Joe Hargrave has this to say (on Facebook) about liberals and their complaints about a “climate of hate”:
I will never listen to a single word about a “climate of hate” and “rhetoric of violence” from these people. They are swimming in the blood and guts of 53 million slaughtered innocents. It’s like a crack addict telling me not to drink a beer.
It’s the question “pro-choice” people hate to address. It forces them to examine what they really stand for. I’ve applied it, Socratically, in many an online discussion to get one of the following results:
1. The person tries to say I’m improperly using Socratic logic or analogy.
2. The person says the question is absurd and refuses to answer it
3. The person is honest and admits there are standards by which he or she would deny the right to life to a born person.
So, the question is:
“Is it OK to kill blind people?”
Presumably, the person will say, of couse not.
To this, I respond,
“Well, then, the lack of sight doesn’t deprive one of the right to live?”
“OK, well, what about the lack of hearing? mobility? and so on.”
What faculty do you believe is necessary for a person to have human rights?
At what point does the loss of some particular faculty deprive one of human rights?
After all, an unborn baby is deprived of the right to life merely because of some missing faculty. For many who support abortion, especially our president, that missing faculty is visibility. Wait–for Barack Obama, it’s not even visibility, since he says it’s OK to starve or suffocate newborn babies to death if they’re born in “botched” abortions.
And for the average person who *has* an abortion, visibility is the missing factor, because people don’t take the time to think about such things.
Posted in abortion, analogy, Barack Obama, Culture Wars, Disability, euthanasia, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, infanticide, intrinsic evil, Logic, Politics, Pro-Life
One of the most powerful pro-life talks I’ve ever attended was given by Dr. John Bruchalski of the Tepeyac Clinic, several years ago at adult education night at St. William of York in Stafford, VA. He shared a lot of the “inside scoop” as a medical professional, a revert who used to work in the clinic that pioneered in vitro fertilization in the US. I’ve discussed some of these before, but it doesn’t hurt to repeat.
Some of the key points:
1. There will never be a male contraceptive on the market. Whenever they test a male contraceptive pill, the test subjects did not like what it did to them, how shall we say, aesthetically. The estrogen pill doubles a woman’s risk of stroke or heart attack and increases the risk of various cancers. Any other drug with the estrogen pill’s side effects would be pulled from the market. Double standard, anyone?
2. When conception occurs, the newly formed embryo sends out an electrical impulse to tell the mother’s brain, “Hey! I’m here!” It is possible to detect pregnancy within moments of fertilization, since there are *immediate* changes to the mother’s biochemistry. When conception occurs in a petri dish, there is a visible flash of light. He says that, back when he worked at the IVF lab, they used to watch and wait for that flash of light, and they would cheer.
3. On January 22, 1973, he came home from school and found his father dressed in his funeral clothes. He asked him who died, and his father said, “I am in mourning for America, because today America legalized abortion.”
Posted in abortion, Catholicism, contraception, health care, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, In Vitro Fertilization, infanticide, intrinsic evil, medical ethics, Natural Family Planning, Natural law, Pro-Life, research, sex, Theology of the Body