I’m tapping this out on Friday night, September 5, 2003. This past week, a murderer of a paid serial killer was executed in Florida. The man executed was convicted using the law and courts to convict and sentence him (to be truthful, the executed murderer actually killed more than just his intended victim). The man he murdered was never tried or convicted of the serial killings he is absolutely known to have committed. The people who paid for the killings were easily identifiable, but were never questioned regarding their solicitations. Why you may ask? … Because the serial killer was an abortionist hired by women to kill their alive, unborn children. That’s perfectly legal in America, and only women are granted that horrible right. The fathers have no legal say, though they may aid in the solicitation and the payment to the serial killer.
Argument has flown hot and heavy at various Internet sites over whether the murderer of the abortionists should have been executed, whether the abortionists was just as guilty of criminal acts against humanity, whether one murderer is more evil than the other. Lost in the sometimes-heated exchanges is the reality that already accomplished dehumanization of the unborn is preparing our nation for deep and abiding wrong. We are on the verge of embracing cannibalism as an enlightened application of science and technology because of the accomplished dehumanization inherent in the abortion industry.
If our legal system recognized the provable humanity of the alive –absolutely alive, or abortionists wouldn’t be need to kill them-- prenatal, a myriad of coming evil exploitations would be easily refuted and repudiated. [I wonder, is cannibalizing alive human beings wrong at this juncture in American History? … If you can persuade someone that the thing being cannibalized is not a human being, there is no contest. And that’s where there is an astonishing disconnect, as you will shortly see.]
When the debate centers upon the degrees of wrong between an abortionist and a murderer of an abortionist, the humanity of the little ones the abortionist has slaughtered tends to fade into the background and become a non-issue. And there are folks who actually seek to accomplish that because they do not believe the abortionist was doing wrong as long as the law protects his serial killing … they used to ignore the truth regarding the unborn because it was expedient to deny the unborn were alive human beings, until the nation became numb to the reality and the numbers grew to the tens-of-millions exterminated. In fact, there are people who do not believe the unborn are yet human beings ‘in full’ and thus it is acceptable to slaughter them to avoid consequences of earlier behavioral laxity. [Applied logically, killing of crib-bound and toddlers could be defended since they are not yet fertile, or fully grown, or fully aware, or … well, you get the picture, dehumanization always has a preferred utility making the category quite palatable.]
In a previous essay (Human Embryo/Human Being), we addressed the truth that even an embryo not yet implanted in a woman’s body is a human being, albeit shaped and arranged very differently from we who live in the air world. Let’s look at the dichotomy now at play in defending embryonic stem cell harvesting and cloning for body parts, for that is precisely what is looming in our approaching future, if men like Orrin Hatch have their way with the law.
Many who support abortion on demand do so under the mantra of ‘a woman’s right to choose’ (they mean choose the serial killer, not earlier choice to expose herself to pregnancy, but that is the grist of another essay). These people of whom I write actually acknowledge the humanity of the little ones the serial killers slaughter, but these same defenders claim the woman has a right to kill that child before it becomes a burden to the woman’s lifestyle. [If you have trouble believing this, catch a read of a recent Glamour Magazine article in which the female writer encourages teen readers to ‘have as much sex as possible and get plenty of sleep, enjoy this magical time of your life. And if you do get pregnant, there is always abortion and forgiveness. And there is much more putrid sludge in the article, but I won’t subject you to it here.] These people even have quasi-religious rituals that they will help the abortion seeker perform toward their alive-unborn prior to the killing! They encourage baptizing the soon to be diced being, and/or write Valentines to the little ones slaughtered to free ‘mommy’ from caregiving. Folks, you don’t baptize a non-human. These people condone the killing because of the expedience and they will readily admit the ‘thing’ being killed is a human being, but assert that a woman must have this right to kill a fellow human being.
Since it is becoming acceptable to kill individual human beings during their earliest age of their individual lifetime, it no longer requires deceit to lobby for the full exploitation of embryonic and fetal individuals when the goal is to treat older individuals! That, dear Reader, is the onset of cannibalism by utilitarian design. That is the evil we now sink toward because we have allowed dehumanization of the unborn under the guise of ‘a woman’s right to choose’ a serial killer to terminate an inconvenient fellow human being sequestered in the womb by no fault or design of the innocent one.
As usual, the Europeans are ahead of we naïve Americans. I wonder how long it will take the liberal politicians to bring us up to speed so we can compete with the Euro-techs and Chicom-labs in the field of cannibalizing the preborn? I’m sure people like Daschle, Kennedy, Harkin, Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards, Clinton, Boxer and Dean have plans already in the works, and they’ll have plenty of help from the likes of Orrin Hatch and Arlen Specter. But is that what we really want to be our final … strike that final, for humankind have depravity potential I cannot even imagine. But is that what We the People really want to be, C-A-N-N-I-B-A-L-S?