From Associates

• Children of God for Life—A number of articles have appeared in the media recently regarding vaccines, including Merck’s recall of more than a million doses of the Hib vaccine and information that HPV does not cause cervical cancer. Read the most recent information on COG for Life’s website at www.cogforlife.org.

• LIFE-CAN, Inc.—Edward Daccarett, director of LIFE-CAN, recently wrote a letter to the editor of the TC Palm. See the letter, “Planned Parenthood uses euphemisms to shroud its abortion activities,” at http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2007/dec/12/letter-planned-parenthood-uses-euphemisms-shroud-i/

Tip of the Month – How many abortions are necessary?
By ALL Staff

The idea of a total ban on all abortions makes some people uncomfortable. After all, we've been told for years that there are situations in which abortion, though a poor choice, is the best option. That, however, is untrue. Abortion always claims a human being's life, and therefore is never an appropriate choice. Legislation that acknowledges this fact should be supported and encouraged.

The "big lie" theory says if an untrue statement is repeated often enough, people will start to accept it as truth. Such is the case with the erroneous mantra that abortion must be permitted in cases of rape, incest, fetal deformity and threat to the mother's life. This brief presentation will look at each of those situations and explain why the statement is in error.

Rape and incest

Rape and incest are similar in the sense that both are criminal acts. In our system of justice, we punish the criminal. We do not punish the victim, nor do we punish the criminal's children. We are told, however, that if pregnancy occurs as a result of rape or incest, offering the victim an abortion is the compassionate thing to do. No woman should be "forced to carry that monster's child," we are told.

The trauma of sexual assault is very real, and there is no intention here to downplay that. Abortion carries its own variety of trauma, however; women—even those who were victims of sexual assault—have reported years of physical, emotional and psychological difficulty following their abortions. Abortion did not solve their problem; it merely created additional ones.

There is also the very important fact that abortion takes the life of a living human being. The circumstances of conception may have been criminal, but the life of the newly-created human being is just as valuable as any other person's. We do not put criminals' innocent children to death in our culture; it simply isn't done. It should not be done in this situation, either.

Fetal abnormality

Expectant parents can treat a diagnosis of fetal deformity or other form of birth defect almost as if it were death itself. It is not a physical death, but a death of hopes and dreams. Visions of a "normal" childhood—playing games, going to school, growing up and starting families of their own—vanish in a flash. Parents in this moment of despair are often told they should simply go ahead and terminate the pregnancy and get on with their lives.

The first problem here is that medical opinions can be just that—opinions. There are countless cases of parents who permitted their children to live and found out at birth that the experts were wrong. Also, imagine the horror of the parents who abort their child, only to see that they had destroyed a perfect baby. That is simply too difficult to comprehend.

Abortions in cases of fetal abnormality, however, are just like all other abortions. They take the lives of innocent human beings. Abortions in these cases raise frightening prospects, for if it is all right to kill a disabled person in the womb, could it one day be considered permissible to kill a disabled infant? A disabled adult? The answer is clearly "no" in those cases; why is there any question when the victim is a child in the womb?

The mother's life

This excuse for allowing abortion sounds reasonable. If the pregnancy is threatening the mother's life, it would seem that lethal force—an abortion—would be a permissible form of self-defense. The child is not really "attacking" the mother, but his presence puts her at risk. It sounds like a good argument, but it simply isn't true.

Hundreds of doctors have signed a statement that puts the situation in perspective. The statement reads, "There is never a situation in the law or in the ethical practice of medicine where a preborn child's life need be intentionally destroyed by procured abortion for the purpose of saving the life of the mother. A physician must do everything possible to save the lives of both of his patients, mother and child. He must never intend the death of either."

A tubal pregnancy, for instance, can indeed be life-threatening. But the treatment, even if it is fatal to the child, is not a "procured abortion." The doctor wants to save the baby, but knows that is unlikely. The baby's death is an unintended consequence of the physician's effort to save the mother. There are similar cases involving the treatment of cancer in which the baby's death can be an unintended consequence. But again, these are medical treatments, not abortion.

There is only one purpose for abortion—ending the pregnancy by ending the life of the child. The "life of the mother" situation for abortion is simply bogus.

Never "necessary"

Science has shown us that a human being's life begins at fertilization. At this point, a new person with unique DNA, different from both parents, comes into existence. Each of us began this way. Each of us has inherent value and dignity that were vested in us at the moment our lives began. Would we, today, say that there may have been a legitimate reason for our mothers to abort us? Not likely.

Each of the situations described here is difficult. Each of these situations brings challenges that require strength and courage to overcome. But none of these situations require the issuance of a death warrant for another human being. And that's why the number of "necessary" abortions is zero.

News

• Abortionist tells medical students to lie to patients

  Last month, Dr. Alberto Hodari spoke to students at Wayne State in Detroit about his career performing abortions. In his speech, Hodari told students that doctors have a license to lie to their patients. The video of the entire speech, which took place on November 9, complete with captions, has now been released on Google Video.

  Also in the speech, Hodari talks about going to Mexico to do experiments on pregnant women that were outlawed in the United States. He invited students to come watch an abortion he performed and he also spoke about how little he washed between abortions because it chafed his hands.
  

• Abortion triples chances of future low birth weight babies, new study confirms

Women who have had an abortion run three times the normal risk of having a subsequent low birth weight baby, suggests research in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. The study titled "Previous abortion and the risk of low birth weight and preterm births" is published in the January 2008 edition of the journal on pages 16-22.

The more abortions a woman has, the greater are her chances of giving birth to a child that is underweight or premature in the future, the research shows. Low birth weight (under 2500 g) and premature birth (less than 37 weeks) are two of the major contributors to deaths among newborn babies and infants.

The authors used data from the United States Collaborative Perinatal Project, which was set up in 1959 to look at the associations between factors during pregnancy and birth and childhood development. In total, more than 45,500 mother and child pairs were assessed. Nearly 40% of the mothers had one or two children and almost two thirds were between 20 and 29 years of age.

Women who had had one, two, or three or more abortions in the past were almost three, five, and nine times as likely to give birth to an underweight child as those without previous abortions. Similarly, women who had one abortion were 67% more likely to have a premature birth, while those who had had three or more were over three times as likely to do so compared with those with no history of abortion.

The authors acknowledge that previous research has been inconclusive, with some studies reporting no increased risk while others have found a significantly increased risk. Nevertheless, women and healthcare professionals should be aware of the potential risks, they conclude.

Click here to view the paper in full.

See also: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1695927,00.html

 

The angel said to them, "Don’t be afraid! I am here with good news for you, which will bring great joy to all the people. This very day in David’s town your Savior was born—Christ the Lord! And this is what will prove it to you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger."

– Luke 2:10-12