Abortion

To my fellow humans who are entering that most precarious stage of human development.

Let me begin by congratulating you on making it through the embryonic stage. Too many of our fellow humans don’t even make it as far as you have now. Many died of natural causes. Others were cut down prior to implantation by an abortifacient. Still others are trapped in the freezers of IVF clinics, in suspended animation awaiting their fate.

You have made it to the second stage of life. But you’re not out of the woods, as they say, until you’re out of the womb. In America there are roughly 250 abortions for every 1000 live births, which means that you have (all other things being equal) a one in five chance of still being aborted. Here are four reasons you might be aborted and what you can do to avoid this gruesome fate.

#1. Don’t be the unlucky third in series of IVF induced triplets

...To save money on in vitro fertilization, couples can implant several embryos at one time in order to increase the changes of pregnancy and reduce the cost of multiple procedures. Although it lowers the cost, it increases the chances of multiple pregnancies, which increase the risks to both mother and children. As the Washington Post noted several years ago, “Carrying three babies to term would more than double the woman’s risk of developing the most severe diseases of pregnancy, such as preeclampsia. The average triplet is born two months premature, significantly raising the risk of disabilities such as cerebral palsy and of lifelong damage to the infant’s lungs, eyes, brain and other organs.”

Unlike embryos, money can’t be created in a Petri dish. Which is why it is less costly (in economic if not in human terms) to just kill you rather than pay for another round of IVF. They euphemistically refer to this as “selective reduction”— your parents have selected to reduce your chances for survival to zero....

#2 Don’t be anything other than “chromosomally normal”

May our Lord have mercy on your poor fetal soul if you have the misfortune to possess a chromosomal abnormality. Once you make it out of the womb you can be filled to the brim with bile—indeed you can rape, pillage, plunder, and murder—and you’ll have people defending your right to live. But right now if they measure the fluid behind your neck using a nuchal scan and discover you have too much—well, you’re as good as dead. Such a test reveals that you may have the unforgivable condition of Down syndrome....

#3 Don’t be a girl
Speaking of chromosomes, be sure you have a Y chromosome to go along with the X. If you have the misfortune of being of the homogametic sex you have an increased risk of being killed. It may not be a concern if your parents are white, black, or Hispanic. But if you’re parents are Chinese, Japanese, Indian, or Filipino you may be in trouble....

#4 Don’t squint
Several years ago in England, doctors were given permission to create a baby free from a genetic disorder which would have caused the child to have a severe squint. According to the Daily Telegraph, the license was granted by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to Prof Gedis Grudzinskas. The good professor said he would seek to screen for any genetic factor at all that would cause a family severe distress....

I would like to add to Joe Carter's list of what-not-to-do or-be as a fetus:

#5 Do not have cystic fibrosis.

Even though the average life expectancy of someone with CF is now 37.4 years old with many people living into their 40s and beyond (not to mention the possibility of improved treatment in the coming decades), many fetuses with CF are aborted.  (I personally know a child with CF that has no symptoms of the disease.)  Even so many parents of CF fetuses (including the aforementioned child) are pressured to abort.  So if you are a fetus with CF watch out!

#6 Do not have a club foot, webbed fingers or toes, or cleft palate.

Even though these conditions are easily corrected with surgery, stories of later term abortions in England indicate that having any of these conditions puts your life in jeopardy.

#7 Do not have a genetic predisposition for adult onset disease.

There are genetic factors that put some people at risk for breast or colon cancer, even obesity.  More and more fetuses are being aborted for a genetic predisposition to a disease they may not get until they are an adult and even then may have a cure by then.  So even if you may never develop breast or colon cancer or become obese, you may still be aborted.  Lori B. Andrews, a well-known reproductive rights lawyer, reports that one study has as many as 12% of parents reporting they would abort their fetus if they had a genetic predisposition to obesity.

#8 Do not get implanted in the wrong uterus.

If you started your life as an IVF embryo and you get implanted in a uterus other then your mom's, watch out.  Last year a woman aborted another couple's last embryo when it was implanted into her uterus by mistake.

When society rejects life it is always the women who feel the impact.  From the exploitation of women's bodies for embryonic stem cell research and cloning to forced abortions in China, from the aftermath of legal abortion to gender selection, girls get short end of the stick.

It makes sense that women would be marginalized in a pro-death world.  We grow life.  If life isn't desired, than neither are we.

Everyone know about the preference for boys in China and how sex selective abortions and infanticide have caused an imbalance in favor of males.  A new Economist article challenges the idea that this phenomenon is limited to China or to impoverished areas.  They are reporting that millions of girls are being aborted in countries all over the world and in higher economic brackets than previous thought.  From the article:

Gendercide—to borrow the title of a 1985 book by Mary Anne Warren—is often seen as an unintended consequence of China’s one-child policy, or as a product of poverty or ignorance. But that cannot be the whole story. The surplus of bachelors—called in China guanggun, or “bare branches”— seems to have accelerated between 1990 and 2005, in ways not obviously linked to the one-child policy, which was introduced in 1979. And, as is becoming clear, the war against baby girls is not confined to China.

Parts of India have sex ratios as skewed as anything in its northern neighbour. Other East Asian countries—South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan—have peculiarly high numbers of male births. So, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, have former communist countries in the Caucasus and the western Balkans. Even subsets of America’s population are following suit, though not the population as a whole.

The real cause, argues Nick Eberstadt, a demographer at the American Enterprise Institute, a think-tank in Washington, DC, is not any country’s particular policy but “the fateful collision between overweening son preference, the use of rapidly spreading prenatal sex-determination technology and declining fertility.” These are global trends. And the selective destruction of baby girls is global, too.

(Actually, it is the practice of abortion that destroys baby girls not prenatal technology, but I digress.)  In fact, the higher the income the MORE likely that gendercide takes place:

The spread of fetal-imaging technology has not only skewed the sex ratio but also explains what would otherwise be something of a puzzle: sexual disparities tend to rise with income and education, which you would not expect if “backward thinking” was all that mattered. In India, some of the most prosperous states—Maharashtra, Punjab, Gujarat—have the worst sex ratios. In China, the higher a province’s literacy rate, the more skewed its sex ratio. The ratio also rises with income per head.

So modernisation and rising incomes make it easier and more desirable to select the sex of your children. And on top of that smaller families combine with greater wealth to reinforce the imperative to produce a son. When families are large, at least one male child will doubtless come along to maintain the family line. But if you have only one or two children, the birth of a daughter may be at a son’s expense. So, with rising incomes and falling fertility, more and more people live in the smaller, richer families that are under the most pressure to produce a son.

And with a gender imbalance in favor of males comes a large population of unmarried men.  In the next decade, that unmarried Chinese male population will be the same as the entire population of males in America.  With these 'bare branches" as the bachelors are called, comes a higher rate of violent crime including bride abduction, the trafficking of women, rape and prostitution.  So women are not only being killed in the womb, but also abused outside the womb.  And the trend will only get worse.

Abortion was supposed to "liberate" women.  But with a rejection of life and a preference for males, comes the death and abuse of millions of women around the globe.

Which makes me want to scream "Equal rights for unborn women!"

Fetal Tweet

The monitoring system used to detect fetal kicking is now being marketed as a way to remotely monitor fetal movements. I can see Kickbee being very useful at the end of pregnancy in place of counting fetal movements as many women are forced to do every night to make sure their baby is not going into fetal distress.

I am just wondering what the pro-abort crowd thinks of this business.  It is kinda hard for a fetus to tweet unless they are live, separate organism.

Hat Tip: ScienceRoll

Abby Johnson, the Director of the Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas, resigned in October citing a change of heart about abortion and the practices of Planned Parenthood.  From KBTX.com:

Planned Parenthood has been a part of Abby Johnson's life for the past eight years; that is until last month, when Abby resigned. Johnson said she realized she wanted to leave, after watching an ultrasound of an abortion procedure.

"I just thought I can't do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that's it," said Jonhson.

According to Johnson, the non-profit was struggling under the weight of a tough economy, and changing it's business model from one that pushed prevention, to one that focused on abortion.

"It seemed like maybe that's not what a lot of people were believing any more because that's not where the money was. The money wasn't in family planning, the money wasn't in prevention, the money was in abortion and so I had a problem with that," said Johnson.

Johnson said she was told to bring in more women who wanted abortions...

Prolifers have known for years that Planned Parenthood was all about making money from abortions.  This testimony from a former director confirms this.

Abby Johnson's statement, in my opinion, also sheds new light on the Consumer Reports condom ratings of 23 different condoms.  Two out of the three condoms passed out by Planned Parenthood rated POOR in strength and one rated POOR in both strength and reliability.  In fact, of the 23 condoms rated by Consumer Reports, the condoms passed out by Planned Parenthood rated dead last.

What a racket.  First, they give you a "poor" condom so you can have "safe" sex, then when you get your girlfriend pregnant, they can charge you for an abortion.  Dare I say that they are planning to make you a parent?

Hat Tip: Wesley J Smith at First Things

Neocutis states that this was a one time harvesting of fetal cells from only one abortion and they will never have to sample an aborted baby again.  They also argue that because fetal tissue has been important in the past, and if it is done responsibly, that research on electively aborted fetal tissue is fine.  In their statement about the responsible use of fetal tissue, Neocutis argues:

Since the 1930s, the international medical community has used donated fetal tissue to better understand cell biology and as an essential tool in the development of vaccines, which are credited with saving millions of lives worldwide. The 1954 Nobel Prize for medicine was awarded to researchers who utilized fetal kidney cells to develop the polio vaccine. Soon, patients who have suffered a severe burn, leg ulcer or wound—or are recovering from surgery—will heal faster, more safely and with far less scarring thanks to the emergence of new treatments developed from cultured fetal skin cells. Our view—which is shared by most medical professionals and patients—is that the limited, prudent and responsible use of donated fetal skin tissue can continue to ease suffering, speed healing, save lives, and improve the well-being of many patients around the globe.

They are right that fetal tissue is a valuable tool for research and has saved lives.  But a distinction must be made between fetal tissue that comes from an elective abortion and fetal tissue that comes from a spontaneous abortion more commonly called a miscarriage. Using fetal tissue obtained from a miscarriage donated by parents is morally acceptable just as using organs from a child who died in an accident is morally permissible, even laudable. 

But, just as harvesting organs from a death row inmate is morally wrong, so is harvesting tissue from a fetus that was electively aborted.  As with embryonic stem cell research, many people argue that if a human organism is "going to die anyway" it is morally permissible to harvest their biological material for research or for use in other humans.  Neocutis even says that their fetus wouldn't have made to to term anyway so it was fine to kill it first and use the skin for their products. 

The Catholic Church and others rightly reject this argument because we are ALL "going to die anyway."  Not a one of us is going to make it out alive.  The "going to die anyway" argument makes us all look like harvestable biological material at some point in our lives. 

In other words, if it requires that the life of a human organism be purposefully terminated to obtain the desired tissue, then it is immoral to use the tissues obtained for research or for organ transplants.  This seems like a no brainer ethically, but some people do not understand the subtly. 

Neocutis uses the weight of the polio vaccine to bolster what they believe is the moral high ground.  The reality is that the fetal cells needed for such experiments can come from an ethical source, namely a spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. 

Neocutis had a choice to used fetal cells from a miscarried fetus, but they choose to use the cells of a murdered fetus instead.

As with vaccines, we Catholics are charged with finding out whether the products that we use or that our doctor prescribes are produced ethically.  In the case of Neocutis, their Bio-restorative Skin Cream, JOURNÉE Bio-restorative Day Cream, LUMIÈRE Bio-restorative Eye Cream and BIO-GEL Bio-restorative Hydrogel products are unethically produced.  Catholics and other pro-lifers should not use these products and should discourage anyone they know from using them.

Hat Tip: Prolife Blogs

It never ceases to amaze me how terminology about pregnancy changes depending on whether the life growing inside is "wanted" or not.  If the pregnancy is undesired then the embryo or fetus inside a woman is simply a part of her body that she can dispose of if she wants.  If the pregnancy is desired, then the embryo or fetus is considered a separate organism from the mother.  Case in point, this article from The Scientist about preventing miscarriage which headline proclaims that embryos and fetuses are foreigners that needs safeguarding:

Safeguarding the Foreigner Within: A newly found cause of miscarriage raises hopes for treatment, using a drug already on the market for other indications.

...Many researchers suspect that the mother’s immune response actually accounts for as many as 80% of unexplained cases [of miscarriage]. Fetuses express paternal antigens early in development, which triggers the immune systems of some mothers to attack the embryo as foreign, just as it would a bacterium or virus. Pregnancy requires tolerance of these foreign fetal antigens encoded by paternal genes.

Interesting.  So an embryo inside its mother is as foreign to her body as a baterium or virus.  But that means that the embryo is NOT her body, but a separate human organism growing inside her.  Crazy.

The USCCB looks forward to working with you to reform health care successfully in a manner that offers accessible, affordable and quality health care that protects and respects the life and dignity of all people from conception until natural death.

How can the USCCB "look forward" to working for health care that "protects and respects the life and dignity of all people from conception until natural death" with a government that DOES NOT "protect and respect the life and dignity of all people from conception until natural death."

And here in lies the problem.  Before we can have government-run health care we must have a government that protects human life from conception to natural death.  Health care reform is like a lot of topics I write about in this blog.  Genetic testing, stem cell research, and genetic engineering are great things that have the potential to make our lives better and alleviate suffering.  But NOT with a government that does not protect ALL the human lives in its care.  Genetic testing in such a society leads to the aborting of 80% to 90% of Down Syndrome babies.  Stem cell research in such a country leads to the gutting of human embryos for the common good.  Genetic engineering in such a system will lead to parents ordering up the "perfect child."

Before we can trust the government with our health care, we need to trust the government to protect life from beginning to end.  Right now we cannot do that.  I support health care reform as well.  I want affordable health care for everyone, just like the USCCB, but until our government protects ALL Americans, born or unborn, I cannot support asking the government to do the fixing.  That is, I believe, making a deal with the Devil.

That is why we need fathers to step up, to realize that their job does not end at conception; that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one.

He is absolutely right.  Kudos to our President for having the courage to say it.  But this statement begs the question: if a father's job does not end at conception, does that imply that his job begins at conception?  I believe it does.  But that means a  child's life begins at conception.  This subtle admission outs his "above my pay grade" comment as political speak.  Even the President knows what we all know in our hearts.  Human life begins at conception.  A father's job begins at conception because his child begins at conception.  It is just that simple.  Dave Andrusko writes:

As men we must never let ourself, or any other guy, off with the "society tells us" slogan/excuse. Sure, there are a million ways the message is conveyed that in such a crisis pregnancy situation, the decision is exclusively the woman's. But, deep down, all men know otherwise....

Men can wash their hands of decision-making responsibility--they can abandon the girl/woman-- but not erase their moral and ethical obligations. They can tell themselves that "it's a woman's body," but not quiet the still small voice that tugs at their heart.

I wanted to make a clear statement that as a prolifer, I am outraged and saddened by the murder of Kansas abortionist George Tiller.  The man that killed Tiller in front of his family and his congregation is not prolife.  When I read that Tiller had been murdered, I actually felt physically sick.

George Tiller's life was worth as much as the women and children that were killed in his clinic.  I am saddened by the taking of his life, as I am theirs.  Unfortunately, no matter how many prolife voices denounce Tiller's murder, this act will be used to paint us all.

I pray for Tiller and his family.  They all need our prayers.

Let's take advantage of our numbers and send PURPLE envelopes to Care Net or Heartbeat Int. If you can't find a purple envelope, use a WHITE envelope and write "Purple Envelope Project" on the back. Here's the twist. Instead of sending empty envelopes, PUT IN 1 DOLLAR.

Just think how much we can raise for CareNet and Heartbeat Int. if everyone who sent a red envelope to the White House sends them a purple envelope!

Write this message:
Thank you for all that you do to protect life. Life begins at conception. We appreciate the work you do that helps women choose life. God bless you and your work.

This, like the Red Envelope Project, is something that you can do with your family. Please send your envelope and dollar to one or both of these great organizations.

Here's the addresses:

Care Net PO Box 758530
Topeka, KS 66675-8530

Heartbeat Int.
665 E. Dublin-Granville Road, Suite 440,
Columbus, OH 43229, USA

Nice work!  Thank-you to everyone who sent President Obama a Red Envelope!  From World Net Daily:

The White House mail office has confirmed it received a "deluge" of as many as 2.25 million red envelopes symbolizing the empty promise of lives snuffed out in abortion in a massive campaign that was larger than most White House mailing movements in the last 35 years.

White House mail worker "Steve" has handled letters for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. for more than three decades. Every single package and letter destined for the White House goes through his office.

Asked if he has seen a flood of red envelopes bound for the White House, Steve chuckled.

"Uh, yes," he said emphatically. "Believe me, they made it here."

Steve said while Obama has been occupied in Europe, his administration has noticed millions of red envelopes on behalf of aborted children.

"Quite frankly, there was definitely a deluge of mail coming through," he laughed. "I had to handle them all."

"I've been here 35 years, so I've seen presidents come and go," Steve told WND. "This campaign ranks up there with the big ones."

The Red Envelope Project.  My family has sent ours.  Go to a grocery store, pharmacy or card shop.  Find a red envelope and do the following:

On the front, address it to:

DON'T FORGET YOUR RETURN ADDRESS. THEY WON'T BE DELIVERED WIHOUT IT.

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington , D.C. 20500

On the back, write the following message.

This envelope represents one child who died in abortion. It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world. Responsibility begins with conception.

Put it in the mail on March 31st, and send it. Then send this website to every one of your friends who you think would send one too. I wish we could send 50 million red envelopes, one for every child who died before having a a chance to live. Maybe it will change the heart of the president.

A few months ago, this writer lost her fifth child to miscarriage.  I was not planning on blogging about it at all until I read something that made me thankful for my local Catholic hospital.

I tried to deal with the miscarriage without any medical intervention, but I was far enough along in my pregnancy that after two weeks, it was clear that I was going to need a D&C.  I was conflicted and exhausted.  I had always associated the term "D&C" with abortion, so my level of stress was pretty high.

I could not believe the compassion I received from the staff of the very busy outpatient surgery center.  From the phlebotomist to the nurses to the anesthesiologist, they all introduced themselves and then immediately said they were sorry for my loss.  My care and comfort were clearly a high priority and even though I was in a highly tuned and productive facility, I never once felt like I was in a production line.

I was sent home with a bag full information on miscarriage and available grief counseling.  Not only did I receive sympathy cards from my doctor's office which I expected, but the hospital had informed my General Practitioner immediately and the GP's had called to offer their condolences.  A few days later, I even received a card hand-written by a hospital staff member expressing sympathy from the entire hospital staff.

It was clear that this Catholic hospital, which still rings a bell across campus every time a baby is born, viewed my miscarriage as a profound loss just as I did.

It was not until I read this letter from Katie to the providers at the LoveJoy Surgi Center, did I realize how much the Catholic respect for life was a cornerstone to the care I received.  Katie had aborted her baby diagnosed with Trisomy 13.  Here is her account of how she was treated:

I was 22 weeks pregnant with a little boy who had Trisomy 13 Robertsonian Translocation. When I walked in to talk to the counselor about the termination, she had NO idea why I was there. I myself, had to inform her because she did NOT read my charts before I entered her room. It was hard enough being there, never mind giving an explanation as to why I was there....

We came in NO COMPASSION from any of the employees at all. I was completely terrified. My mother and my loving boyfriend were there with me. Well we got into the waiting room with the gurney beds, got into gown, cap and the paper shoes. The anesthesiologist came in just kind of monotone, no compassion there either, he just shoved the IV in my arm and left. Then someone else came in (not sure who they didn't introduce themselves), and just took the gurney and wheeled it into the surgical room. The only thing I remember is a picture of a mountain/river poster on the ceiling. Well the next thing I knew I was in the "recovery room". Well to this day it still makes me very ANGRY! No one in the surgical room told me there were putting me out! How dare them. How can you people inject something into someone's body without letting them know!

Considering why we "choose" to do the termination because off all the pressure from genetic counselor/DR's/ professionals and the employees of Love Joy Surgi Center. Not a single person had a single bit of encouragement for us to carry a baby with so many anomalies, nothing except for to kill him....

Also not a single professional at Love Joy spoke to me about Grief counseling/after abortion counseling.

Not a lot of love and joy at the LoveJoy Surgi Center.  I am so thankful for my local Catholic hospital.  I am thankful they still regard life as precious.  I just wish Katie had been able to experience their compassion as well.

The striking benefit of a legal trade in fetal organs, unlike adult organs, is that it may provide all of the benefits that supporters desire without resulting in the exploitative harms that opponents fear. Such sales could prove the rare economic transaction in the medical field in which all participating parties can truly be said to benefit.

The first striking feature of fetal organs is that their supply, for all practical purposes, is unlimited. Unlike living kidney donors, who must then advance through life with only one functioning kidney, pregnant women who provide fetal kidneys could do so repeatedly without incurring the medical consequences of adult organ loss.

(Excuse me.  I just threw-up in my mouth a little.) Women would not "provide" fetal organs, their offspring would be ripped apart and their organs would be taken.  Possibly even for a profit.  Where does the "fetus" as a "participating party" benefit in this "economic transaction"?

Appel dismisses the possibility that women might be exploited in this fetal organ market simply because they have "reproductive rights" that will somehow magically protect them:

Would such a marketplace lead to the exploitation of poor women? I imagine those scholars who oppose compensation for surrogate motherhood and oppose the sale of eggs for in-vitro fertilization will argue that a fetal-organ market presents yet another way in which women's wombs might be commandeered under duress for the benefit of a society dominated by men. I would prefer to believe that a market in fetal organs would empower women to use their reproductive capabilities to their own economic advantage. If a woman has the fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy, why not the right to use the products of that terminated pregnancy as she sees fit? Many women would likely use the proceeds of such sales to finance college educations or to help raise their children. While being pregnant and going to college, or being pregnant and looking after a family, is certainly a challenge, who is to say it is any less desirable than pursing these goals while working at Wal-Mart?

Can Appel seriously believe the euphemistic language he hides behind?  Here is a picture of his "products of a terminated pregnancy."  Can he truly believe a woman is better off aborting her child for money than working her way through college at Wal-Mart?  That is an insult to every woman who got pregnant in college and worked her way through without selling her babies for parts.  (I know because I had a crisis pregnancy in college and worked two jobs to finish.)  Does he truly believe that a mother would sell off the body parts of one child to help pay for shoes for her others? 

Talk about insulting and degrading women while pretending to support and empower them.  (And taking a pot shot at the hard working Americans employed at Wal-Mart in the process.)

Appel has to be psychotic to truly espouse such callous nonsense.  Or he is just a closet pro-lifer on the verge of realizing where the door-knob is?

PATERNITY tests are being carried out by DNA laboratories on unborn children while they are still in the womb, enabling their mothers to abort them if they are the product of an extramarital affair.

The service, known as a prenatal paternity test, is being used by hundreds of British women every year, according to one of the laboratories performing it.

Most of the women opting for it have had affairs and are anxious to know whether the child they are carrying was fathered by their partner or their illicit lover.

Some DNA laboratories are refusing to perform the prenatal paternity test, insisting that it is unethical, a view echoed by pro-life campaign groups....

Last week a court heard how Elspeth Chapman spent 17 years believing that an unrelated man was her father, only discovering his true identity in her mother’s diary. It was later confirmed through genetic testing.

To avoid such a situation, some women are resorting to invasive procedures to find out their child’s father.

Okay, I lied. I do have words.  I am still amazed at the logical gymnastics society goes through to justify such horrific behavior.  I mean I am sure Elspeth would rather have been ripped from her mother's womb in pieces then discover that she is not genetically related to the man she thought was her father.  Ridiculous....

This is genetic testing at its worst.

In one of his final actions in the White House, President Bush on Thursday declared Jan. 18 to be “National Sanctity of Human Life Day.”

Photo: AP

“All human life is a gift from our creator that is sacred, unique and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world,” reads the presidential proclamation.

“The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. My administration has been committed to building a culture of life by vigorously promoting adoption and parental notification laws, opposing federal funding for abortions overseas, encouraging teen abstinence and funding crisis pregnancy programs,” the proclamation continues.

“The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. On this day and throughout the year, we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law. We also encourage more of our fellow Americans to join our just and noble cause. History tells us that with a cause rooted in our deepest principles and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens, we will prevail.”

So for the first time, I have been searching for a third party candidate that was truly 100% pro-life and not apologetic about it. I am very impressed with Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party and I believe that I will vote for him. I have meet him personally and I found him to be a man of principle and frankly a breath of fresh air.

Why am I even blogging about this when I know I am asking for all kinds of heat from my fellow pro-lifers who are pulling for McCain and Palin?  Because I want to introduce my readers to Dr. Baldwin and the Constitution Party.  Many pro-lifers know nothing about the party platform and I think they would be shocked to find that there is a truly pro-life party out there.  From the Baldwin08 website:

The pre-born child, whose life begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God's image. The first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments, and that certainly includes the office of the President of the United States, to secure and to safeguard the lives of the pre-born. I affirm the God-given legal person hood of all unborn human beings, without exception.

In addition to guaranteeing the legal person hood of the unborn, Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act, which I wholeheartedly support, would strip the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in all cases of abortion in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2. This would mean that Roe v. Wade would immediately pass away as any legal authority on this issue. There would be no need to worry about putting a Supreme Court on the bench that might eventually make the right decision on this issue. We can, therefore, end legal abortion immediately upon enactment of the Sanctity of Life Act.

Republicans tout themselves as being "pro-life." Yet, the GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House for six years and did absolutely nothing to overturn Roe or end abortion-on-demand. If the Republicans were really serious about being pro-life the could have already ended legal abortion in America. Obviously the Republican Party and most GOP politicians are not serious about ending abortion, but are, regrettably, simply content to perpetuate the issue to manipulate pro-life voters.

Under my administration, we could end legal abortion in a matter of days, not decades. And if Congress refuses to pass Dr. Paul's bill, I will use the constitutional power of the Presidency to deny funds to protect abortion clinics. Either way, legalized abortion ends when I take office.

Here is a video of Chuck Baldwin for you to consider:

"The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.

Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated....

One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the "Dred Scott Case" in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.

Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act."

"How does a wrong position on the dignity of the unborn and the elderly taint a person's perspective on other matters related to social justice?"

And this was essentially my answer:

I rarely use analogies to the Holocaust because I feel they cheapen the horror of what happened under the hands of the National Socialist (NAZI) Party, but I cannot help but seeing one here.

Supporting a pro-choice politician is like a German saying they supported the social, economic and environmental policies of the Nazi party even if they didn't like the fact that the Nazi's supported the mass murder of the Jews, Christians and other "undesirables."  Imagine such a German rationalizing, "The Holocaust isn't the only issue on the ballot"  or "I think the Nazi party is really looking out for the middle class."  It is utter nonsense.

Abortion is not the only issue that is important, but let us keep this in perspective. The 48 million Americans ripped from their mothers' wombs since Roe vs. Wade is the worst atrocity in human history. Any politician that supports the killing of the smallest and most innocent of our species on such a massive scale cannot possibly make life better for the rest of us humans.

The best health care, the best economy, the best social justice system means nothing to the millions of Americans that never made it out of the womb or never will.

Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life. Consider this: The finest health and education systems, the fairest immigration laws, and the soundest economy do nothing for the child who never sees the light of day. It is a tragic irony that “pro-choice” candidates have come to support homicide -- the gravest injustice a society can tolerate -- in the name of “social justice.”

And:

Furthermore, National Right to Life reports that 48.5 million abortions have been performed since 1973. One would be too many. No war, no natural disaster, no illness or disability has claimed so great a price.