|
James Watkins
Author
Speaker
Threat to society

  
Is it a life or a choice?
How should we deal with this controversial issue? (Adapted from The Why Files.
Buy it at amazon.com.)
But first, this paid political announcement . . .
We hear a lot about "pro-choice" on the evening news and sound bites
from politicians. We, too, want to avoid "legislating values and claiming
there are moral absolutes."
Ethics is a personal choice, not a political or religious concern. That's why we've established "Planned Bank Robbery." Now, we personally don't
approve of bank robbery, but we don't want to inflict our morals on anyone
else either.
It must be a personal decision of each individual.
Education is
the key since our studies reveal that 99 percent of senior high teens
know that banks are robbed. But it is shocking the number of teens who
don't know how banks are robbed. Or even how to load a .357 magnum,
drive a get-away car, or demand, "Give me all of your unmarked, non-sequentially-ordered
twenty-dollar bills." Young people need to know the wide range of
career options available to them.
And we're also
concerned that a lot of young people are robbing banks without proper protection.
Personal injury and irresponsibility are much greater crimes than actually
knocking over the First National. At Planned Bank Robbery we
don't approve of unauthorized withdrawals. But we do want to offer--free
of charge--bullet-proof vests, ski masks, and if necessary a get-away car.
This is the compassionate thing to do!
And young people
who need some extra cash from their local 7-Eleven shouldn't have to get their
parent's permission to obtain this protection. If that were the case, hundreds
more teens would be needlessly injured by narrow-minded parents who are
trying to inflict their morality on their children.
Again, let me
emphasize that Planned Bank Robbery does not condone or encourage
grand larceny. We only want to stress it is a personal decision. We're
"pro-choice"!
Hey, I'm just
kidding! And if you think I'm serious, I do hope you don't know where I
live.
But the "pro-choice"
debate is often just as misguided as the arguments for "pro-bank-robbery."
If "pro-life" supporters are going to be successful in their
campaign, they must pin down the slippery semantics of their opponents
and puncture the following . . .
"pro-choice"
arguments
"'Fetal
tissue' is no more a human being, than a bolt is a Buick."
Those who argue
that abortion does not kill human life must have skipped high school biology,
never picked up a medical book, or else are deliberately lying. Virtually
every secular medical book and even a senate hearing declare human life
begins the instant of conception.
A report from
Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 1981 reads: "Physicians, biologists
and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life
of a human being--a being is alive and is a member of the human species.
There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological,
and scientific writings."
A split second
after conception, this one-celled forty-six-chromosomed human being possesses
everything it needs to grow into an adult human except time.
It's not a blueprint
of a human being. It's not a part of a human being. It is
a human being. Never has a bolt grown into a Buick!
Because words
are so important in this debate, Dr. Jack Wilke, the former director of
"National Right to Life," warns pro-lifers to avoid emotion-laden
words like "murder" and "baby." He urges the use of
"kill" and "human life." Pro-choicers can engage in
wordplay arguing that a "baby" is not "murdered," but
cannot refute--with any scientific credibility--that abortions do indeed
kill human life.
A close cousin
to the "it's not human life" argument is . . .
"A woman
has a right to choose what she will with her own body."
Again, this pro-choice/pro-abortion
argument reveals ignorance of human physiology or, again, the perpetuation
of a deliberate lie.
The life growing within the mother is not her body.
It has a very different chromosome structure with a separate circulatory
system and often a different blood type. There's even a fifty-fifty chance
it's a different gender!
"A woman
should be able to choose life in her medical care"
Only 2 percent
of the one and a half million abortions performed each year in the United
State were for the express purpose of saving the mother's life. The overwhelming
number of abortions performed do not "save" anyone's life.
"An abortion
is less dangerous than childbirth for very young girls."
The New York
Times quotes The Journal of Youth and Adolescence finding's
"that teenage mothers, given proper care, have the least complications
in childbirth. The younger the mother, the better the birth. [If there
are more problems,] society makes it so."
In my book Sex
is Not a Four-letter Word, I list twelve studies from medical journals
that list such complications from abortion as pelvic inflammatory disease,
problems with next pregnancy, damage to cervix, and severe blood loss to
name a few.
I also note that
a University of Minnesota study, tracking the psychological effects five
to ten years after an abortion, revealed that 81 percent of women having
an abortion became preoccupied with the aborted child, 75 percent had flashbacks
of the actual operation, 54 percent had nightmares, 33 percent reported
visions of aborted child visiting them and 25 percent experienced hallucinations
related to the abortion.
Contrary to the
pro-choice/pro-abortion rhetoric, abortions are not always "simple
and safe" operations."
"Abortion should
be legal because of rape and incest."
Only a fraction
of 1 percent of rape and incest victims become pregnant. That means that
for every abortion for rape or incest, there are 25,000 for convenience.
And, we must
consider what is best for the rape or incest victim. It's the vicious attack
and violation that causes emotional damage--not the pregnancy itself. Will
additional physical and mental health threats noted earlier result by subjecting
her to an abortion?
"Abortion
reduces child abuse by making each child a 'wanted child.'"
If that is the
case, we should see a reduction in reported cases after Roe v. Wade legalized
abortion. In 1960, before the Supreme Court decision, five thousand child
abuse cases were reported in New York City. Fifteen years following Roe
v. Wade, twenty-five thousand cases were reported in New York City--a 500
percent increase!
National statistics
reveal that child abuse is sky-rocketing across the United States as well.
Over 167 thousand cases were reported in 1973, 711 thousand in 1979, and
929 thousand in 1982, and in 1989 nearly two and a half million!
To be fair, there
are many possible explanations for the incredible statistical increase:
more people willing to report abuse, more accurate reporting of abuse,
stress of economic conditions, increase in drug use in adults, the pressures
of single parenting, etc.
But one possible
cause could be that abortion creates the mentality of "disposable
children." If children are viewed as having no value in the womb,
it follows they may be viewed with little value outside the womb.
However complex
the causes of child abuse, pro-abortionists cannot argue that abortion
on demand has reduced child abuse when there has been a 1,400 percent statistical
increase since 1973!
"pro-life"
choices
So, what can
pro-lifers do? First, pro-lifers mustn't let people hide behind a "pro-choice"
position of "I'm personally opposed to abortion, but I think everyone
has a right to choose." This perhaps is the most dangerous use of
words. After all, who in a pluralistic democracy could possibly oppose
"choice."
But those who
embrace this particular "pro-choice" position are guilty of ignoring
their own conscience ("I'm personally opposed") by allowing for
the killing of human life ("but everyone has a right to choose").
Secondly, pro-lifers
must calmly and compassionately refute the medical myths which support
unscientific statements such as " it's not a human being."
Finally, pro-lifers must use the truth to refute the careless use of words by the pro-abortion
camp. For while the pen may be mightier than the sword, words are more
powerful than both.
© Copyright 1992 James N. Watkins
Comments
Just read your website piece on abortion, very well done. Here is some added info. There are physiological
reasons for women who've had abortions to become "pre-occupied" with their aborted child. Mothers inherit traits
from their children: click here.
Loretta Oakes (June 2009)
leave a comment, tell a friend, send me money
Email your comments to jim @ jameswatkins.com.
If this page was helpful, please . . .
a) tell a friend
b) link to it from your blog or Web site
c) save it as a favorite at
delicious.com
d) recommend it to digg.com and
StumbleUpon.com
If this page was really helpful, please . . .
e) consider a donation to our sponsor XarisCom.
You can donate securely with any major credit card

legal stuff and warnings
Copyright © James Watkins. All text and graphics on my sites, unless otherwise noted, are copyrighted © in my name,
James N. Watkins, and are protected by United States copyright law and international copyright law under the Berne
Convention. Please visit the press room for information on reprinting any text or
graphics. Thanks!
WARNING: Reader assumes full responsibility for the proper and prescribed use of this
site. For external use only. Discontinue if rash, redness, irritation, or swelling develops. If swallowed, do not
induce vomiting. Side-effects may include drowsiness or mild to severe agitation. Do not read while consuming alcohol or
operating heavy machinery. Keep away from open flame. Do not store above 451 degrees. Do not use near or place in water.
Void where prohibited, taxed or licensed. Any medical information provided is for general educational use only and should
not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice.
Views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of
any other personreal or fictitious, living or deadusing the name James Watkins.
|