LISTEN TO TLR’S LATEST PODCAST:
According to Oklahoma State Rep. George Faught, who introduced a bill that would make abortions on the grounds of genetic abnormalities, such as Down’s Syndrome, illegal with no exceptions: “Life, no matter how it is conceived, is something to be protected.” The left consider this statement along with many others made by Representative Faught in regards to this bill “dumb and vile.” Why? Let’s get into it, shall we?
Playing On Your Emotions
This bill is essentially to restrict abortion on the grounds of the baby not being in what some would consider “normal” physical condition, meaning any baby testing positive for any genetic abnormality, such as Down’s Syndrome, would not be legal to abort under any circumstance. “Republican politicians frequently say dumb and vile things to justify abortion bans that don’t allow exceptions under any circumstance- including pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.” Now let’s think about the words chosen here. The subject is a woman deciding to abort her baby for the reason of the baby being genetically imperfect, the left threw in the words “rape” and “incest” which are entirely separate reasons. Why? To draw an emotional response, rather than a logical one. Something both the left and the right have come to perfect when pushing any particular agenda. Have you noticed? Using certain words and phrases to force you to react emotionally, usually resulting in an illogical response that always gets whatever is on the agenda pushed through the cracks. For example, Donald Trump introducing the idea of a wall on the border of Mexico. His appeal was:
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”
Emotionally appealing statements like these ultimately resulted in his election as president. An illogical response made mostly out of fear.
A logical person has to ask themselves when any bill is proposed, especially in the day of “fake news,” what is true. They need to distinguish between what is a ploy to ultimately serve a political purpose, rather than one that would benefit the people of the nation as a whole. Sadly, many Americans rush to judge with their hearts instead of their minds.
In regards to the bill passed in Oklahoma by 67 votes, many would argue that an embryo or a fetus is not life, but what would lead a reasonable person to believe this? What is the very definition of abortion?
“The termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by death of the embryo or fetus.”
Let’s examine the definition of these two stages of development in the human existence for a moment.
Embryo: “The developing human individual from the time of implantation to the end of the 8th week after conception.” At this point a heartbeat is involved. Does a heartbeat indicate life? Let’s look to the next stage of human development after the 8th week.
Fetus: “A developing human from usually 8 weeks (two months) after conception to birth.” So an unborn baby from 8 weeks to day of birth is considered a “fetus.”
It is clear by the very definition of these words that human life is present in these early stages of development. Given these simple facts, how is it that the US Supreme Court has convinced so many of us that abortion, in this case abortion on the grounds of a “genetic abnormality” is actually a constitutionally protect right?
You see, not only have the left and right perfected playing on your emotions, they have perfected using words that draw no emotional response, like “embryo” and “fetus,” rather than “baby,” or “human” much like other major governments in history.
Asking questions rather than dwelling on key words
Let’s ask ourselves some logical questions regarding abortion. Why not? The nature of abortion deserves to have more thought put into it than the regurgitated, robotic responses that we have grown to accept from our government, and media. I’m more interested here in what you consciously think, and why, so let’s get into it together.
- What is the functional difference between selecting babies with disabilities for abortion, and Hitler’s plan to cleanse the Aryan race?
This was the German government playing on words to convince an entire nation that one human being was less human than the other, was it not?
“A broader definition of the Holocaust includes non-Jewish victims of the Nazi campaign of mass murder based on biological factors, such as the Romani, and the Aktion T4 patients who were mentally and physically disabled” - How is this not a form of discrimination against the disabled?
Do we look our disabled brother, sister, cousin, friend, in the eye and tell them they shouldn’t have been born? If the answer to that is yes, why? If the answer is no, why? Furthermore, is your answer constitutionally acceptable? According to the 14th Amendment, unless the courts were to further distort what it means to be a “person,” all persons, regardless of their physical or mental capabilities, have the right to life, liberty, and equal protection of the laws. - What is eugenics?
“A set of beliefs and practices that aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population.”
Is genetically testing an unborn human and deeming that developing human as not worthy of life, not the very definition of eugenics?
Why is this so important to governments across the world?
Ethnic or genetic cleansing can only work with the cooperation of the privileged majority. What is the difference between our cooperation on eugenics in the United States, and your average German citizen in 1939?I will leave you with a final thought:Do we want to be an America that that conforms to other nations of the world? Like New Zealand who won’t accept immigrants if they have “genetic abnormalities,” especially Down’s Syndrome? Or Iceland, where almost everyone screens for Down’s Syndrome during pregnancy, and 100% of women who have a positive diagnosis terminate? Or As leaders of the world, do we want to be the nation that thinks outside of what our government tells us to think? A nation that draws the line, and says “No, that’s too far.”
