United States House of Representatives Seal (Photo credit: DonkeyHotey)
All my life I’ve never ever understood one aspect of the Pro-Life vs Pro-Abortion fight; and it has come up again this week as the U.S. House of Representatives debates a bill that would make abortion of 20 weeks of pregnancy illegal. My question is…why is it so darned important that pro-abortion (pro-choice…if you prefer) advocates hold on to the right to kill what is undeniably a viable human life so late in a pregnancy even if the pregnancy is the result of a rape? If my math is right 20 weeks is nearly five months.
As usual cooler heads always fail to prevail in the debate over abortion. It’s like common sense simply doesn’t exist on this subject. The lack of common sense produces insensitive Republican politicians making asinine statements like “legitimate rape” and that there “Was a low rate of pregnancy from rape” as AZ-R Trent Franks said yesterday. And it leads to Democrats defending the actions of murderers like the Philadelphia abortion quack Kermit Gosnell.
Yesterday the House Judiciary Committee passed the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act” on a strictly party line vote. It bans abortion 20 weeks after conception based on the premise that at 20-weeks unborn babies can feel pain. Democrats offered repeated Amendments, which were all rejected, including granting exceptions for cases of rape and incest. Upon having such Amendments rejected Democrats continually scorned Republicans, calling them insensitive, uncaring, brutal and other standard epithets for opposing their desire to ignore the fact that they want the right to choose killing a viable human life…regardless of its genealogy.
But the insults again led me to wonder what I have always wondered. If pregnant through rape or incest why not get an abortion LONG before the fifth month? Why wait so long? I accept the fact that I might be missing something, and I welcome a cool-headed pro-abortionist to explain to me why ignoring a human life is less important than allowing a pregnant woman to procrastinate endlessly…or at least through the entire nine month pregnancy. I am pro-choice and pro-human life. I believe a fetus in the first trimester is not human and a woman’s right to govern what happens to her own body should not be infringed. But I also believe a BABY in the third trimester is a viable human life, capable of survival outside the womb. It’s the 2nd trimester that’s a grey area I claim no strong feelings for, one way or the other; except to say when in doubt value life over choice and protect the innocent baby.
But when asked to extend the right to an abortion through the entire pregnancy I sincerely don’t understand. Isn’t it common sense that if you allow someone, anyone, man or woman, to procrastinate…they will? Or am I the only kid in school who only did his homework in the final couple days before it were due in spite of having the homework assigned some two-three weeks prior? By establishing a national law and understanding that you, the pregnant woman, MUST decide to keep or abort your pregnancy by the 20th week of your pregnancy…guess what…they’ll decide. And even if they pass the 20 week point having not decided a woman now as always still maintains the right to give up the child for adoption, a far more favorable option than the abominable choice of choosing to kill a viable human life.
Approximately 1.3-million abortions are performed in this country every year. That’s over 50 million since 1973 when Roe vs Wade became the law of the land, and only 1.3% of them were performed at 21 weeks of gestation or later. Between 88-92% of abortions are performed in the pregnancy’s first trimester. Is it so much to ask that the small percentage, the TINY percentage of women who can’t make up their minds in five months to get an abortion be prevented from doing so once that baby can feel the pain of being killed? I honestly don’t think it’s so much to ask. But I welcome someone explaining it to me.
Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.
Related articles
- House panel backs bill to ban later-term abortions (modbee.com)
- Lawmaker Says Low Rate Of Pregnancy From Rape (kake.com)
- Catholic bishops accuse Government of misleading people on abortion (irishtimes.com)
- House panel backs bill to ban later-term abortions (kfwbam.com)
- Sick Salvadoran woman denied abortion (themexicanpost.wordpress.com)
- Abortion as the ultimate rejection of personal responsibility (liveactionnews.org)
- Ariz. congressman: ‘The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low’ (azfamily.com)
- abortion bill means a woman can be prosecuted after having an abortion in another jurisdiction ? (politics.ie)
- In Wisconsin and on Capitol Hill, the GOP is going all-out on restricting abortion (host.madison.com)
- Pelosi to reporter asking on abortion: ‘I’m not going there’ (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
M Schuett blah blah blah 