Even “Pro-Choice” People Know Abortion Stops a Beating Heart

Life News ^ | 7/11/12 | Lucy LeFever

[wagglebee]

Would you be surprised if I told you this quote came from a pro-abortion advocate? Well, it did. Here is the quote in its context from Salon’s recent interview with Choices Women’s Medical Center President Merle Hoffman:

“Interestingly, although the standard pro-choice line is essentially to let the woman define the embryo or fetus for herself, Hoffman has a more controversial stance: ‘In the beginning they were calling it a baby. We were saying it was only blood and tissue. Let’s agree this is a life form, a potential life; you’re terminating it. You don’t have to argue that abortion stops a beating heart. It does.’ She adds, ‘I can’t say it’s just like an appendectomy. It isn’t. It’s a very powerful and loaded decision.’

But it’s a decision that she believes is irrevocably the woman’s, which in turn informs the rabid opposition to it: ‘The act of abortion positions women at their most powerful, and that’s why it is so strongly opposed by so many in society,’ she writes in ‘Intimate Wars.’”

As the Salon article acknowledges, this is not the standard pro-choice stance. Often the abortion debate boils down to a disagreement on the humanity of the unborn child. But here Hoffman agrees with the typical pro-life view that abortion is not like other medical procedures, as it takes a life and stops a beating heart.

I am pro-life because of the humanity of the unborn child. Hoffman is pro-choice despite the humanity of the unborn child. Though more medically honest, this stance on abortion is far more frightening than the average pro-choice stance.

Admitting that abortion ends the life of a human being and still advocating for it sets a very dangerous precedent for our society. Who are we to determine whose heart is allowed to beat and whose is not? Every major social injustice, be it genocide, slavery, or oppression, starts with this terrible assumption, this belief that some humans are less deserving of fundamental rights than others. Even if abortion “positions women at their most powerful,” taking innocent human life is a power that none of us should have or desire.

Though she initially acknowledged abortion for what it is, Hoffman followed her honesty about abortion in the interview with euphemistic language about abortion. Below are two of the descriptions that she used:

“‘You know how many women have had abortions?’ Hoffman says. ‘Abortion is as American as apple pie. I think it’s one in three.’”

So because abortion is common, it’s American? Abortion is popular in nations across the globe, so clearly popularity alone does not determine what is an American trait. Actually, when one looks to the common definitions of American, one sees abortion goes against everything that is truly American.

American ideals include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, whereas abortion takes away life, thus, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. American’s pledge to a nation with “liberty and justice for all,” while abortion denies liberty and justice for some. America is constantly defined by freedom, but abortion takes away all freedom from a very tiny American — an American who will never vote, never watch fireworks on the Fourth of July, and never taste apple pie.

“With my choice I was fighting for the right of all women to define abortion as an act of love: love for the family one already has, and just as important, love for oneself. I was fighting to reclaim abortion as a mother’s act.”

An act of love?

Hoffman clarifies that she is speaking about love for oneself and other family members, while love for the aborted child is completely overlooked. She already conceded that abortion stops a beating heart — which definitely is not loving the child. Love is sacrificial. Love puts the needs of others first, rather than focusing on personal convenience. Calling abortion “love” is the literal enactment of loving someone (oneself) to death.

But let’s look at the two kinds of love that were addressed: love for one’s born family and love for oneself.

For oneself, Hoffman ignores the large number of women who feel pain and regret following an abortion. Whether their symptoms are nightmares, depression, or just the feeling of someone missing from their life, none of these common symptoms are evidence that abortion was an act of love toward the women who aborted.

As for love toward one’s born family, abortion still is not the answer. Let’s put this into perspective: If a parent killed one of their born children so they could better take care of another, would the living child consider that an act of love? It is not loving to end the life of one’s brother, sister, son or daughter — born or unborn.

Abortion stops a beating heart. Once that is admitted, it is neither an “American” action, a “loving” action, or an action that should be permitted in our society.

LifeNews.com Note: Lucy LeFever is a Live Action contributing writer. This column appeared at the Live Action blog and is reprinted with permission.

[wagglebee]

“With my choice I was fighting for the right of all women to define abortion as an act of love: love for the family one already has, and just as important, love for oneself. I was fighting to reclaim abortion as a mother’s act.”

Abortion is an act of MURDER, it IS NOT love.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[Carbonsteel]

I used to think that the reason so many people supported unfettered abortion was the fact that everyone in the country had bought into the false narrative that an unborn child is simply a clump of cells. This is what we were even taught in high school.

Unfortunately, most of us now know that an unborn child is not just a clump of cells. Beyond that, we know that fetal development is far more advanced even in the early stages and that the heart, nervous system and pain centers are some of the first parts of a human to develop.

With everything we now know about fetal development, I'm really surprised that more people haven’t switched sides on the abortion debate. This is where our education system and media have once again let us down, since they constantly bury anything that puts abortion in a negative light.

[Excellence]

‘The act of abortion positions women at their most powerful...'

Actually, it's the opposite.

[Covenantor]

I was in my senior year of high school when this issue of Life Magazine was published on April 30, 1965. Unless you were sentient at that time you have no idea what an astounding event this was. It was in it's own way as momentous as the moon landing. Forty-seven years later it was easier to recall then the date of my first marriage.

Eight years after these photos were revealed to the world in 1973 the United States Supreme Court made their ruling in Roe vs Wade, opening the flood gates of the mass murders of innocents.

And this wretched creature attempts to escape the brutal truth of her actions by standing truth on its head and proclaiming, "...and just as important, love for oneself. I was fighting to reclaim abortion as a mother's act."

A mother's act?

No.

No, not a mother's act, just an abased act of self love, as though likening yourself to the morning star, clothed in light, unmoored from the rest of humanity.

[docbnj]

OK, I will give some credit to this particular pro-abortionist for cutting through the denials usually heard from the abortion lobby. This clarifies the issues.

She continues to support abortion on grounds which now are at the heart of the issue, and can be challenged clearly and logically, as well as from a religious and moral standpoint.

Abortionists devalue the potential of the unborn. Apparently their viewpoint is restricted is its focus in its immediate state: its future potential means nothing. A mature person looks forward to the future: plans for the future consider ultimate consequences. There is a huge moral, as well as practical distinction in these outlooks.

Even an investor considers not only the present state of an opportunity, but its potential for growth. That is a mere material consideration. So why should we not consider the moral value of life, which always has a potential future?

But the abortion lobby reveals real evil by continuing to support the rare and completely unnecessary act of “partial-birth abortion.” That is baby killing with no excuse at all, except that it might tend to crimp the style of the abortion racket and its proponents by setting even the most obvious limitation. That is why partial-birth abortion is so telling in the abortion controversy — and for me, personally, it is the thing which especially went to shaping my views on abortion in general.

Love, by the way, is outward: the individual considering the good of others, and giving to nourish people outside of oneself. Of course, one must have a healthy individual life in order to love in a healthy way.

Self love, on the other hand, is an in-turning. It is placing ego at the center. It is perhaps the most common (and growing) religious viewpoint in the country: worship of self. So I give very little credit to an argument that abortion is an act of love, supposedly because it is self-love, which is good. A murderer could argue the same way. “I killed granny for her inheritance, as an act of self-love for myself, and my current family.” I don’t think that this argument can stand up by any sort of moral logic.

[docbnj]

OK, I will give some credit to this particular pro-abortionist for cutting through the denials usually heard from the abortion lobby. This clarifies the issues.

She continues to support abortion on grounds which now are at the heart of the issue, and can be challenged clearly and logically, as well as from a religious and moral standpoint.

Abortionists devalue the potential of the unborn. Apparently their viewpoint is restricted is its focus in its immediate state: its future potential means nothing. A mature person looks forward to the future: plans for the future consider ultimate consequences. There is a huge moral, as well as practical distinction in these outlooks.

Even an investor considers not only the present state of an opportunity, but its potential for growth. That is a mere material consideration. So why should we not consider the moral value of life, which always has a potential future?

But the abortion lobby reveals real evil by continuing to support the rare and completely unnecessary act of “partial-birth abortion.” That is baby killing with no excuse at all, except that it might tend to crimp the style of the abortion racket and its proponents by setting even the most obvious limitation. That is why partial-birth abortion is so telling in the abortion controversy — and for me, personally, it is the thing which especially went to shaping my views on abortion in general.

Love, by the way, is outward: the individual considering the good of others, and giving to nourish people outside of oneself. Of course, one must have a healthy individual life in order to love in a healthy way.

Self love, on the other hand, is an in-turning. It is placing ego at the center. It is perhaps the most common (and growing) religious viewpoint in the country: worship of self. So I give very little credit to an argument that abortion is an act of love, supposedly because it is self-love, which is good. A murderer could argue the same way. “I killed granny for her inheritance, as an act of self-love for myself, and my current family.” I don’t think that this argument can stand up by any sort of moral logic.

[HIDEK6]

Abortion is a question of precedence of rights, not when life starts.

It's this argument we must win.

[MrB]

“‘You know how many women have had abortions?’ Hoffman says. ‘Abortion is as American as apple pie. I think it’s one in three.’”

These people are so steeped in irony that I just have to shake my head. Whenever someone is engaged in evil, they always try to include as many others in their evil as possible so that they aren't standing alone in their wickedness. Now, check this out:

Satan took 1/3 of the angels of heaven with him when he chose to rebel... "one in three".

[MrB]

That’s the way the argument with pro-aborts needs to be framed. Make them defend the concept that one human has the right to take the life of another because that life is not convenient.

Also, remember the most vehement pro-aborts are had-aborts. They KNOW they’ve committed murder, and they have two choices in life - repent before God, or spend their life in rebellion to Him justifying the murder. Most will encourage others to “join” them in their murderous state.