Re-Examining Abortion issues While Waiting
For a New Supreme Court Justice
George Bush will most probably be nominating and
replacing one or more of the eight Supreme Court
Justices before the end of his presidential term.
For the record, One of the 8 (William Rehnquist) has
been quite ill. He is 81 years old. The court re-convenes
on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 to hear oral arguments on
a variety of cases, and Rehnquist is too sick to attend.
Judge Paul Stevens is 85. Five of the remaining six are
beyond that magic age of retirement. O'Connor (75),
Ginsburg (72), Scalia and Kennedy (69), and Breyer (67).
The George Bush Presidency has a firm agenda to one day
re-write history by overturning Roe vs. Wade (1973),
which for the past 32 years has granted American women
the right to make decisions regarding their own bodies
by choosing to have or not have abortions.
On Friday February 11, 2005, the South Dakota State
Affairs Committee passed a curious "if and when" bill.
According to HB1249, if and when Roe vs. Wade is overturned,
the law will allow those doctors performing abortions to be
fined $2,000 and spend two years in prison.
South Dakota is the first. Other states will follow South
Dakota's lead. States rights will rule as federal laws
convert to state sovereignty. Be ready for this change in
the balance of philosophy and power in the United States,
brought to you by the U.S. Supreme Court. The justice will
soon be dead. Long live the new justice. That is to be part
of the Bush legacy.
Before posting the following column more than one year ago
(January 24, 2004), I was warned (by a few prominant colleagues
who lecture about vegetarian and animal rights issues and who
privately agree with my position while publically expressing
the exact opposite but politically correct view) that to do
so would invite the scorn of many people. I had fair warning.
I now suffer the consequence of exclusion from many events
and conferences. Talks have been cancelled and invitations to
speak from various groups are no longer offered. Despite such
behavior, I have not changed the strong conviction I have
I Believe in Abortion
"Compassion is the basis of morality."
The animal rights movement supports the murder of
unborn children. Most of its members are liberal
feminists who demand a woman's right to make that
painful life or death decision about a future being.
The animal rights movement also promotes compassionate
slaughter of animals, and, in doing so, insures that
more animals are to be slaughtered and eaten.
When the goals of a movement change to contradict its own
founding principles, we reach that point in time when
that mission should be aborted. It is in that spirit that
I believe in abortions. In its current state, the animal
rights movement is dead and must be ripped from the body
of injustices which men and women of conscience continue
to protest. In its place, we must pray for the birth of a new
movement that supports the rights of all living creatures,
even unborn humans.
Animal rights activists protest pain to laboratory rats, but
support a woman's right to an abortion. Some demand that meat
eaters acknowledge the horrors of slaughterhouse films, or
vivisection, or bullfighting. Yet, they turn a deaf ear and
firmly shut a blind eye to the conscious being who grows
within the human mother.
Each year, one thousand or more animal rights supporters
gather near Washington, D.C. for their annual convention.
This year (2005), they will gather in Loss Angeles, CA.
The majority of these activists are women. As a matter of
fact, there would be no animal rights movement without the
gentler sex, who seem to possess a spirituality and wisdom
that their male counterparts lack.
Most of these passionate women also support the rights of
women. That's a natural. More than one female author has
paralleled the abuse and struggles of animals to the sexual
politics and multiple indignities suffered by women at the
hands of a male-oriented society.
Is abortion murder? Of course it is. It is more than just
murder. It is death without compassion, for the living
creature, not yet named, possesses pain receptors and is
aware of his or her own suffering.
In defense of their ignorance, some animal rights activists
argue that the fetus feels no pain, much the same way that
animal abusers use the very same argument to defend
vivisection, sport, or the consumption of sentient farm
As an animal rights activist, I am faced with an enormous
dilemma. Do I call abortion anything else than murder? I
cannot rationalize murder, for that is exactly what it is.
Murder, without regard for the human who will die in great
pain. Abortion is murder.
I cry for the cow and the calf, and the bull in the
bullring, and the dog who is euthanized, and the rat
who is burned in the name of science, and the squirrel
shot by the young boy in the name of sport, and the
coyote who is anally electrocuted so that her fur can
adorn a parka.
Many people do not recognize the unborn child as possessing
the same rights as the rest of us, yet, a study published in
the May, 2003 issue of Psychological Science (2003;14:220-224)
reveals that a fetal infant is able to recognize the voice of
her own mother.
Scientific studies have demonstrated that the growing human
fetus feels pain and learns about the external environment
while within. The fetus recognizes songs and voices. The
brain works, the heart beats, pain receptors feel. How much
compassion do animal rights activists emote for sentient
human infants, not yet born?
Supporting animal research is a transgression of the laws of
nature and an insult to the respect of life. This is why
Animal Rights activists are so right in the things they protest.
Supporting abortion for just one of the 4,700 species of mammals
is a contradiction in terms against all of the good. In 1866,
one of America's first great intellectual feminists, Ellen
G. White, wrote in book 3 of How to Live:
"Against every transgression of the laws of life, nature will
utter her protest. She bears abuse as long as she can; but
finally the retribution comes, and it falls upon the mental
as well as the physical powers."
THE NOTMILK NEWSLETTER:
SUBSCRIBE: send an empty Email to-
UNSUBSCRIBE: send an empty Email to-
Forward this message to your milk-drinking friends:
MILK from A to Z: http://www.notmilk.com/milkatoz.htm
2O QUESTIONS: http://www.notmilk.com/notmilkfaq.html
What is an excellent alternative for NOTMILK?
http://www.soytoy.com ... make your own grain and nut milks!
SoyToy recipes forum: email@example.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: