Pro-life blog buzz 6-3-15
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
- At Live Action News, Sarah Terzo refutes the outrageous claims of pro-abortion Methodist minister John M. Swomley, who argues that preborn children are not innocent (due to original sin) and therefore cannot be considered harmless if their existence produces a threat to their mothers. As outrageous as these arguments are, it is even sadder to hear them coming from purported representatives of the Gospel. Terzo rightly points out:
Swomley’s argument would also justify infanticide. A baby outside the womb would still be considered to have “Original Sin” until baptism, in many faith traditions. Therefore, prior to the moment when the priest or pastor pours water on the child’s forehead (or baptizes him some other way) it would be permissible to kill the child.
- At First Things, Michael J. New points to a disturbing trend that should concern pro-lifers:
Last week, Gallup released a poll which showed a large short term increase support for physician assisted suicide. In 2013, only 45 percent of Americans found doctor assisted suicide “morally acceptable.” Last week’s poll indicated that percentage had risen to 56 percent. It is likely that the fawning media coverage of Brittany Maynard’s [pictured left] assisted suicide this past November shifted public attitudes.
- Euthanasia Prevention Coalition reposts an article by disability rights expert Marilyn Golden on California’s assisted suicide bill SB 128, which is modeled after Oregon’s law. Unfortunately, not only does OR allow physician-assisted suicide, they keep very poor statistical records, leaving many questions unanswered and unanalyzed. Golden asks, “Is this the model California really wants to use for something this important?”
- JivinJehoshaphat dissects a pro-choice Salon article in which an abortion worker acknowledges the humanity of the preborn child while diminishing it:
What I noticed is how Beeman admitted earlier that the unborn have tiny arms and legs, yet goes on to use the intentionally dehumanizing term “unwanted growth” to describe them as if the human individual these arms and legs were torn from was like a wart on a foot….My thought is that the idea that a woman should be able to kill the helpless human being living inside for whatever reason she wants is not a position most people are comfortable defending even if that’s the actual reason they favor legal abortion. It’s much easier to push those tiny arms and legs aside and imagine the unborn as a bunion or a pimple because making the bodily autonomy argument is much easier if another human being isn’t being torn apart.
- Fletcher Armstrong ran into an issue at Tennessee Tech University when school officials were unaware of their own policy “allow[ing] individual students (not just student groups) to host events on campus”:
[W]hen national pro-life award-winner and TTU student Justin Brown contacted us about bringing GAP [Genocide Awareness Project], we were eager to go….
As it turns out, every public university student has the same right that Justin exercised at TTU; their universities just don’t know it… yet. The rights of free speech and equal access to university grounds are individual rights, not group rights. They cannot be denied to an individual student simply because he hasn’t identified others willing to join him in that speech. TTU has figured this out, and they deserve credit for that. - Clinic Quotes uncovers a statement from Lawrence McKinney, who was a Planned Parenthood board member in upstate New York. Note his sneering disdain for larger families (especially those on welfare):
All I do actually is to multiply them by $600, which is deductible from their income tax and realize that I, with only three children, am paying for them. The McKinney suggestion, which has and will go nowhere is: 1) give everybody a tax reduction for four children and after that make them pay $600 for every other child. The only trouble with my system is that since most of the explosive families are on relief anyway, there is nothing to deduct from or to tax with.
[Photos via usmagazine.com and Fletcher Armstrong]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
The issue of physician assisted suicide has been rather quiet of late. The only real item concerning it is whether it is legal or remains illegal. There have not been that many people who have taken advantage of the 1994 Oregon law.
Over the past few years, palliative care has been an alternative for legal assisted suicide. Generally, palliative care has been accepted by most people. It accomplishes the same thing as physician assisted suicide but without the restrictions. And, it is not that difficult to find a physician willing to assist in helping a patient die if he or she asks. “I know a friend who has a doctor who knows a doctor” happens more and more each day.
Say I have pneumonia and am terminally ill from cancer. If I am terminally ill, and of sound mind, I can request that nutrition be withheld from me, as well as cancer treatments and treatments for the pneumonia. After the second day, I will feel no pain from the lack of nutrition because the physician has medicated me enough to prevent it. In the course of a few days, I will die.
And, there’s really nothing the “meddlers” can do about it. Of course, it helps if I don’t make a big stink to the press about not being able to have a physician legally help me to die.
I agree, Howard. I’ve been in remission from stage 4 breast cancer for 8 years. When it returns and no longer responds to treatment, I will go gently and peacefully into that good night with those I love and adore so much right there with me – not watching me suffer in vain and not carrying that particular sad memory forever in their hearts like I have. No, no meddlers will ever be any the wiser, as is appropriate for the mental and emotional well-being of my dear loved ones.
Good posts, Howard and El. It’s true – not much in the news about it, lately.
I’ve seen people that I really felt sorry for, incapacitated or not, always suffering to an extent where I couldn’t but feel sorry for them. We should be allowed to choose. Were it me, not sure what I’d pick, but I sure think we should be free to choose.
Howard, you are absolutely wrong about palliative care. It DOES NOT accomplish the same thing as physician assisted suicide. Palliative care is meant to improve a patient’s quality of life in all realms, psychological, emotional, and spiritual. Palliative care does not cure but allows you to live your fullest with an illness.
I beg of you all to find out the FACTS regarding palliative care!
Palliative care certainly is meant to improve a patient’s quality of life physically, psychologically and emotionally. Sometimes that is achieved by ramping up treatment doses such that life ends.
The Culture of Death embraces both abortion and euthanasia. As the answer to all “problem people” is their death.
Didn’t Richard Dawkins charmingly comment recently that he didn’t want his insurance premiums to go up because of people with zero chance of quality of life?
The question is, who gets to decide?. The individual? Or if the culture of death becomes stronger and stronger won’t there be societal pressure to refuse care? Didn’t one of the Emanuel brothers recently publish an article, in the Atlantic I think, where he urged us all to forgo all treatment at age 75?
Maybe the government should decide? Or your insurer? Hey, if your Oncotype score is bad and shows high likelihood of cancer recurrence, wouldn’t it be cheaper to simply not pay for all those very expensive chemo drugs? And the new Hep C medications that are mind bogglingly priced at over $80,000 for a course of treatment? Well, Hep C is often from IV drug use…. The culture of death says these people are useless and effort should not be wasted.
I don’t what the answer is other than to fight hard for the dignity of all people, the unborn and the born, the well and the sick, whoever they may be.
Sharon: The Culture of Death embraces both abortion and euthanasia. As the answer to all “problem people” is their death.
Oh come on, Sharon. That is you saying that, not anybody else.
You want to generalize incorrectly, while the fact is that for some people in some situations, as above, there is no good argument to be made against them having the right to choose to die.