Margaret Schaut

One more conservative viewpoint on the world at large.

Archive for March, 2012

After Birth Abortion & The Constitution


Newborn 12 weeks gestation

Image source http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2987963330564&set=a.2035546960750.2118911.1006496411&type=1&theater

A very serious problem for America is that it is completely unique in its Constitution. This puts America, in its very foundation, at odds with all of human governmental style in history and in our world today.

There is hardly a more dramatic demonstration of this than this article: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.full.pdf+html “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”

A child who is born, in ANY condition, is a CITIZEN of America and is not entitled, but IMBUED with all the rights OF a citizen, moral wordplay notwithstanding. If they are alive they HAVE THEIR RIGHTS. We, as fellow citizens, who depend on those rights as much as anyone, are obligated to enforce those rights for the benefit of the individual citizen, ALL OF THEM, or forfeit them for ourselves as well.

Not so anywhere else in the world, and even our own Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg, who swore an OATH to that Constitution, has dismissed the document as irrelevant. The ONLY replacement for our Constitution is tyranny in one form or another.

After-birth-abortion, elsewhere called murder or infanticide, is based on a reasoning so convoluted, so bizarre, as to defy imagination.

It is not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense

If an infant is breathing when it leaves the womb, it IS a person in EVERY moral sense.

When I was growing up I knew someone whom society referred to as a Thalidomide Baby, and she attended all of our childhood events such as birthday parties. The effect of Thalidomide on this child was that her arms were missing and all she had were hands attached to her shoulders. She was extremely small. She was severely deformed and lived a life of great pain.

According to Dr.s Alberto Giubilini, and Francesca Minerva:

Euthanasia in infants has been proposed by philosophers for children with severe abnormalities whose lives can be expected to be not worth living and who are experiencing unbearable suffering.

The Thalidomide Baby was, despite her suffering and her disability, a happy child and became a happy adult. She married and had five beautiful children of her own, cared for BY HER and her husband, and all in all had a productive and important life.

Eugenicists are avidly seeking justification for murder of the disabled or imperfect, and are abusing the sorrows of families to forward this despicable agenda.

In modern society we can’t save everyone from the problems of disabilities and enormous difficulties. But as Americans and as human beings, we can offer palliative care, the ease of suffering, and most importantly, comfort and love. This care is available to the born AND the unborn.

A Place to Turn When a Newborn Is Fated to Die

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/health/13hospice.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Hospice Care for the Unborn/Newborn http://www.atcmag.com/v11n4/article4.asp

Newborn hospice vs. euthanasia http://www.jillstanek.com/euthanasia/both-dead-one-k.html

Hospice, Palliative Care for Newborns, Infants and Children http://dying.about.com/od/pediatricnicuhospice/Hospice_Palliative_Care_for_Newborns_Infants_and_Children.htm

My Thalidomide friend found her life every bit worth living, the people around her worth loving. I cannot imagine a circumstance under which she would have preferred death to a loving, if pain-filled, life.

Even these dark-hearted doctors admit:

Although it is reasonable to predict that living with a very severe condition is against the bestinterest of the newborn, it is hard to find definitive arguments to the effect that life with certain pathologies is not worth living, even when those pathologies would constitute acceptable reasons for abortion.

Yet they still play with definitions to justify murder:

In spite of the oxymoron in the expression, we propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide’, to emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where
abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.

Like it or not, our forebears provided us with a form of government that gave citizens the unalienable right to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’ If a child is alive when exiting the womb, this is guaranteed to THEM, without the liens or contingencies the rest of this monstrous article would lay all over the defenseless, and at their expense.

No human being is capable of making a fully informed decision about the potential to have an acceptable life or not. Those who take the choice into their own hands we call murderers.

It is all too obvious to say that history is repeating itself. Someone made the decisions of who would live and who would die during the holocaust, based upon reasons so repulsive that Nazi-ism is synonymous with evil personified. Justification to murder has cost over 100 million deaths in WWII alone, and the vast number of abortions, chosen by a child’s own mother reached 50 million Americans in 2008. http://www.nrlc.org/news/2008/NRL01/LiveLost.html

That number defies imagination, especially with the bountiful provision of birth control of all types, including sterilization, mountains of money dumped into the end of American human progeny. And still, even with all that, there is this over-reaching and deceptive play on words that seeks to kill the BORN CITIZENS, not being satisfied with the massive loss of life already.

The problem, therefore, isn’t with our medical knowledge.

The problem is, we do not love our children, nor do we love the human race. America does not even have the respect for our future and the youngsters who will populate it that our Founding Fathers did.

America will stand or fall based on respect for the Constitution and our willingness to protect and defend those rights, even for the smallest among us, who are our future.

In a world that sees far more value to the elites in NO rights for their people, America has stood alone. But we are giving it away to replace it with what the world seems to offer instead.

When mass genocide is seen as a great good, then all of us are in real trouble.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 30 other followers

%d bloggers like this: