DISCLAIMER: Some content in this post is graphic and may be disturbing to some readers.
I was doing a little research and reading on abortions and decided to leave the pro-life websites behind and look at the so-called pro-choice websites and what they were saying.
In so doing, I came across some things that really weren't that surprising, and some other things that just made me shake my head in disbelief. How could intelligent people read these things and not feel uncomfortable with the way they talk about human life? How could they read them and not feel patronized by the blatant euphemistic language?
One site I browsed, belonging to the National Abortion Federation, is not-so-aptly named www.prochoice.org. What didn't surprise me here was the fact that the baby in the womb is referred to as an "embryo" or "pregnancy tissue" or even "the contents of the uterus." It is typical for pro-abortion advocates to talk about human life as if it is just "tissue" prior to birth, and somehow not fully human.
On this particular site, the term "embryo" was used in reference to medical abortion, which is accomplished by means of drugs. One pill interferes with the attachment of the fetus to the uterus, while another induces contractions, expelling the "embryo" [i.e. baby] from the woman's body. [The website failed to mention the fact that the failure to attach to the uterus also amounts to a failure for the placenta to develop. Ultimately the fetus is starved to death, a fact which is noted on other websites, here and here.]
The second term, "pregnancy tissue", was also used in reference to medical abortion. A cited disadvantage of such a procedure is that "Women may see blood clots and pregnancy tissue" that are expelled from their bodies. [It seems even pro-abortion advocates recognize that such a sight could be emotionally devastating for a woman.]
The term "contents of the uterus" was used in reference to a vacuum aspiration abortion procedure, where the baby is [violently] sucked out of the womb. [The website didn't really explain what happens to the fetus during this procedure. Apparently, the fact that the baby is literally ripped limb from limb in the process doesn't seem as important to communicate as information about the ease and relative comfort of the procedure for the mother. For the brave soul who wishes to further educate themselves concerning the reality of what happens to a baby during a vacuum aspiration you can start by reading this article, then seeing the pictures in this article, or watching this video. NOT for the faint of heart.]
As mentioned above, the use of this kind of terminology wasn't surprising to me. I did find it a little blatant and found myself wondering if anyone is actually fooled or comforted by the obvious euphemism for human life. Sadly, I'm sure many simply "accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions" (2 Timothy 4:3-4) and embrace the euphemisms. They believe it is true and right because that is what they want to hear.
What surprised me about this site was the general vagueness about abortion procedures and what actually happens to the baby during an abortion procedure. Upon second thought, however, I surmise that it's not too surprising after all. Why would a pro-abortion organization want to provide any information that would surely prove detrimental to their cause? While claiming to be pro-choice, they really don't provide a lot of information for helping women to consider any other choice but abortion.
The site also failed to mention late-term abortion. At least I couldn't find anything about it while I was poking around. Another case of withholding information that would undoubtedly harm the efforts of a pro-abortion organization. [See this article to read how barbaric late-term abortion procedures really are.]
Also surprising was the lack of information about the baby at all. I couldn't find any information about fetal development, let alone any links to other websites that might have this information. It was kind of disturbing to see first-hand how the existence of a child was virtually unacknowledged altogether. Again, not really pro-choice. More like just plain pro-abortion.
I suppose that's only what can be expected of an organization called the "National Abortion Federation," but I would have to protest their obvious claim to pro-choice status with the web address www.prochoice.org.
At the end of the day, the attitudes expressed in an anonymous quote I found on one of the website's articles reflect the selfishness at the heart of the abortion issue:
"I have often times regretted engaging in unprotected sexual activity
which led to my getting pregnant in college. I have NEVER, not once,
regretted having my abortion. By having an abortion in 1985, I did
choose life - my life."
Apparently committing murder to avoid the consequences of personal irresponsibility is justifiable when having a baby would interfere with our personal lives.Labels: abortion