "look" human (at least in her earlier stages), but in fact she looks exactly like a human at that level of human development. Living things do not become something different as they grow and mature; rather, they develop the way that they do precisely because of the kind of being they already are.
Third, the unborn is genetically and functionally distinct from (though dependent on and resting inside of) the pregnant woman. Her growth and maturation is internally directed, and her DNA is unique and different from that of any other cell in the woman's body. She develops her own arms, legs, brain, central nervous system, etc. To say that a fetus is a part of the pregnant woman's body is to say that the woman has four arms and four legs, and that about half of pregnant women have penises.
Fourth, the unborn is a whole or complete (though immature) organism. That is, she is not a mere part of another living thing, but is her own organism--an entity whose parts work together in a self-integrated fashion to bring the whole to maturity. Her genetic information is fully present at conception, determining to a large extent her physical characteristics (including sex, eye color, skin color, bone structure, etc.); she needs only a suitable environment and nutrition to develop herself through the different stages of human life.
Thus, the unborn is a distinct, living and whole human organism--a full-fledged member of the species Homo sapiens, like you and me, only at a much earlier stage in her development. She is a human being.

Further Reading
www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html

www.prolifemn.blogspot.com/2011/07/what-science-tells-us-about-unborn.html

www.caseforlife.com

www.abortionfacts.com

"In the Womb".  By National Geographic. Video, 2005

United States, Cong. Subcommittee Report on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158. 97th Cong., 1st Ssess. Washington: GPO, 1981

"The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology". By Keith Moore & T.V.N. Persaud. Saunders. 2003.

"The Case for Life". By Scott Klusendorf. Crossway Books. 2009.
"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health". By Lawrence B.Finer. Guttmacher Institute. 2005.

"Langman's Embryology". By T.W. Sadler. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2009
"Human Embryology and Teratology". By Ronand O'Rahilly and Pabiola Muller. Wiley-Liss. 2001.

A short, but long defense against Abortion. (From a recent convo I had)

This is a response that I wrote towards a young sophmore high school girl who told me that I had no right to say that abortion is wrong, and that I was hateful towards women for saying that they shouldn't get abortions.

I'm quite proud of this comeback, but I know that it wouldn't have been possible if not for the privilege God blessed me with of attending and graduating Summit Ministries. A place where I not only grew to understand God's word better, but where I learned more about the anti-Christian issues in today's society, including abortion. So without further ado, here is the thoroughly thought out and researched response.


I cared about it way before the proposition came up, and that, frankly, has nothing to do with this issue. But I didn't start being vocal about it until I felt God calling me to stand up for his children and the atrocities being committed. (If you don't believe in God and/or the Holy Spirit working in people's lives, that's cool, but that's what led me to be more vocal about it

I don't set out to offend people. People have mistaken my tone as a hostile tone before, but it never has been such. I have friends in those situations. And I don't condemn them or treat them badly. They have come to realize that they were lied to by the doctors who tried to give them the abortions. The doctors talk over the heartbeat and refuse to show them ultra sounds.... I'm not trying to make people feel bad, because like my friends, most people who have undergone abortions were tricked and lied to. Ever since Roe v Wade, (Roe has since become a pro life advocate after realizing what the procedure actually does) the numbers of innocent lives lost have been way higher than that of those caused by Hitler or Stalin. 

I agree with you completely, I as a male, have no right to tell a woman what she can and can't do, and if she should or shouldn't get an abortion. That makes perfect sense and I agree with you completely, if the unborn are Not Human.

 I base what i say on scientific evidence. I  know from scientific research that abortion doctors will not perform a surgical abortion until at least 7 weeks. The child's heartbeat can be heard at 4 weeks. They are undergoing human development, just as we all do until we are fully grown, they are just at a different stage of development. Which factor makes them "terminate-able"? Size? Level of development? Environment? Or Degree of Dependency?  

Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading Embryology Text books confirm this (TW Sadler's "Langman's Embryology", Keith L. Moore's "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology", and O'Rahilly,Ronand,and Muller, Pabiola, Human Embryology and Teratology. Just to name a few) 

I'm all for women's rights. Women should be allowed to have all the same rights as men. It's the woman's right to have sex with whomever she wants. But by making that choice, she is risking getting pregnant. 98% of Abortions are performed on women who accidentally get pregnant and simply don't want to have a baby. This meaning that these 98% willingly chose to have sex and risk getting  pregnant. Just because they made a mistake of getting pregnant does t mean that they have the Right to kill their child. Murder is never the answer.

The point of the matter is: is the unborn human? (or, at what point does it become human?) If it is human, then my point and the comparison I originally stated are valid, but, if the Unborn is NOT human, then all your points are valid. But if it's not a human, what is it???

Final point: there isn't reason to bicker and insult each other over a scientific issue. The point that we debate over is simply: is the unborn human?/at what point does it become human? 

   
Done

Mississippi: First Abortion-free State?

Today's post will be a mixture of joy and annoyance. And in the respective order. 

In effect today is a Mississippi law that requires anyone performing abortions at the state's only clinic to be 1.) a certified OB/GYN, and 2.) a doctor with privileges to admit patients to a local hospital. This very well could lead to Mississippi being the first abortion-free state. 

This is a very good thing, because Mississippi has a very high teen pregnancy rate, which means, with no abortions, girls will give birth to their kids instead of killing them. Thus cutting back the number of deaths each year. 

Now, some of you might be thinking: abortion isn't killing! To that I say: yes, it is. 

Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct and living  human beings. Leading Embryology Text books confirm this
(TW Sadler's "Langman's Embryology", Keith L. Moore's "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology", and O'Rahilly,Ronand,and Muller, Pabiola, Human Embryology and Teratology.) Just to name a few.

*So scientifically, abortion is taking the life of a defenseless human.*

Now here comes the annoyed part. 

This made national news and liberals and lawsuits are already flying against it. MSNBC had an interview posted with Dr. Willie Parker, a black OBGYN from Alabama.  He made a statement that shocked me (not really):

 "Abortion is healthcare!"

I have a question: How? I was under the impression that healthcare was to help your health be better. 

According to a medical dictionary Healthcare is:

"the prevention, treatment, and management of illness and the preservation of mental and physical well-being through the services offered by the medical and allied health professions."

So, from a strictly scientific & medical perspective, abortion is NOT healthcare.

It is, in fact, the complete opposite. 

You also might have wondered why I specified the man's race. Well, he is a black man, and I find it ironic that a black man is supporting abortion in America, when the sole purpose of its starting in the US was to eradicate the black race from Harlem and then the rest of the US. Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood founder & American abortion advocate) was a racist with ties to the Klu Klux Klan. Many times she talked about how blacks were a lower class of humans and didn't deserve to live. Other Planned Parenthood  directors and board members had ties to and were admirers of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. One even was invited to speak to Nazis about abortion and eugenics and how to "weed out" the undesirable classes of humans(Jews, Blacks, ect...). Since then, Planned Parenthood has tried many different ways to carry on their racist agenda. 

What black person in their right mind would support abortion? 

Well, as you can see, I'm joyful about the law being passed. One reason being that the Governor that passed it, Phil Bryant, was the man I voted for in my first real election. 

But I'm also annoyed that so many people are upset and against this. 

Whether they know it or not, the people against it,  are supporting the slaughtering of many innocent human beings.  
 
 I pray that Mississippi will stand strong against them!