Saturday, April 21, 2007

Abortion a wrenching personal decision? For who?

Before heading to the woods until Thur next week, Lex fired off the following to the Daily Puctilio (AKA the ft. Wayne Journal Gazette):

A few things on your ed. Rolling back Roe v. Wade

What anti-abortion (AKA pro-life) proponents dubbed “partial birth abortion”? What else would you call it when a baby is partially pulled from the mother’s womb; surgical scissors stuck into the base of the baby’s skull and the baby’s brains sucked out? I dare the JG to run a series of full color pictures of this vile grotesque procedure and then try to defend it.

Knocked a chink in the decision that “AFFIRMED the right to abortion”? Sure abortion rights have been there since September 17th, 1787 when the constitution was ratified. Who knew until the Burger court found it buried deep in the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments in 1973? Five unelected judges legislated abortion on America from the bench of the Supreme Court. Americans will continue to be at odds on this issue until Roe is struck down and the issue returned to state legislatures where it belongs. Sadly, even then, little will change with the laws regulating abortion; a practice that future human generations are likely to view as barbaric as we now view the human sacrifices of our ancestors.

Women making “the most wrenching personal decisions of THEIR lives”? You cannot be serious. Whose brain gets sucked out? The woman’s or the helpless baby’s? It seems to me that it’s the baby, mere inches away from leading a normal productive life – maybe curing aids - being imposed upon in the most “wrenching” and “personal” way imaginable. It’s a wrenching personal decision to get a tattoo or choose between Rocky-Road or Mint-Chocolate Chip ice cream on a hot day. It’s not quite as “personal” when someone else has to pay the consequences for your decision - wrenching or otherwise.

No comments: