Abortion: To Be Or Not To Be Essay
About 1.5 million American women have abortions each year. But many common assumptions about who these women are don’t always stand up to scrutiny. Women who work are just as likely to have an abortion as those who do not work.
Age – Teenagers are having abortions at a slightly lower rate than they were in 1987. Women ages 18 to 24, who make up 21% of the childbearing population, have 44% of all abortions.
Money – Women with annual family incomes of less than $15,000 are four times as likely to have abortions as women with family incomes of $60,000 or above.
Race – Blacks, who make up 14% of all childbearing women, have 31% of all abortions. Whites, who account for 81% of women of childbearing age, have 61%.
Religion – Women who claim no religious affiliation are four times as likely to have abortions as are religious women; 18% of abortion patients describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians. Catholic women have abortions as frequently as do all women of childbearing age.
Prevention – More than 57% of abortion patients say they used birth control during the month of conception. Of the religious patients, Catholics were the least likely to have
I look around and see countless signs of moral decay all across the naiton. But there lies a ethical dilemmea that far exceeds the question of the hour – breeding and selling unborn fetuses all in the name of research. The use of tissues and organs from newborn and unborn babies is shaping up as the hottest medical debate of the next decade, and now presents pro-lifers, myself included, with a new challenge. Women who are willing to lease their wombs from the production of fetal tissue to allow an older generation to live off other spare parts of the unborn. Women have literally become fetal factories.
Living or freshly-killed, mid-pregnancy tissue is more desirable. This makes the potential supply of available unborn fetuses be restricted to babies slated for abortion in the mid-trimester, babies delivered prematurely between the 16th and 24th week of pregnancy, and children born with a severely malformed brain that can only survive for a few days or weeks.
In Australia and China have been experimenting with fetal pancreata transplants. I have read that success of this procedure depends on late abortions. The most successful transplants using pancreatic tissue from aborted babies have been performed in Shanghai. The procedure works for only a limited time and must be repeated, and several unborn babies must be available for each patient. China attributes its success to a combination of herbs and 30 week terminations! “In that country, there is a link between the compulsory abortion law (only one child per family) and this procedure.” 11
Because all transplants are more effective if there is a genetic match, there is a danger of children being created solely for the purpose of being aborted and genetically matched to the recipient of the transplant tissue. There is also the likelihood that the demand for cells or organs from aborted babies will increase and lead to a fetus industry. It is now necessary to provide protection for fetuses that might be unscrupulously conceived, grown and killed in order to provide organs for transplantation.
Here are documented experiments that are already taking place in the U.S. and Europe:
* California doctor transplanted human fetal thymus glands into two older children. Both donor humans were killed.
* A six-month-old aborted baby had his testicles transplanted into a 28-year-old man who had been unable to become fully sexully active.
* At Stanford University, living aborted babies were placed in incubators. Their chests were cut open so researchers could observe their heart actions. The babies died within 11 hours.
* Researchers at the University of Colorado used 114 aborted babies for experiments on the lower jaw. American Journal of Anatomy, 1971.
* In California, thymus glands obtained from aborted babies have been transplanted into older children. Time Magazine, Feb. 28, 1972.
* In 1974 an experiment involved cutting the beating hearts out of aborted babies and placing them in a nutrient solution. “The hearts survived for many hours without any significant change in their spontaneous contraction rate.” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, January 1, 1974.
* Researchers at the Children’s Hospital in Helsinki, Finland, experimented on 12 babies from 12 to 21 weeks gestation, killed by hysterotomy. The babies’ heads were cut off and attached to a machine that pumped chemicals through the severed brains. Acta Paedriatrica, Scandinavia, January 1975.
* The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved a $300,000 project which used 100 aborted babies to test the effects of pesticides. Chicago Sun Times, July 26, 1977.
* In April, 1981, guards at the Swiss-French border intercepted a truck loaded with frozen human fetus’ destined for French cosmetic laboratories. Gazette du Palais, 1981. (11)
The implications of fetal brain tissue transplants for Parkinson’s Disease are grave.
First, we must consider the moral and ethical dilemma of using cells and tissue from human beings who have been deliberately KILLED by ABORTION. Secondly, we must consider the strong possibility that this procedure will do the following:
1. Encourage abortion;
2. Increase the demand for the bodies of aborted children;
3. Lead to further experimentation on aborted children;
4. Lead to the possible harvesting of children for personal profit;
5. Increase the number of late abortions; and
6. Encourage the development of the “designer fetus”. (12)
The last thought is to consider the effect of this procedure on those who have Parkinson’s Disease. The procedure, which is still experimental, is risky. Would it not be better to provide those with Parkinson’s Disease other proven treatments, and at the same time put money into research for new treatments which do not depend on the industry of abortion?
11. Fetal Research: Fatal Step, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, July 1, 1963.
We as a society are now at a crossroads, and the choices are clear: We can continue along the path of a utilitarian ethic in which all things including life itself … are reduced to mere commodities; or we can resacrilize life and return to a world in which life is treasured and respected.