Abortion and Gun Violence

I saw this infographic on a friend's Facebook page and was kind of taken aback by it. I am used to seeing liberals voicing their opinions on support of gun control and being against the 2nd Amendment while ironically also voicing their support for abortion all the way up until the moment of birth, but I had never seen the two used together.

I look at the Abortion issue from a scientific and logical human rights point of view. Most people just simply look at it as a religious issue. Yes, the pro-life view does have roots in the teachings of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, but science says WAY more about the issue than those religions do.

Before I start analyzing this graphic, I want to define some of the terms I use and explain beforehand what exactly science says about abortion. Scott Klusendorf states that "The science of embryology is clear. From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct , living, and whole human beings. Therefore, every "successful" abortion ends the life of a living human being. Leading Embryology Text books confirm this (TW Sadler's "Langman's Embryology", Keith L. Moore's "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology", and Ronand O’Rahilly and Fabiola Muller’s “Human Embryology and Teratology.“ Just to name a few)" (1).


In his textbook, Keith L. More writes, "[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being." (2).

World renowned Genetics professor at the University of Descartes, Dr Jerome LeJeune writes, "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 Robert P. George, Award winning McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, states: "These facts are stubborn; there is no running away from them. Human embryos are not creatures different in kind from human beings (like rocks, or potatoes, or alligators). They are, rather,human beings - distinct living members of the species Homo Sapiens - at the earliest stage of their natural development. They differ from human beings at later developmental stages not in virtue of the kind of entity they are, but rather by degree of development"

In 1981 the United States Congress held the Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee, where the issue of when human life begins was discussed. Congress had several expert testimonies on the matter. The subcommittee's report concluded that "Physicians, biologist, 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."
Among those who testified were:
Harvard University Medical School professor Micheline Matthews-Roth stated: "It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception". As well as Dr. Watson A. Bowes from the University of Colorado Medical Center who said: "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter - the beginning is conception" 

Those scientific expert testimonies from textbooks only scratch the surface of what science says about when human life begins. According to these sources, life begins at conception, thus, every abortion unjustly takes the life of of an innocent human being. These human beings killed in abortion are just as much human as you and I are. Therefore, logically and scientifically, killing someone through abortion is no different than someone killing a newborn, someone who is two years old, ten years old, twenty years old, or eighty years old. 

NOW, on to analyzing the graphic. First of all, the infographic begs the question that abortion is simply a medical procedure and that it doesn't kill an innocent human being. We know from what science tells us that abortion DOES in fact take the life of an innocent human being. It also begs the question that everyone who buys a gun is doing so with the purpose of killing innocent people.

The graphic states:

"How about we treat every young man who wants to buy a gun like every woman who wants to get an abortion - mandatory 48 hour waiting period, parental permission, a note from his doctor proving he understands what he is about to do, a video he has to watch about the effects of gun violence, an ultrasound wand up the ass (just because)."

The 48 hour waiting period in some states is in place to give the woman more time to think about and research the life-ending procedure they are considering. This isn't comparable to someone buying a gun. Simply buying a gun does not end a life. The purpose of buying a gun isn't to end someones life, but the purpose of getting an abortion is to end someones life.

The parental permission line is only applicable to someone who is underage. And this isn't even required in a lot of states. I agree that a minor who is buying a gun should have their parents permission, just like they have to have it to do various other things. Although I do think it is insane and illogical to require a minor to have parental permission to get advil from a school nurse, yet not have parental permission to have a highly invasive surgery.

I honestly don't have any idea what the line about the guy having a note from his doctor means. Ive never heard of any woman considering an abortion having to do that. My friends who have had abortions didn't have to do that.

Abortion facilities are required by law to show their patients an ultrasound of what their child looks like before an abortion is performed. Sadly though, this isn't done most of the times. I have had friends who have had abortions who were never shown an ultrasound. In some cases they even lie to their patients about what the ultrasound shows. I had a friend in high school and college that had that happen to her.  Once again, the logic of comparing an ultrasound viewing to forcing a gunman to watch a video about gun violence is terribly flawed. The reason women are shown an ultrasound is to allow them to see that their child is very much alive, has a heartbeat, and is human, this is to persuade them not to get an abortion. Surprisingly, according to a 2011 poll, up to 78% of women who are considering abortions who view an ultrasound of their child choose not to abort. A person who buys a gun isn't buying it to go and do violent shootings.  In fact, there are approximately 270 million gun owners in the US, the overwhelming majority of the owners do not kill people. One thing that I think people who advocate for strict gun control don't get is that these people are criminals, they, by their very label, do not abide by laws. No amount of gun control is going to stop people from being killed by guns.

The graphic says that people who want to buy a gun should have an ultrasound wand put pup their ass. Whoever wrote this obviously has no idea how an ultrasound machine works. The wand is never inserted inside anyone. I suggest they put some thought and research into their argument before making absurd statements like that.


The graphic goes on to state:

"Lets close down all but one gun shop in every state and make him travel hundreds of miles, take time off work, and stay overnight in a strange town to get a gun. Make him walk through a gauntlet of people holding photos of loved ones who were shot to death, people who call him a murderer and beg him not to buy a gun"

Again, there is no comparison here. The vast majority of people who own guns do not kill people, but abortion does kill a person.  That is why there are now less than 739 abortion facilities in the US. Pro-Life people believe that killing innocent human beings is wrong, thats why they want to shut down these facilities. Every day in the US, over 3,000 innocent human beings are killed from abortion.

As for the line about people having to walk through groups of people with pictures of loved ones killed by gun violence, this just isn't a reasonable comparison either. Once again, the vast majority of people who buy guns do not kill people. It would make sense to make someone contemplating homocide to see pictures of loved ones killed from gun violence. The people who hold up pictures outside of abortion facilities are  holding up signs of children that are killed by abortion. Many of the people that I know who protest outside of abortion clinics have either had abortions themselves or have had loved ones who have had them. They are begging people not to allow their children to be killed. Every day in the US, over 3,000 innocent human beings are killed from abortion.

The line about people calling the person a murderer is also false logic. As I have stated many times, the vast majority of gun owners in the US do not kill people. Also, calling a woman who gets an abortion a murderer isn't an accurate comparison either. The person who is actually doing the killing is the abortion doctor. The woman simply pays him to kill another human being. Calling the woman a murderer is both false and hurtful. Most pro-life people don't do that. Being pro-life means being compassionate and loving towards the women getting abortions. In fact, there is a growing movement of people in the pro-life movement who do counseling outside the abortion facilities. They talk to the women and give them information about ALL the choices they have. They give them information about FREE pregnancy centers, adoption, counseling, etc. I am friends with the president and founder of Sidewalk Advocates For Life, a non-profit that exists solely to help women know all of their choices. These amazing women dedicate their life to helping women who are considering abortion. Many of them help find financial support for the women if they choose to not abort their child.


The final lines of the graphic state:
It makes more sense to do this with young men and guns than with women and healthcare, right? I mean, no woman getting an abortion has killed a room full of people in seconds, right?

The logical answer to this is no. As I have repeated in this post, the vast majority of people in the US who own guns are not killers. But all women who get abortions are paying to kill an innocent human being. Abortion is in no shape, form, or fashion, in any sense of the word, healthcare. Healthcare, according to Merriam Webster is "the maintaining and restoration of health by the treatment and prevention of disease especially by trained and licensed professionals". Scientifically speaking, Abortion is the act of ending a human life. This is the complete opposite of healthcare.

Overall, this infographic defies logic, science, truth , and common sense. It is completely idiotic.

Since 1973 there have been 524,278 deaths from gun violence, and over 54,559,615 deaths from abortion. That is approximately 104 times as many deaths. Abortion has claimed the lives of over 9 times that of the Jewish Holocaust. If people REALLY cared about saving lives, they would also be against abortion.

Don't get me wrong, gun violence is awful. I am in no way downplaying the tragedy of those killed by guns. I believe there should be some gun control. But the overwhelming majority of gun control laws do nothing to stop criminals from obtaining guns, but instead affect the 270 million law-abiding gun owners in the US. I do not own a gun, but, living in the south, almost everyone I know owns a gun. All of them own them for either hunting or for protection of themselves or their families.

On the note of comparing abortion to mass shootings and murders:

I have seen conservatives use situations like school shootings to talk about abortion. I admit that I see their logic in doing this, and have been guilty of doing this in the past, and I also see how it can be insensitive. I think Josh Brahm, president of Equal Rights Institute, does a good job of explaining it.

"Put simply, 9/11 is one of the most unforgettable acts of violence we’ve seen live on TV. Yet, every time September 11 rolls around, I watch dozens of well-meaning pro-life people post Facebook statuses like this:

“2,977 people died on 9/11. 3,300 babies are killed every day in abortion facilities. Why does everyone get so upset about the former and not the latter?” 

People won’t take your moral views seriously if it seems like your moral compass is broken. They won’t have a reason to believe your moral compass is properly functioning if you are unable to authentically acknowledge the horror of other mass killings.

Pro-choice people look at the 9/11 Facebook status above and think, “Of course we get so upset about 2,977 people dying! And we should! It was horrific! And we watched it on the news! Why can’t you see how horrible 9/11 is?” 

Don’t miss this point: I’ve (almost) never heard a pro-life person actually say that we shouldn’t mourn those other tragedies. But what they say comes across to many people as devaluing one tragedy to elevate the one issue they care most about. I think some pro-life individuals just need help expressing the grief they already feel about other human rights violations."

Sources:

1. Scott Klusendorf (2009) "The Case for Life"

TW Sadler (2014) "Langman's Embryology"

 Keith L. Moore (2011) "The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology"

Ronand O’Rahilly and Fabiola Muller (2001) “Human Embryology and Teratology"

2. Keith L. Moore (2012) "Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology"

An analytical response to a Pro-Choice Progressive

I recently posted a status on Facebook criticizing some of the Pro-Choice claims. It lead to a rather lengthy discussion between 4 of my friends. Two were very strong Pro-Life Advocates and two were very strong Pro-Choice advocates. This response is to the most vocal of the two Pro-Choice advocates. I broke down his claims and arguments and wrote a response to each of them. Amazingly, by the grace of God, I was able to stay calm and gently respond to his claims and arguments without getting upset or mad. This youngster is, from what I've gathered, a logical and intelligent student, and I pray that some of what I have said has some effect on him.

Note: *I use some arguments & examples in an edited form from Scott Klusendorf and Dr. Mike S. Adams, both have encouraged and taught me many things on this area. I wouldn't have been able to make this defense without them. *
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My friend, you make some great points and raise some important questions. Allow me to break each down and address and/or answer them for you. Before I answer and address what you said, I want to first lay on the table what science says on the issue, and the reasoning behind most of, if not all of my points. 

Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading doctors in thee field and Embryology Text books confirm this. The science of embryology is clear. From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct , living, and whole human beings. Therefore, every "successful" abortion ends the life of a living human being. Nothing is added to the unborn to make them “more human”. They are fully human, just as much as human as you and I are.  They just aren't as fully developed as you and I are. They are just as much human as you and I are, just at a different stage of development. In comparison: a 4 year old girl is not as fully developed as a 14 year old girl is, yet both are fully human. That is not simply my opinion, that is documented scientific truth.

Now on to your questions and points.

*”You make it seem like people who are pro-choice are pro-abortion and that's entirely false.”

Being pro-choice means that you want women to have an option, a choice, on whether they want to get an abortion (unjustly end an innocent human life) or not. Being Pro-life means that we value all human life and wish for the equal right to life for all human beings. Because if you take away that one right, all other rights are automatically taken away. So, when it all boils down, Pro-life advocates are against abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life). Pro-Choice advocates are for the right of a mother to get an abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life), therefore, by advocating for it, you are on the “pro” side of it. On a side note: the majority of Pro-choice advocates that I’ve met or talked with are very much Pro-abortion. They view it as no different than using a condom or taking the pill. 

*”The honest reason why people have the same process as me are simply one to keep it safe.” 

I assume you mean “safe” for the mother. But abortion, itself, is never a safe procedure. In every procedure, sans failed abortions, an innocent human life is unjustly ended. I do’t know about you, but to me, killing an innocent human being would never fall under the category of “safe”. 

  

*”Before abortions were legal people still had things like back alley abortions where a shifty guy would use a hanger or some instrument like that. This lead to the woman most often dying or being incredibly hurt....really gruesome stuff. This is why most people who are pro-choice believe that way, we need to keep something like this safe, and avoid a disaster like that from happening ever again.”

Sadly, yes, that did happen before abortion was made legal in the US in 1973. But in saying this, the assumption is made that the unborn are not human. A more understandable analogy of your argument would be: (I’m going to drive down the road to kill someone, but there is ice all over the road, I’m afraid that I might have a wreck on the way there and get hurt. Could you call the city workers to have them come put salt on the road so that I wont get hurt on my way to of from the person’s house? Im still going to kill the person, but at least I will be safe in the process.) In your argument/statement, you are saying that we should keep it legal to unjustly end the life of an innocent human being in a safe and sterile environment to avoid harming the person killing them, as would happen in a dirty filthy place such as a back alley. Where’s the logic in that?

*”Let the expected mother know what she is going through”

I completely agree with you. A mother should know what is going to happen in the procedure before she agrees to do it. Sadly, in the majority of abortion clinics, especially Planed Parenthood, they do not explain to the mother what the procedure is. Ive talked with several women that have either had abortions or had been to get an abortion and then decided not to. They said that they were not shown an ultrasound, or told what the procedure would do. In one person I talked to, she said that although the abortion doctor did an ultrasound, he purposely stood in front of the screen so that she could not see it, and he told her that there was nothing but a glob of tissue. He also talked loud during the ultrasound so that she wouldn't hear the heartbeat. She went to the hospital the same day and saw her child through an ultrasound and listened to the heartbeat. She decided to not go through with the procedure after seeing and hearing these things. This is not an isolated incident, I've heard dozens upon dozens of accounts almost identical to this one from all across the country. Why, you might ask, do the abortion doctors lie and deceive the women like this? Money. The approximate cost for an abortion is between $400-500. The doctors make a profit from this. If they actually told what the procedure would do and actually showed the women the ultrasound, most women, after seeing the child and hearing the heartbeat, would change their minds about the abortion. And thus the abortion doctors would not make any money, save for the small visit fee.   


“Other reasons are obvious, like in the horrific event of rape or incest. How can we as human beings tell a woman who was raped that they now have to carry that burden, and that reminder of the most likely single most horrific event that has ever happened to her in her life. We can't! That would be appalling to even suggest that the woman has to keep it.”

Good point. Rape is terrible. I consider it to be the worst crime, after murder, that is. I advocate for the male to be castrated in punishment for the crime, as well as a long jail sentence.  It is an absolutely horrible crime and nobody should ever have to experience it. You're saying that if a woman becomes pregnant as the result of rape, she should get an abortion. So, you're suggesting that because an evil man commits an extremely terrible act of violence on an innocent woman, then the woman should in turn  commit an extremely terrible act of violence on another innocent human being that results in that human being’s life being ended. If anyone should have their life ended over rape, it should be the rapist, not the innocent child.
As for the child reminding her of the horrific incident, let me ask you something: should we be allowed to kill other human beings simply because they remind of us of a horrible event that happened to us? Lets say that a woman is raped and doesn't get pregnant, and it just so happens that her boss looks similar to the rapist, and everyday at work she is reminded of that horrible incident because her boss resembles the rapist. Should she be allowed to kill her boss, n innocent human being, simply because he reminds her of that horrible attack? 
Luckily, less than 1% of abortions are done on women who became pregnant as the result of rape, so that is a very small issue.
I propose to you an offer:  If I agree to write in the exception for rape , will you lobby with me for the law banning all other abortions (99% of the ones performed) ?

*”Another pretty valid point are the legislators that claim themselves as pro-life consistently vote down child welfare services. So, how can they say we need to protect that child as much as we can while in womb, but when it comes out, if the parents can't afford it, that's on them, maybe the shouldn't have had the kid in the first place. The pro-life concepts don't make a lot of sense in that regard.”

An EXCELLENT point my friend! And that, I agree with you 100%. It makes no sense whatsoever! We should make every effort to protect the children at all stages of development, not just in the womb. Thats why I cannot stand politicians, they dont make sense and they! HA! As the late Whitney Houston so eloquently put it, I believe the children are our future. We should protect them at all costs at all stages of their life . 

*”The MOST obvious [reason], mother endangerment”

This too is something I agree with you on. But I believe you are mistaken about. Yes, I believe that if the mother’s life is at risk and if continuing to carry the child or giving birth would kill her, then I believe that her life should be saved. I haven't met any Pro-life advocates that would disagree. The child will die either way, so you are saving the only life you can. I use the analogy that if 2 kids are going down stream towards a waterfall, and you go in to save them, but because of the current, you only have time to save one, you save the one that easiest to save and that is closest to you. You aren't going in with the intention of taking a life, you are going in with the intention of saving a life. The other life that is lost is an unintentional and unavoidable consequence.
Also, even if abortion were made illegal, this would in no way affect this life saving procedure. These procedures are done in hospitals or women’s clinics by medical doctors who are trying to save the woman’s life. Ive never heard of an abortion doctor doing one of these life saving procedures. I have a friend who is an OBGYN here in Starkville and the Medical Director of the Starkville Pregnancy Care Center, and I've talked to him about this issue and how he handles it. He agrees and says that it is a last resort procedure they do to save the mother’s life and that those cases are rare. So the legalization or ilegalization of abortion would have no affect whatsoever on this procedure. 

*”...people who have the ability to have the keep and could afford it or giving it up for adoption, and they have an abortion, that's pretty twisted.”

Yes, that is pretty twisted. But sadly, that is the case with the majority of people who get abortions in the US. They use abortion as a form of birth control. I believe that adoption is the best choice in the situations where the parents cannot provide for the children. 
In their annual report released in 2010, Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, did 392 abortions per every 1 adoption referral. 

*”You and I probably shouldn't have too much input on a subject like this because after all, we can never get pregnant. This is women's rights issue, and men trying to legislate it just doesn't make sense!”

I see your point, and I would agree with you IF this really were a women’s rights issue. The claim that abortion (unjustly ending an innocent human life) is a women’s rights issue couldn't be farther from the truth. It is, in fact, a human rights issue. Since abortion was made legal in the US in 1973, over 55 Million innocent human beings have been killed. Half of those innocent human beings (approximately 27.5 Million) have been male. This doesn't just concern women, it concerns men as well. Regardless of the gender, nobody should have the right to unjustly take the life of an innocent human being.   

*”We can not for a single second compare abortions to the holocaust.”

Why can’t we? Approximately 6 million innocent human beings were killed in the Holocaust. Around 55 Million innocent human beings were/are being killed through abortion. The death toll of abortion is approximately 9 times higher than that of the Holocaust.
Now, I will grant that the torture and brutality of the Jews before they were killed is horrific, and in comparison, abortion seems like a more merciful way to kill someone. Although it has been proven that in surgical abortions past 8 weeks, the child can actually feel pain and can feel the pain of its arms and legs being ripped from their bodies. That sounds horrific too.
So, when comparing just the death tolls, abortion would be considered 9 times worse than the holocaust.
Not to mention that the US’s largest abortion provider started out as a machine for eugenics, ridding the nation of the undesirable people, most notably, blacks. Their early founders had numerous links to the KKK and the Nazi Party, and even Hitler and Himmler. They still do, in some forms, still function today with a racist agenda. But that is a whole other can of worms that can be saved for a later discussion. (If you are interested, I suggest you watch “Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America”. 

Thanks for your input in this discussion, and I apologize for the delayed response. I hope you have a blessed summer! =)  
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As you can see, every response comes back to the question, are the unborn human? If they are not human, than abortion isnt wrong at all and should be legal, but if the unborn are human, then abortion is Very wrong and should be made illegal and the unborn should be protected at all cost! 



*Update: I received a response to this from the guy it was written to. He was telling g someone about it and tagged me in it.:
 "Nick Bell and I were In a debate about abortion recently in a status he published. Nick and I threw some good points at each other in a non-offensive way, some things we actually agreed on. There were people in the thread obviously offended but, in his argument he opened my mind to think about my stance on the issue, I am still pro-choice, but he brought up valid points. Opening people to think works in many ways."

I praise God that his mind was opened to think about and consider some of his ideas!

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!