| LinkExchange Member | Free Home Pages at GeoCities |
|
Palun gives commentary on abortion issue by Jeffrey M. Palun |
Those waiting for my response to the "abortion" articles in the December 3, 1997 issue of The News Record written by Thomas Breyer and Robert Davis, here is the response anticipated. First I shall tackle Davis' article and then Breyer's.
Davis argues, "[Abortion] in the final analysis, [is] no one's business but a womans' [sic], her doctor's, and her God's. He seems to be forgetting one very important person; the unborn child. He suggests that we should take a step back and "take a good hard look at the issue at its core." Now that is a good idea. I did that in my last article. When it comes down to it, the core issue is whether a mother has the right to kill her unborn child. That is the core issue. So as Davis says, "everyone step back for a few minutes, and take a good hard look at the issue at its core." Go rent the movie The Hard Truth. Watch as they perform abortions; go see how gruesome the death of a child can be. Then come back and tell me that the central issue is (to sum up Davis' article) that the Supreme Court has ruled that abortion is legal and that everyone should accept it blindly. (As if I even need to tell you this...) The Supreme Court ruled long ago that slaves were non-persons in the eyes of the law. Later that decision was reversed. In fact the Supreme Court has reversed many of its rulings. My own personal opinion is that history will repeat itself.
[Just to point out Davis' inaccuracy with facts I have added this portion.] Davis claims that the Supreme Court is a maker of laws. For those of us that do truly know the Constitution and have followed the history of the United States government, we know that this statement is inaccurate if not completely wrong. Yes, the Supreme Court has judicial review. No, the Supreme Court can not make legislature. Ever heard of Checks and Balances Mr. Davis? Legislation is passed in Congress. The Supreme Court can only rule on the constitutionality of the legislation passed; it con not, however, create new legislation.
"Ironically, in the past few years, the pro-lifers have advocated, planned, and carried out more violnece and actually killed more people in the name of what they believe than the abortionists!" Do you honestly know how many people die per day due to surgical abortions alone? Four thousand four hundred! Plus all of the mothers that die from complications. I totally agree with Davis on one point, "What pro-lifers CANNOT do is advocate, carry out illegal fire bombings of property, nor commit murder or attempted mureder upon those who perform abortions." No kidding! That wouldn't make them very por-life now would it? So the bombings were not advocated nor carried out by (truly) pro-life people; those acts were carried out by insane radicals. I don't know how many times I will have to defend myself from such accusations.
Now on to Breyer's article. "First, I find it amusing that one group can point the finger at another group for using words 'to confuse and muddle what is really happening,' only to turn around and do the same things." A group didn't use those words Mr. Breyer, I did. If you feel I used words to muddle then let's take another look at the paragraph in question. Here is an excerpt from my Nov. 24th article:
 | The pro-death people talk about the mother's right to choose. Choose what? To have a baby or not? Excuse me, but that choice is made before having sex. Sex is the determining factor in whether we want children or not. If you don't want to be pregnant don't have sex. Yes, the pro-death people might object to this and claim, "What about those women who were raped?" I shall get to that, but in due time; we are still examining the "choice" that people are talking about. Let's see, the mother is pregnant already, that means that there is a living human inside her. The pro-choice peiple say that abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. Funny I always thought that the phrase "To carry a baby to term" meant you had a live baby at the end; now it seems that may not be the case. So what happens when they terminate that pregnancy? What are the only two things that can happen? One, the pregnancy is terminated and a live child is born. Two, the pregnancy is terminated and a dead child is born. The only thing that is different is the child. So the choice for the mother cannot be to terminate her pregnancy; all pregnancies are terminated when the child is born! So the real choice that the abortion supporters want to give the mother is...(drum roll please)... whether to deliver a dead child or a live child. Sounds like killing to me. Maybe I'm just old fashioned but I was always taught that killing humans is wrong. |
"Using loaded terms such as 'pro-death', 'terminated', and 'live baby' are words that do just that." I have taken the liberty to bold those terms I think that Breyer finds offensive. Now re-read the same passage only do the following:
- instead of pro-death--read pro-choice
- delete living, live, and the entire sentece starting with "Funny I always..."
- instead of terminate(d)--read end(ed)
[The following paragraph is not in the article for the News Record but is here to make it easier to read]
| The pro-choice people talk about the mother's right to choose. Choose what? To have a baby or not? Excuse me, but that choice is made before having sex. Sex is the determining factor in whether we want children or not. If you don't want to be pregnant don't have sex. Yes, the pro-choice people might object to this and claim, "What about those women who were raped?" I shall get to that, but in due time; we are still examining the "choice" that people are talking about. Let's see, the mother is pregnant already, that means that there is a human inside her. The pro-choice peiple say that abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. So what happens when they end that pregnancy? What are the only two things that can happen? One, the pregnancy is ended and a child is born. Two, the pregnancy is ended and a dead child is born. The only thing that is different is the child. So the choice for the mother cannot be to end her pregnancy; all pregnancies are ended when the child is born! So the real choice that the abortion supporters want to give the mother is...(drum roll please)... whether to deliver a dead child or a child. Sounds like killing to me. Maybe I'm just old fashioned but I was always taught that killing humans is wrong. |
[back to the original text]
Has my meaning changed? Doesn't it say the same thing? [By the way, Mr. Breyer, my mother carried me to term and I wasn't born after nine months (40 weeks); I was born after eight months (36 1/2 weeks).]
I know that this is getting long, but I do have to address the issue of rape and life of the mother. In the instance of life of the mother, abortion should not be allowed. Now let me explain. Abortion is the action undertaken with intent to kill the child. There should be nothing stopping the mother from a surgery that would save her life. Breyer asks, "whose rights come first, mother or baby?" The right to live is equal for the both of them. If there is a surgery that can save both then that is what should be done. If the life of the mother is threatened it usually means that a doctor 9at this point in time) would not be able to save the life of the child. But a surgery to save the life of the mother with the uninteded death of the child is not an abortion.
Now let's take a look at abortion in the case of rape. I have touched upon this before, but it looks like I shall have to again. "Why should a victim of rape, whose life already altered, have to hae it altered for the rest of her life? Is it right for this women [sic] to be reminded every day of her life that she was victimized?" Do you honestly think that a woman would ever forget the fact that she was raped, no matter what happened afterwards? Rape is hard enough to go through without adding to it post-abortion syndrome. For those of you that don't know, post-abortion syndrome is a mental ill (possible signs of it are depression, guil, lack of sleep,...) and is experienced by 90% of women who have had aboritons (within 0-20 years). Second of all, punish the rapist, not the offspring of the rapist. Lastly, here is the same point I made in my Nov. 24th article: "Look around you. Do you know how everyone you see was conceived? If you did would that matter? If you found out that your best friend was the offspring of a rapist would that make it alright to kill him? Or even discriminate against him? We treat these people no different outside the womb, why should we treat them any different inside the womb? They are human beings and deserve to be treated like it!"
Breyer states, "No one has the right to tell her what she can and cannot do with her body. No one has the right to tell a man either." Unfortunately, when the mother tells the doctor she wants an abortion and the doctor kills the boy or girl inside that is exactly what happens. The mother tells her little boy or girl that they are to die. The mother decides that her child is no longer going to live. The child has no choice in the matter.
"Maybe if pro-lifers worked with counseling services more than they do, stopped calling women who choose abortion murderes, opened up their arms and said 'Here let me help you through this. Let me show you that there is a good home for your baby if you can't do it.' maybe then things would be better." Why people assume that pro-life people don't care about the mother and the child after birth is beyond me. I have never called a mother a murdered, I never will. My family and I have helped more than 10 [more like 18--I checked out records] children by being a foster family. We took care of them until they were either adopted or went back with their mother. You're right, if only there were more. There are plenty of people out there doing a world of good, but we do need more. Come join us at a UCSFL meeting if you are interested. We meet first and third Wed. at 6:30 in TUC. (No more meetings until Winter Quarter resumes).
This article was taken from the University of Cincinnati Student Newspaper, The News Record Jan.6-7, 1998.
Back to the Main Page