New solution for abortion conflict

By Tom Ambrose

As you are likely aware, the U.S. Supreme Court has now, once again,
declared by a 5-to-4 decision that it is God. In this particular decision, the Court struck down the ban against partial-birth abortion in Nebraska. In essence, they have allowed the bloody slaughter of
innocent, viable babies to continue.

Over the years, I have listened closely to the defenders of abortion
and tried hard to understand their perspective. Abortion, after all, is the most divisive issue of our time. And, yet, the more I listen, the more amazed I become that so-called “pro-choice” activists can stand to live with themselves.

Please follow closely what I am about to say, however, as my conclusions will likely surprise many of you. And, know this: I’m pro-choice, but only in the sense that I believe that responsible
“choice” belongs in the bedroom, not in the abortion clinic.

I do want to acknowledge at the outset, though, that I know there are
some people who do not have any good choices: those who have been the
victims of rape or incest or a mother who’s life is physically in
danger if she carries her baby to term – these situations cumulatively
account for less than 1 percent of all abortions.

In such cases, I would be willing – reluctantly – to compromise and
allow the mother to legally abort her child. I don’t like such an option but neither do I have to live with the enormous pain that such mothers must face no matter what they do.

But, how do we morally defend the 99 percent of abortions that are
done for the convenience of the mother, i.e., abortions on demand? How
do we defend taking a full-term baby, partially out of the womb, and
ripping its brain and life from it?

To some extent, partial-birth abortion has helped to clarify the real issue surrounding this debate: Abortion is really about where the baby is located. After all, human beings are constantly in some stage of development and change. Consider the following examples:

  • In the womb, a baby boy or girl is known as a fetus.

  • After birth, she is known as an infant.

  • After she can walk, she is called a toddler.

  • In elementary school, she is a child.

  • During middle school, she is known as an adolescent.

  • During high school, she is called a teen-ager.

  • After high school, she is seen as an adult.

  • That adult will then go on to find herself in the workplace, her
    own home and may, eventually, become incapacitated and live in a
    hospital or a place that cares for the elderly.

The point is, we all reside somewhere and we are all in some stage of physiological development. Why, then, is it OK to selectively murder an innocent human being just because he or she is inconveniently located in a womb?

Murder has long been recognized as “wrong” in the family of mankind,
i.e., both illegal and immoral. Why has this form of premeditated murder suddenly become legally acceptable in the last 30 years? Why don’t these innocent babies also have a “choice” in their
own survival?

And, does this mean that other innocent human beings, who are also
inconvenient, are also worthy of death? For example, old people
often cost their families thousands of dollars to support, are often
unwanted and they raise medical costs for everyone. Should we terminate
them too? What about the mentally or physically handicapped? What
about people with AIDS?

Hmmm? Where do we stop? Indeed, who should have the right to make
such decisions? To be consistent, should we also let the U.S. Supreme
Court decide if it is OK to kill all of these other people?

One reason our society allows the killing of our inconvenient babies
is that their own mothers will not speak out in their defense. And,
since Roe vs. Wade, even the law has turned its back on protecting the
weakest and most needy of our country – you know, that place where
everyone is supposedly guaranteed “life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness.”

We’ll gladly save the whales but human babies are fair game for the
abortionist to butcher. And, it’s important to stop chopping down the rain forests because we might never discover some new life-saving medicine but it is quite acceptable to terminate the lives of babies who might one day grow-up and be capable of discovering such medicines. Go figure.

Another reason this ugliness continues is that Planned Parenthood has
raked-in billions of dollars making abortion into a powerful industry
that puts enormous pressure on our elected representatives. They
educate children to use condoms (thus encouraging sexual activity rather
than teaching why it is important to abstain from promiscuous sex).
Then, they give them free condoms knowing full well that many will not
use them. Finally, they perform the abortions when – surprise! – the
girls get pregnant. What a racket.

One rationale that is given to justify this wholesale massacre of innocent human life is that we cannot really say when life actually begins. However, this assertion is just not true. Biologically, one
can make a clear case that life begins at conception.

But, rather than re-hashing the technical merits, let me propose a
new way of looking at this problem and a new solution.

The standard by which we define human death in our society is
the absence of brain waves. Should we not, then, at least be logically consistent and define human beings as alive when brain waves are present?

In the human species, this begins approximately 40 days / six weeks
after conception. This is why, for example, there has been a recent
surge of interest in playing classical music for babies to hear while
they are in their mother’s womb: They hear, they feel, they dream, they

By such a definition, any deliberate abortion that occurs more than 40 days after conception is, inescapably, murder. Fetal brain waves are detectable. Can we not look into each of our own hearts and support this logical, clear and easily determined position of when life begins?

Forget about the people on both sides of this argument who insist on
all-or-nothing positions. I urge each and every one of you to contact your state and federal representatives today and implore them to stop killing babies beyond six weeks after conception.

It is time to stop this bloody, disgusting, immoral slaughter of
innocent human life. It is time for a constitutional amendment
to protect the unborn – but very much alive – children of our nation. It is time to stop taking their precious lives to pay the salaries of Planned Parenthood’s butchers.