The MORAL Basis for Defending All Human Life

“Moral” is defined as “concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.”  I think most of us can agree that there are right and wrong ways to behave and that humans can demonstrate both good and bad character.  So, on the issue of abortion—and the issue of defending human life in general—what is the moral position to take?

First, in order to come to any sort of moral conclusion in the matter, we need to make a basic assumption that this article is predicated on:  we’re talking about human lives.  You can’t argue against my conclusions on the basis that an unborn child isn’t a unique, living human being.  We’re already assuming that based on the Scientific Basis for Defending All Human Life.  If you don’t believe that an unborn child is a human being, you have an issue with science and morality, but you may need to resolve your science first.

Abortion: equally immoral as the Holocaust.

Next, let’s ask and answer four questions.  1)  What is the result of declaring certain classes of humans as “less” than others?  2)  We all agree that Hitler’s genocide of the Jews was wrong and immoral.  How does this relate to abortion?  4)  Is it actually wrong to fail to stand up for innocent lives?  5)  What should good moral character compel me to do?  Read more The MORAL Basis for Defending All Human Life

Abortion Funding Muddies the Waters of DC Budget Controversy

Because it is the nation’s capital, the District of Columbia works a little differently from most localities.

For starters, its budgets are subject to review by the United States Congress. The legislative branch of the federal government is currently considering whether or not to give DC greater control over its own budget, but the specter of abortion is complicating the decision.  The Huffington Post states:

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which oversees D.C. affairs, expressed his commitment late last year to giving budget autonomy to the District to help city government avoid a shutdown whenever Congress appears unable to pass a spending bill.

D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), Mayor Vincent Gray and others welcomed the proposal but reluctantly rejected the plan Issa unveiled in November because it contained a provision barring local funding for abortions — a move Issa said was necessary to win Republican votes. Read more Abortion Funding Muddies the Waters of DC Budget Controversy

How Low Can You Go? Salon Writer Accuses Rick Santorum of Wanting Her Daughter Dead

Clearly, he hates little girls.

Once again proving how hated those who stand for life are in some corners of society, Sarah Fister Gale at Salon explains how Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum “would have killed my daughter.”

She explains how a prenatal test of her unborn baby’s amniotic fluid revealed that she had Rh negative disease, which would have been fatal to her if left undiscovered. The prenatal testing saved the child’s life by enabling Gale’s doctor to track her development, ensure that she was delivered at the safest time, given a full blood transfusion, and monitored to make certain the disease was eliminated. Thankfully, little Ella is alive and well today.

What does this have to do with Rick Santorum, though? Read more How Low Can You Go? Salon Writer Accuses Rick Santorum of Wanting Her Daughter Dead

States File Lawsuit Against HHS Mandate

In addition to earlier lawsuits by small religious collegesindividuals, and non-profit organizations, seven states have filed a law suit against the HHS contraception, sterilization, and abortifacient mandate.

The attorney generals of Texas, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Carolina filed a joint lawsuit in Nebraska’s US District Court yesterday.

The attorney generals are asking the Court to declare the mandate unconstitutional, as it violates the religious freedom’s of their state’s citizens.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott argued that:

“Obamacare’s latest mandate tramples the First Amendment’s Freedom of Religion and compels people of faith to act contrary to their convictions. The President’s so called ‘accommodation’ was nothing but a shell game: the mandate still requires religious organizations to subsidize and authorize conduct that conflicts with their religious principles. The very first amendment to our Constitution was intended to protect against this sort of government intrusion into our religious convictions.”

The Obama administration had no comment (as of press time) about the lawsuit.

Read more States File Lawsuit Against HHS Mandate

The Advisors Behind the Contraception Mandate

According to ABC’s Jake Tapper, the most influential supporters of the controversial Contraception Mandate were HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, former Director of Domestic Policy Melody Barnes (who has resigned from the Obama administration), Presidential Advisor Valerie Jarrett, and President of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards.

Other than their support for this mandate, they have something else in common: they are all unabashedly pro-abortion.

Why was Cecile Richards, who is not an official White House advisor, included in the discussions so prominently? Why was someone who could directly benefit from this mandate included, yet the very organizations that would be forced to provide this coverage against their beliefs, were excluded from the conversation?

Read more The Advisors Behind the Contraception Mandate

The CHRISTIAN Basis for Defending All Human Life

You may wonder why I am discussing the Christian basis for defending all human life in this series, along with the scientific, philosophical, moral, and legal bases.  Well, in case you haven’t noticed, many active pro-lifers are Christians.  In addition, I’m a Christian, so I think I understand this basis well.  Furthermore, on a personal note, I believe that every Christian pro-lifer needs to be able to clearly explain why they are pro-life–from a Christian perspective–for their Christian friends who may claim to believe otherwise.  There are certainly Christians who get abortions and vote for pro-abortion candidates, sadly.

A  clarification  before I start:  while I am a Christian and believe that the Bible supports the pro-life position, I am not pro-life only because I’m a Christian.  I’m pro-life because it’s also the common-sense, scientific, moral, and logical position to take.  However, I do believe that being a Christian and believing in my Savior is what compels me to speak out for those more helpless than myself.

Here’s what I believe to be the Christian basis for defending all human life.  We can find all the evidence we need in the Bible itself.

1)    The Bible Clearly Teaches That Life is Precious.
Life is clearly precious to God, as He is  the giver of life (Acts 17:25), the fountain of life (Psalm 36:9), the defender of life (Psalm 27:1), the prince of life (Acts 3:15), the restorer of life (Ruth 4:15), and the conqueror of death (I Corinthians 15:55).  George Grant lists out these Scriptures and more in “Third Time Around”.

In this same book, Mr. Grant lays out an excellent Biblical basis for the sanctity of life.  I recommend you read the book for yourself online.  While laying out specific verses, he states, “From Genesis to Revelation, in the books of the Law, in the books of history, in the books of wisdom, in the prophetic books, in the Gospels, and in the epistles, the pro-life message of the Bible is absolutely inescapable.” Read more The CHRISTIAN Basis for Defending All Human Life

Nine Pro-Life Books You Should Read

I used to have quite the collection of pro-life books.  I’ve been into this issue since I was a very young teenager.  Now, I’ve thinned down my collection and have a few definite favorites.  For anyone out there who’d like to increase their knowledge or expand their thinking on the issue, here are my reviews and recommendations:

The #1 Book Out There Award goes to Why Pro Life? by Randy Alcorn.  This is an incredibly easy-to-read, yet appropriately detailed and informative book.  It’s thin and small, so anyone can read it.  It’s even available in an audio-CD format.  I’ve talked about this book before, and I highly recommend that you grab a copy.  When I was the spokesperson for Colorado’s 2008 Personhood campaign, Randy Alcorn mailed us copies of this book for free so we could hand them out.  I rate this an absolutely invaluable resource!

Third Time Around by George Grant (free online copy) is a wonderful history of the pro-life movement.  I’m going to guess that most of you had no idea the movement started so early or in such interesting ways.  I certainly had no clue.  If you’ve ever been curious about the Christian church’s involvement (or lack of involvement) on this issue over the centuries, if you’ve ever wondered about what early pro-life heroes did, if you’ve ever wished for a basic history of the movement…this is the book for you.

A Perfect Persecution by James R. Lucas.  Can I say amazing?  This book is a heart-stopping thriller of a novel.  It takes the reader into a not-so-difficult-to-imagine world where the pro-choice position has taken over the U.S.A.  (Now, I didn’t say I believe this will ever happen—I don’t!  But it’s not hard to imagine what kind of a world that would be.)  The really cool thing about this novel is that it is believable.  It’s not a sci-fi, pie in the sky, fake world book.  It’s the real thing.  Don’t pick up this book unless you want to be more motivated than ever to stand up for innocent life. Read more Nine Pro-Life Books You Should Read

Missouri School District Silences Pro-Life Students

 

The Alliance Defense Fund has filed a suit against the Missouri Dixon R-1 School District on behalf of a student who says she was unfairly censored for promoting the annual Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity.

While Dixon High School has typically been known to foster student involvement by allowing the promotion of events and causes, last October they decided to deny the female student’s request to post flyers encouraging her fellow students to give up their voices for the unborn.

Such promotions have been previously allowed, and follow district policy that states: “student expression regarding a variety of topics may be beneficial to the District’s educational mission,” including “discussion and debate regarding serious issues.” In recent years, this policy has been used to justify posters with political and anti-drug messages, posters and announcements promoting the Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network’s Day of Silence, even photos of students edited to look like bloody zombies. Read more Missouri School District Silences Pro-Life Students

South Dakota Informed Consent Fight Highlights the Truth About Abortion and Suicide

You’ve probably heard about Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, a dispute over South Dakota’s mandatory informed consent law, but you may not have heard about one of the case’s most potentially-explosive details: the law’s requirement that women seeking abortions be warned about a potential link between abortion and suicide.

On Monday, Americans United for Life’s Clarke Forsythe and Mailee Smith took to the pages of the Washington Times to explain the controversy, including a stunning rundown of the medical evidence. Here are just the first three examples:

A 1995 study by A.C. Gilchrist in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that in women with no history of psychiatric illness, the rate of deliberate self-harm was 70 percent higher after abortion than after childbirth. Read more South Dakota Informed Consent Fight Highlights the Truth About Abortion and Suicide

The PHILOSOPHICAL Basis for Defending All Human Life

Have you ever wondered whether pro-life people who believe in the death penalty but oppose abortion are inconsistent; if outlawing abortion will lead to “pregnancy policing”; or why pro-life people are so insistent that a “fertilized egg” is a person?  Have you ever philosophically thought out your own position on abortion—whether you’re pro-life  or pro-choice?

If you are out there reading this article and you truly believe you are pro-choice, I have a challenge for you, should you choose to accept it.  Accepting this challenge is, of course, a matter of choice.  But if you think that abortion is sad or tragic; if you find yourself saying that it should be “safe, legal, and rare”; if you wish that abortion didn’t exist, but still view it as a woman’s choice, please take this challenge.

If you are pro-life, you simply MUST take this challenge to better understand and to be better able to argue the pro-life perspective. Read more The PHILOSOPHICAL Basis for Defending All Human Life

Hysterical Abortion Advocates Equate Ultrasounds To Rape

The Virginia state legislature has introduced a bill requiring women get a sonogram before they get an abortion. It must be given by an MD at least two hours before the procedure — not one of the “nurses” employed by the abortion clinic — and the woman must be given the opportunity to see the ultrasound image and hear the heartbeat. She is not required to do either, but the option must be made available to her. Pro-abortion advocates immediately flew into attack mode, because heaven forbid anything be done to ensure women get the correct medical information before having an abortion! Hysterics over any attempt to curtail abortions are nothing new, and this time they’ve come up with a rather… interesting argument. Ultrasounds equal rape!

Over at Slate, Dahlia Lithwick writes that most women will be forced into a transvaginal ultrasound, which of course, equals rape.

Because the great majority of abortions occur during the first 12 weeks, that means most women will be forced to have a transvaginal procedure, in which a probe is inserted into the vagina, and then moved around until an ultrasound image is produced.

The ultrasound = rape meme is spreading like wildfire around pro-abortion blogs, from RH Reality Check and Feministing, to Feministe and Pandagon. They’re all parroting the same absurd claim: that somehow, requiring a pre-abortion ultrasound equals rape.

Read more Hysterical Abortion Advocates Equate Ultrasounds To Rape

“Safe, Legal, and Rare”? Ross Douthat Exposes the Emptiness of Pro-Aborts’ Claims to Fight Unplanned Pregnancy

Stop me if you’ve heard this one: “We support a woman’s right to choose, but that doesn’t mean we think abortion is a good thing. We want abortion to be safe, legal, and rare, so we prefer to find ways to reduce women’s need for abortion.”

It’s a neat, tidy bit of rhetoric that enables pro-choicers to distance themselves from the injustice of abortion while simultaneously spinning policies like forced contraception coverage as somehow pro-life. It doesn’t hold up too well under logical scrutiny—if abortion isn’t the taking of an innocent life, then who cares how rare it is?—but on the whole, it’s been a useful propaganda tool.

However, over the weekend New York Times columnist Ross Douthat took a look at how well the “safe, legal, and rare” strategy has worked out. His conclusion? It hasn’t: Read more “Safe, Legal, and Rare”? Ross Douthat Exposes the Emptiness of Pro-Aborts’ Claims to Fight Unplanned Pregnancy