A Question About Abortion

United States House of Representatives Seal

United States House of Representatives Seal (Photo credit: DonkeyHotey)

A pregnant woman

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.

When Does a Life Begin Having Rights?

The artificial argument created by the Obama Re-Election Administration(and Yes I termed them that way intentionally) over women’s birth control has gained more steam than I dreamed possible. Democrats like Nancy Pelosi have termed this artificial, non-existent fight the Republican’s War on Women.

Republicans War on Women at the State Level we...

I am seldom surprised by the gullibility of the American electorate, but must admit this time, I’m dumbfounded. Obama and his minions have successfully managed to divide and enrage people with reasonable and differing views where mostly quiet co-existence had existed for the past 50 years.

Are Conservatives actively trying to impede women’s access to birth control? Puhhhhleeeezzz! If you believe so show some balls. Comment on this blog and tell us all where those impediments exist.

Prevention Park, is the largest Planned Parent...

Prevention Park, is the largest Planned Parenthood administrative and medical facility in the nation. It also serves as the headquarters for 12 clinics, located in Houston, Texas (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Trying to de-fund Planned Parenthood, you say? That is more about cutting wasteful government spending and abortion than it is about contraception. And Planned Parenthood would not cease to exist were the Federal Government gifts to their operating budget cut off. PP can and would continue to receive generous private donations. In fact, it could be argued that their revenue would actually grow from empowered liberals coming to the rescue of this liberal iconic venue.

Liberals: your next ploy would be to throw up Catholics resistance and outrage to the Obama Health and Human Service Administration’s birth control mandate. This mandate was announced in January after a GOP Presidential debate in which

American television journalist and a former po...

George Stephanopulos

ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos shocked the world and Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney

Mitt and Ann Romney on December 22, 2007, at a...

Mitt and Ann Romney

by asking the seemingly illogical, and uncalled for question “Can state’s disallow health care plans from offering contraception coverage?” Romney correctly pointed out that nobody wants to block contraception coverage. And he said it again, and again and again because Stephanopoulos kept asking; clearly indicating his mission from Democratic headquarters. Catholics righteous condemnation of the HHS mandate is totally and completely about religious freedom, not contraception. Were Catholic Church employees not able to have contraception paid for by their employer-provided health care plan they would not be denied contraception. They would merely be denied having contraception paid for, in part or in whole, by a Catholic Church that views it as a grave sin.

For the record I am telling YOU any of YOU who continue to argue that there is a Republican War on Women and a woman’s “right” to contraception that you are either stupid, impossibly ill-informed, or so hateful and bias in your political views that intelligent discussion with you is pointless. Move on. Don’t talk to me.

I find the whole subject remarkable in its divisiveness. Fifty years after creation of “the pill” and forty years after Roe vs. Wade this country won’t allow itself a sensible middle ground on reproductive rights because neither political side is willing to budge from their extreme positions; positions the vast majority of this country find unacceptable. Pro-Choice advocates want abortion on demand up to and including the partial birth of a living human baby. In other words they continue to advocate infanticide for convenience purposes. Outrageous!

Nearly, but not quite, as outrageous is the Pro-Life position that life begins at conception; that a fertilized egg represents life. Take that fertilized egg out of the womb and see how long it lives, and by what means its given nutrition. Answer those questions and you clearly don’t have life without the woman, the mother. Thus her rights remain paramount.

Neither Pro-life nor Pro-Choice can agree on what seems abundantly obvious to me. Life begins neither at conception, nor at birth, but somewhere in between. And since we’re talking about a LIFE, an individual, and all the God-given and Constitutional rights there-in bestowed upon that individual and the Federal Government’s required protection of that individual’s rights; shouldn’t we error on the side of protecting that life?

If a Pro-choice advocate says that a crying, wiggling baby not more than sixty seconds into the open air from their mother’s birth canal is Constitutionally protected and given rights under our Federal Constitution but that same PERSON had zero rights 61-seconds earlier…that’s just plain and simply unacceptable both logically, morally, and legally.

The great statesman Patrick Henry correctly noted “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” So restraining a woman’s right to control her own reproduction system should only be imposed when those rights infringe upon the rights of another whose rights also deserve protecting.

So, though I’m Catholic,

Constitution of the United States of America

Constitution of the United States of America

I acknowledge we are not a theocracy and Catholics can’t impose their beliefs on the populace any more than Muslims can or should. Therefore contraception is and should always remain available. So should abortion up until its determined when life begins.

When life begins is a question beyond my pay grade, to use a phrase made famous by Barrack Obama when he successfully dodged the same question during the 2008 Presidential race. But any idiot can agree it occurs well before a natural, healthy birth following a nine month pregnancy.

Unlike other posts of mine I broach this dangerous subject not for the purpose of starting debate but with the sincere hope of ending it. Let logic and reason, not religion or emotion prevail.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.