Posted on 09/23/2003 2:19:56 AM PDT by sarcasm
ALL OF BRITAIN was buzzing last week after a tabloid published highly controversial photos — not of a topless supermodel or two female pop singers kissing or Prince William in a grass skirt, but of angelic babies smiling in the womb.
The ultrasound images, taken between 26 and 34 weeks after conception, were released by Professor Stuart Campbell and widely circulated on the Internet via the Drudge Report. Campbell’s an obstetrician at the privately run Create Health Centre in London. For the past two years, the medical facility has offered state-of-the-art 3-D/4-D scanning equipment services to expectant parents. Campbell performs an average of 30 scans a week. His outspoken enthusiasm for this blessed technology is refreshing. “Parents love them,” he told the Mirror. “I hear so many couples laughing when they see the pictures — it’s wonderful.”
Campbell’s high-tech window to the womb also shows the babies moving their limbs at 8 weeks, leaping and turning by 12 weeks, curling their toes and fingers at 15 weeks, and yawning at 20 weeks. The clients’ reactions are overwhelming, Campbell said, “especially with fathers, who rarely get involved. Before, they sat in the corner. Now, they really show emotion. I enjoy scanning and looking at babies. It is so informative about babies and behavior. Every scan is an adventure.”
How have pro-abortion activists abroad reacted after seeing the happy, grinning photos of these unborn babies? With reflexive scowls and dour grimaces, naturally.
Anne Karpf, a commentator for the British-based Guardian who bills herself as a “medical sociologist,” says the photos are “deeply disquieting” and ridicules the anti-abortion lobby for being “intoxicated with evidence of a fetus’ humanity.” (God forbid this cold woman ever be exposed to a pregnant mommy experiencing the undiluted joy of a baby kicking inside her for the first time.) Australian Birth Control Services medical director Geoff Brodie complained that the photos “will be picked up by those groups that use anything and everything to stop terminations but ignore the fact that women have a right to choice.”
Here in America, the pro-abortion lobby is having the same toxic reaction. It was bad enough when conventional, 2-D sonograms revealed unborn hearts beating and blurry hands waving, but the abortionists are absolutely aghast over rapidly spreading access to 3-D/4-D ultrasound technology. When General Electric began running incredibly moving ads last year celebrating the company’s new innovations in sonography, a writer for the liberal American Prospect complained the commercials were “a milieu of clever illusion” that “blur(red) the distinction between a fetus and a newborn infant.”
This from the masters of deception who gave us the infamous euphemisms “fetal matter” and “uterine tissue,” which have successfully blurred the distinction between human life and disposable Kleenex for more than three decades.
Similarly, pro-abortion advocates have attacked legislation in Congress, introduced by Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns, which would guarantee free ultrasound screenings to any woman who visits a non-profit crisis pregnancy center that receives subsidies for sonogram equipment. Kathryn Allen, Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, griped, “With all the problems going on in our world, I can’t imagine that Congress would spend its time and energy on ultrasound for anyone.”
Allison Herwitt, director of government relations for NARAL Pro-Choice America in Washington, also attacked pro-life supporters of the bill. “They don’t want women to go to Planned Parenthood, where they’ll get their full range of options,” said Alison Herwitt. “They just want them to go to crisis pregnancy centers, where women will be exposed to this weapon at taxpayers’ expense.”
Liberals in America are all for the government giving away any health services for free — except if it’s a service that has the ability to persuade a wavering patient to preserve a life instead of end it.
These amazing advances in golden-hued ultrasound have illuminated an insurmountable truth: No amount of NARAL money or National Organization for Women screeching can overcome the persuasive power of an unborn child’s beaming face.
Michelle Malkin is author of “Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores” (Regnery).
Once a woman sees that what she carries in her belly is not an "unviable tissue mass"-- but a baby- the pro-death arguments fade like shadows before the sunlight:
(parenthesis mine)
Yup! Got that right, witch!
This is wonderful!
It removes any doubt from the equation. These women are not killing "blobs of fetal tissue" they are killing babies.
Their "right to choose" is definitely in the ropes and will not last much longer.
Well, using their logic, I have a right to terminate that guy's life also. He's simply a blob of tissue that somehow escaped a womb.
Lucky guy, though. No matter how evil I think he is, I choose life.
Marie's Husband
Snidely
Evil finds truth to be "deeply disquieting". Good. Live with it. Squirm. Screech. Feel uncomfortable. Lay awake at night thinking about it. It's good for ya. And, you deserve it.
Smilin' back at ya, kid...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.