Ron Paul recalls witnessing an abortion
On one occasion in the 1960s when abortion was still illegal, I witnessed, while visiting a surgical suite as an OB/GYN resident, the abortion of a fetus that weighed approximately two pounds.
It was placed in a bucket, crying and struggling to breathe, and the medical personnel pretended not to notice.
Soon the crying stopped. This harrowing event forced me to think more seriously about this important issue.
~Potential Presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul in his new book “Liberty Defined”, as quoted by Joe Carter, First Things, April 28

Why didn’t he pick that baby up and try to help it?
:'( Poor baby.
It was the 1960s. My guess is that they simply did not have the technology even if he wanted to intervene.
Regardless of whether or not s/he could have survived weighing two pounds in the 1960s, this baby deserved more dignity than being tossed in a bucket.
I agree, Eric.
I doubt that I could have just stood there.
carder says:
May 2, 2011 at 8:07 am
It was the 1960s. My guess is that they simply did not have the technology even if he wanted to intervene.
(Denise) Couldn’t he have picked it up and held it? Gave it some sort of comfort during its very brief life?
Was he standing next to the table or was he viewing the procedure through a glass window?
Denise, Carla, and Eric;
All good points.
RP is a libertarian, so who’s to say?
Hey – as a person born at 2 pounds 4 ounces in 1956, I totally object to anyone standing by and letting that child die in a bucket! Comfort anyone? Baptism anyone? Sheesh. This cut awfully close to home!
And I am wondering if Ron Paul actually used the word ‘fetus’ to describe the delivered child. I am also wondering what the Hippocratic oath was at that time.
Good golly – we are dealing with human life here! Thankfully he recognized this action as wrong.
Can we all stop referring to this child as an “it.” I think that we unknowing give cover, with such pronouns, to those who are proabortion.
Yeah, that’s one of my biggest pet peeves. De-humanizing a person by calling them “it”. It seems to happen exclusively to children and babies, especially pre-born babies. This is so wrong! If we are unsure of an adult’s sex, don’t we say “they” and “them” instead of “he” or “she”? We can afford the same basic respect to a child! Or at least pick a sex and be corrected later!
If I had been present, it would have taken more than a glass widow or wild horses to keep me from comforting that poor child!
I don’t see that anyone referred to the baby as “it” but Denise, Elizabeth, and I’m pretty sure that was unintentional on her part.
It is possible that he was pro-choice, up until he witnessed this action (and was possibly in shock witnessing it).
Pamela says:
May 2, 2011 at 1:08 pm
I don’t see that anyone referred to the baby as “it” but Denise, Elizabeth, and I’m pretty sure that was unintentional on her part.
(Denise) I probably should have asked if Mr. Paul could not have done something — even if only to hold and comfort — him or her.
How could anyone write in such a “diplomatic” tone after witnessing the death of a live baby right before his eyes? This man will never get my vote because I fear he has cold water running in his veins! NO warm and caring and loving human could have witnessed such a horrific act and then state, that he needed to think more seriously about this issue, with such a laid back cavalier attitude. This man just witnessed a child being ripped out of the womb of a women and stood there and watched this little life gasping for air and did nothing to help him or her? There are many who side with choice who have never stood and watched an abortion and I can guarantee if all those who are pro choice could watch a live abortion, over half of them would change their minds on site and not have to rethink their position, ugh!!!!!!
I am not so sure of Ron Paul’s prolife views just yet.
Ron Paul’s views are here http://www.ontheissues.org/ron_paul.htm
He believes in criminalizing abortion.
In Ch. 1 of his new book Ron Paul says: “Very early pregnancies and victims of rape can be treated with the day after pill, which is nothing more than using birth control pills in a special manner.”
Hmm.
I would like no exceptions, please. :)
While I believe the rape argument is an invalid argument (by what valid argument does one crime (rape) necessitate another crime (abortion/murder)?), but as for Ron Paul’s “cold water running in his veins”, that is what makes him suitable to lead. And though Mary’s language was meant to be derogatory (and I do not believe Ron Paul is a compassionless zombie), it is a credit to a person to be able to maintain logical consistency in the most difficult circumstances. It’s the pragmatist/lunatic who, making decisions based on an emotional response, often overreacts and whose rash decisions have devastating long term consequences. Some people apparently would rather have someone who rants and raves against abortion than someone who can construct a valid syllogistic argument destroying it. But I guess the pro life movement has all types.
Seth,
Everyone I know would rant and rave if a puppy was in crisis. Yet, a child that is in a bucket gasping for air, everyone looks the other way? Insult me all you want, no one I know could have stood there and watched this happen to a newly aborted baby, no one.
The problem is, we don’t rant and rave enough about the injustice in this nation and that is why this nation is falling down.
Seth, no need to argue why abortion is wrong, go down to your local abortion clinic and ask nicely if you could sit in on an abortion and once you have seen a live abortion, let me know how you stand on this issue then.
Yes, the pro life movement has all types but I can guarantee you, they all have a heart full of love for those who are murdered in the worst ways possible.
on the other hand, maybe he’s lying about the whole thing.
Well as much as you all are appalled by this story, This is how abortions were done for women of means before Roe v Wade. Poor women back then could tell you even more frightening stories. However let’s be clear here, this was 50 years ago. After abortion became legal many medical advances in this area were made. Many different types of birth control and abortion procedures have been developed over the past 40 years giving women even more choices and education. You guys still offer the same two choices women have had throughout our human history, abstinence or motherhood. For most women of today this is not enough choices…
After abortion became legal many medical advances in this area were made.
What advances? Two pound fetuses were killed more efficiently? The French Revolution guillotine and Nazi gas chambers were also heralded as advances in efficient killing.
So Biggz are women today inferior because they haven’t the willpower and mental capacity to make the same choice as their foremothers or are today’s women some superior to all previous generation because they have demanded the choice to be abstinent, a mother, or a mother to a dead baby. I would warn you not to answer around any grandmothers/great grandmothers, or any wife/girlfriend/daughter.
This goes back to my previous point. Either women are and always have been equal to men or they aren’t. You can’t have it both ways. Laws that restrict freedoms may attempt to curtail equality, but equality requires nothing more than one’s mind/body to achieve. If drugs, special treatment, proceedures, surgery, favortism is required to make someone ‘equal’, then they aren’t equal to begin with.
This tears at my heart… rips it out, even! It’s a difficult thing to hear and imagine as it is–that poor child! It feels a little more personal for me because my third baby was born at 27 weeks, 1 day and he was 1lb 9oz at birth (he’s doing great! He’ll be 20 months tomorrow). I honestly never thought I could be any more pro-life than I already was, but when I sat there, watching him… I was horrified at realizing that precious, innocent babies just like him are killed every day by doctors and their mothers. Somehow, he strengthened my pro-life convictions! When I hear this story, I think of my precious little boy… that baby was about the same size as him. Not that size matters. It doesn’t. But you know… it makes it feel more personal to me. I’ve seen about what that sweet baby would have looked like. And then the thought of that tiny little boy or girl, thrown into that bucket like garbage and left there to suffocate, all alone. One of the most heart-breaking things I can imagine!
Biggz, your post makes me want to vomit!
Well said Eric… something (or someone) being more efficient at killing another human being doesn’t make it better! Those were great examples!
Carla, I agree! No exceptions!
Abstinence means only abstinence from the sort of sex that can result in pregnancy. It doesn’t mean no sexual pleasure. Get creative, people!
Carla says:
May 2, 2011 at 3:06 pm
In Ch. 1 of his new book Ron Paul says: “Very early pregnancies and victims of rape can be treated with the day after pill, which is nothing more than using birth control pills in a special manner.”
Hmm.
I would like no exceptions, please.
(Denise) Carla, would you deny treatment that could prevent pregnancy to a girl or woman who had just been raped?
More choices and more education and better technology Biggz? Now we kill babies more efficiently than 50 years ago. We should all be proud of ourselves. We’ve come a long way baby!!
They absolutely still toss babies to die alone.
Julie,
I am grateful your precious son has taught you so much!! :)
Denise,
If by “denying treatment” you mean ending life then yes.
I don’t know why people use rape as an excuse. Rape is dramatizing experience that noone should have to go through but killing a life that didn’t do anything wrong doesn’t take the pain away. In fact it could be a blessing to bring him/her into the world. There are lots of options that could help the child live. And adoption is a wonderful thing….I wouldn’t have a brother if it weren’t for adoption. Even if the baby came from such a horrible situation they are still part of the woman. I couldn’t imagine life without my daughter….motherhood is amazing.
Ron Paul has the most logical/reason-based stances against abortion as far as pro-life politicians go.
Only the 1st paragraph was quoted from his new book “Liberty Defined”. The 2nd paragraph: “That same day in the OB suite, and early delivery occurred & the infant born was only slightly larger than the one that was just aborted. But in this room everybody did everything conceivable to save this child’s life. My conclusion that day was that we were overstepping the bounds of morality by picking and choosing who should live and who should die. There were human lives. There was no consistent moral basis to the value of life under these circumstances.”
This is the full second paragraph and adds a lot more light on the subject. I am the co-editor of the book “Ron Paul Speaks” and; I recommend everyone to read Ron Paul’s books.
This great man is today’s Founding Father and has decades of experience defending liberty, sound money, our rights (including unborn children) and advocating a Constitutional foreign policy, which happens to be pro-life as opposed to the other pro-war/death candidates out there. Ron Paul 2012!
Can you clarify Ron Paul’s stance on exceptions for abortion?
Rape? Incest? ”Health” of the mother?
if you’re enough of a douche bag to kill a baby when it’s almost “done”, then that’s on you. you’re an idiot and a monster.
but that doesn’t mean rape/incest victims should be forced to carry the result of their attack. that’s just cruel and inhumane.
“the result of their attack” is another human being. Killing that human being because their dad happened to be a POS is cruel and inhumane. That “result of their attack” is every bit the “baby when it’s almost done” you just mentioned in your previous paragraph. Where’s the logic?
“the result of their attack” is another human being. Killing that human being because their dad happened to be a POS is cruel and inhumane. That “result of their attack” is every bit the “baby when it’s almost done” you just mentioned in your previous paragraph. Where’s the logic?
Certainly not in Jenny’s comment.