We have print, video and, of course, the Internet. Is there any limit to what we know or can know with all the means of transmitting information?

For someone who grew up with print and radio and movies and moved through the introduction of all the other ways of transmitting information, the world we live in is truly marvelous.

But yet! We still have millions of people who find it difficult, if not impossible, to see the truth, even if it hits them in the face.

The most obvious example of this is the issue of abortion.

What is it, and what does it do?

There doesn’t seem to be any argument that the procedure of “abortion” – however it’s carried out – means that particular woman will not end that day facing the reality of having a child.

But the questions continue: What is growing inside of her? When she is considered pregnant? Is it alive? Does abortion “kill” it? If it does, just exactly what is being “killed”? If it is a human life and if it is being deliberately killed, is that a moral and/or legal act? Why or why not?

It’s amazing that with all our means of transmitting information, we are still arguing about the answers to those questions.

To the shock of pro-choice advocates, the movie “Unplanned” turned out to be successful, despite broad efforts to suppress any information about it and to prevent theaters from showing it.

For those of you who may have been under a basket, the movie is the true story of Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood leader who had a change of heart and belief when she realized exactly what an abortion does to the child growing inside the mother. She saw that the child feels pain and reacts to the fact that it is being pulled apart, piece-by-piece, so that it can be killed and removed from its mother.

Hearing former abortion doctors describe how they killed these children makes it clear that what is inside the mother is NOT a blob of tissue. It is a human being in the earliest stages of development, and when the “abortion” kills it, it is clearly that: the killing of a human being.

Yet, not everyone believes that.

Just last week, I heard a radio talk-show host last week expounding on his belief. He had gotten into a discussion with a caller as to the question of abortion and when and IF what the doctor is removing is in fact a human being.

I listened, incredulous, as this well-educated and highly articulate individual declare without any ambivalence that what is removed from the woman is NOT a human being until it is born and breathes, and until it has a birth certificate. He vehemently repeated that it is nothing without a birth certificate!

Without the birth certificate, it is a non-entity; therefore the abortion is legal.

(OK, take a deep breath.)

There was a recent forum at Boston College – a Catholic school – sponsored by the Pro-Life Club at the school.

A pro-choice BC student said that a baby who survives an abortion (in other words, is born alive) should not receive medical care.

As reported in Breitbart, when asked by the moderator, from the Media Research Center if she thought the “baby” was a “baby,” the girl said “no.”

Her reasoning was that since it hadn’t been born yet and an abortion was being performed, it had already been decided that it isn’t a baby.

When asked how an abortionist can decide that it isn’t a baby, the student said it was because “it hadn’t been born yet.”

Remember, this is a student at a Catholic College, and abortion is considered by Catholics to be a mortal sin.

While many states, most especially recently New York, have made it easier to kill pre-born children, there is movement in the other direction. Just last week, Ohio legislation to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat can be detected became law. That heartbeat can be detected at approximately 6-8 weeks after conception. Abortion after that would be illegal except in cases of a physical threat to the mother.

In addition, women could sue abortionists for wrongful death.

Violating doctors would face prison and revocation of their medical licenses.

It was a long legislative battle because the bill had been vetoed by the previous governor, a veto that came one vote short of being overridden.

However, SB 23 passed the Ohio Senate in March and the House on April 9, with GOP Gov. Mike DeWine signing it that afternoon. He said, “The essential function of government is to protect the most vulnerable among us, those who don’t have a voice. Government’s role should be to protect life from the beginning to the end.”

But that’s not the end of it. Protesters stormed the legislative chamber and various “experts” claim that the law is not based on science.

For example, physician and Ohio State University professor Beth Liston, who is also a Democratic state representative, claims that preborn babied are not alive at 12 weeks.

And, as reported in LifeSite News, state Rep. Janine Boyd proposed that black women specifically be exempt from the ban – ensuring that “black babies would still be legally killable.”

Varied pro-choice representatives are claiming there will be multiple efforts to have the law reversed, and the Ohio chapter of the ACLU has declared it will sue to block the law.

I find it amazing and sad that so much effort is expended to support efforts to kill pre-born human beings.

Follow Barbara Simpson on Facebook.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.

Leave a Reply