Ann Furedi, chief executive of the abortion chain British Pregnancy Advisory Service recently engaged with Will Saletan in a debate over the issue of late-term abortion. During her opening statements, Ann made some comments that caught my attention. She admitted that a late-term fetus connects with people because “it looks like a baby.” Of course though to Ann, it isn’t a baby nor worth of legal protection.

She further states that “there is no evidence to suggest that we need to restrict later abortions in any way.” What sort of evidence is she looking for? Does the fact that a late-term abortions painfully and violently ends the life of a human being count as evidence?

Surely Ms. Furedi knows what a late-term abortion looks like being the CEO of the largest independent British abortion chain. For those that want a real and frankly brutal education about what a later-term abortion looks like, you can see abortions on video at about the 20th weeks at http://abortioninstruments.com. (WARNING, content is very graphic.)

Furedi rightly points out that “there isn’t any profound point at which you can say there is a difference between one kind of fetus and another.” She uses this lack of difference to argue that since terminating early-term humans is fine in her view then how can later-term abortions not be an acceptable decision.

She goes on to state:

“I accept that abortion stops a beating heart and I accept that abortion ends a potential human life, even in the very earliest weeks of pregnancy.”

I am grateful that Furedi is honest about the medical science that the human heart begins to beat about three weeks after the joining of sperm and egg. Being honest about what abortion does doesn’t make it any more acceptable though. In the same way, honestly acknowledging that killing a three-year-old child stops their heartbeat doesn’t make it right.

I also wonder how exactly Furedi defines human life since clearly she thinks that abortion only ends a “potential” instead of actual human life. At what point does she recognize human life begin? Dose it magically start when a baby bursts forth from his or her mother’s womb? Were newborn children just “potential” human lives moments earlier?

Finally, near the end of Furedi’s opening comments is where she makes the statement that stuck me most. She questions herself saying, “Does late abortion have a detrimental effect on society? No, I really don’t think it does.” To that I wonder, what sort of detrimental effect is Furedi looking for? Are mangled human bodies not enough?

You can read the entire comments by Ann Furedi here.

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the abortion chain British Pregnancy Advisory Service recently engaged with Will Saletan in a debate over the issue of late-term abortion. During her opening statements, Ann made some comments that caught my attention. She admitted that a late-term fetus connects with people because “it looks like a baby.” Of course though to Ann, it isn’t a baby nor worth of legal protection.

She further states that “there is no evidence to suggest that we need to restrict later abortions in any way.” What sort of evidence is she looking for? Does the fact that a late-term abortions painfully and violently ends the life of a human being count as evidence?

Surely Ms. Furedi knows what a late-term abortion looks like being the CEO of the largest independent British abortion chain. For those that want a real and frankly brutal education about what a later-term abortion looks like, you can see abortions on video at about the 20th weeks at http://abortioninstruments.com. (WARNING, content is very graphic.)

Furedi rightly points out that “there isn’t any profound point at which you can say there is a difference between one kind of fetus and another.” She uses this lack of difference to argue that since terminating early-term humans is fine in her view then how can later-term abortions not be an acceptable decision.

She goes on to state:

“I accept that abortion stops a beating heart and I accept that abortion ends a potential human life, even in the very earliest weeks of pregnancy.”

I am grateful that Furedi is honest about the medical science that the human heart begins to beat about three weeks after the joining of sperm and egg. Being honest about what abortion does doesn’t make it any more acceptable though. In the same way, honestly acknowledging that killing a three-year-old child stops their heartbeat doesn’t make it right.

I also wonder how exactly Furedi defines human life since clearly she thinks that abortion only ends a “potential” instead of actual human life. At what point does she recognize human life begin? Dose it magically start when a baby bursts forth from his or her mother’s womb? Were newborn children just “potential” human lives moments earlier?

Finally, near the end of Furedi’s opening comments is where she makes the statement that stuck me most. She questions herself saying, “Does late abortion have a detrimental effect on society? No, I really don’t think it does.” To that I wonder, what sort of detrimental effect is Furedi looking for? Are mangled human bodies not enough?

You can read the entire comments by Ann Furedi here.