February 18, 2020 · OPINION
Understanding “choice” and humanity of the unborn
By Adam Cassandra
Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly want to make our commonwealth more “pro-choice” by pushing through a host of measures designed to expand and normalize abortion. But rather than offering legislation that would provide genuine care and support for mothers and their children, the “choice” being forced on Virginia is more pain and death.
One of the tactics often used by “pro-choice” advocates is to deny the humanity of the precious life within a mother’s womb. They ignore the clear scientific evidence that human life begins at conception. They use words and phrases like “fetus,” “clump of cells” and “tissue growth” instead of “human,” “person” or “baby.” They talk of “rights” while assaulting the fundamental human right to life.
Why this deception? Because the abortion industry and their allies don’t want anyone — especially pregnant women — to dwell on the fact that the “choice” they offer is the choice to kill an innocent human being. If abortionists are seen as killers instead of doctors, it could hurt their profit margins.
As science and medicine continue to advance, it will become harder and harder to ignore the humanity of the unborn — and the injustice of abortion.
Polls indicate younger Americans especially have been trending more pro-life over the past decade. One of them is 11-year-old Audrey Lambert, who attended the recent Virginia March for Life.
A journalist with The Arlington Catholic Herald posted a video on Facebook of Audrey marching for life on that rainy Thursday afternoon in Richmond. When asked why she was there, Audrey said, “I’m here because all babies deserve a chance at life, just like my brother.”
“If my mother hadn’t been pro-life,” she continued, “what would’ve happened to my brother? He has Down syndrome and he’s deaf. Some people would say he wouldn’t have a chance at life, and I don't think that’s fair.”
“My brother’s name is James,” Audrey said. “James always smiles. He’s always happy. He’s sort of our little sunshine.”
Audrey’s passionate testimony comes on the heels of another powerful video recognizing the humanity of the unborn being censored by Fox Sports.
The pro-life group Faces of Choice attempted to run a Super Bowl ad showing “the many faces of survivors of abortion, to put a face to the ‘choice’ of ending life.”
The 30-second video features 14 survivors of abortion procedures who look directly in the camera and ask, “Can you look me in the eye and tell me that I shouldn’t be alive? Can you tell me that I didn’t deserve to survive?”
“One ‘choice’ tried to steal our lives,” they continue. “But we survived. We are the survivors of ‘choice.’ We are the faces of ‘choice.’”
Despite spending considerable time and money to get the ad on the air, Faces of Choice Executive Director Lyric Gillett said Fox Sports gave her the run-around and refused to provide a “yes” or “no” response for airing the video.
Back in Richmond, Rev. Dr. Robert M. Grant Jr. of The Father’s Way Church in Warrenton was criticized by some elected officials as being “disrespectful” and “divisive” when, among other remarks, he reminded lawmakers about the humanity of the unborn during an opening prayer for a recent session of the Virginia House of Delegates.
“I pray that you may understand that all life is precious and worthy of a chance to be born. God is a giver of life, and people have no right or authority to take life,” he said. “The unborn have rights, and those rights need to be protected.”
“They should never be denied the right to exist, the right to develop, or the right to have a family,” Grant continued. “The Word of God has given us a warning: ‘woe to anyone who harms an innocent child.’ Every one of you sitting here today can guarantee these rights to these little, innocent children of Virginia … please do not ignore their little voices. I pray for a heart changed today, and may the Lord God have mercy upon this leadership.”
Some Democrats reportedly walked off the floor of the House while Grant was speaking. And Before he could complete his opening prayer, Grant was gaveled into silence by House Speaker Eileen Filler, who then began reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Recognizing the humanity of the unborn isn’t an act of faith, and recognizing the fact that abortion destroys a human life isn’t an expression of opinion. Both of these truths are arrived at through reason informed by science.
Through ultrasound images, DNA testing, scientific studies, etc., we can see that the life in the womb is a human being, just like us. And pictures, videos, and physical evidence show us the fatal consequences of abortion.
The bigger obstacle is convincing people to care about the humanity of the unborn in a culture that increasingly devalues the dignity and worth of human life.
People of goodwill who believe in protecting our fundamental human rights must continue to provide a voice for the voiceless unborn by educating the unaware about the reality of the “choice” offered by abortion supporters — and by firmly, but charitably, challenging those who seek to unjustly violate an innocent person’s right to life. Now’s the time to make our voices heard.
jim goodwin · February 26, 2020 at 8:17 pm
You need serious help and I hope you reach out to friends and family for some support. If anyone knows Tony, please reach out to him.
Tony Bentley · February 26, 2020 at 7:38 pm
We don't need any more people on this planet. Humans are like rats devouring everything it their path. If certain people don't want women getting abortions then it's time for mandatory vasectomies for men.
DonkeyFarmer · February 19, 2020 at 7:06 pm
It doesn't really matter what you think, or what I think. This has been debated ad naseum. It only matters what the Court thinks.
Trump has already replaced nearly 200 Federal judges. 2 SCOTUS justices.
You guys really think Ginsberg can hang on for 5 more years? What about 81 year old Breyer? And there are questions about the health of the diabetic Sotomayor. Make no mistake, that is what the leftists are most afraid of. Why do you think they pulled every dirty trick on Kavanaugh?
Hitlery Clinton · February 19, 2020 at 1:11 pm
If you kill humans and keep their parts in a fridge, you are Jeffrey Dahmer...but when Planned Parenthood does it, it's "health care" and it "empowers women."
Hitlery Clinton · February 19, 2020 at 1:07 pm
What kind of bull are you trying to sell here, Goebbelsthenes?
jim goodwin · February 19, 2020 at 9:16 am
Ok. Government can't regulate our beliefs (don't tell progressives!). It can't even regulate most of our actions. But it can and does regulate the consequences of our actions based on laws derived from our moral beliefs.
So we're back to who gets to define "human" or "person". If every individual gets to decide on that definition, then there's no moral basis for the law against murder.
Demosthenes · February 19, 2020 at 8:52 am
Exactly! And since we don't all have the same definitions we are lucky that we have a government that doesn't get to regulate our beliefs.
jim goodwin · February 19, 2020 at 8:42 am
Demos, it all comes down to how one defines "human" or "person".
And scientific consensus is meaningless. Ask Copernicus.
Demosthenes · February 19, 2020 at 8:38 am
goodwin - I understand your point about beliefs. But there is a difference between killing a live person (total scientific consensus) and killing a zygote (no scientific consensus). When we don't have a consensus then we are operating in the realm of belief, and our beliefs are protected from government control.
PabloCruz · February 19, 2020 at 8:26 am
Donkey Farmer-we do understand that there is another life involved; but this is not the be-all and the end-all to this issue. The real issue is; does the government get to dictate what individuals can and can't do with their bodies, in all situations. Many people who are in principle against abortion, still believe in situational exceptions, such as rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother. Like most Americans, if you believe that there may be a situation like this where an abortion might be appropriate or perhaps necessary, then you are pro-choice. This doesn't mean that you are pro-death, or a baby-killer, or any other pejoratives that someone may throw at you. If anyone is not familiar with the story of the kidnappings of Jaycee Dugard, or Elizabeth Smart, then take some time to re-familiarize yourself. Jaycee Dugard was kidnapped at age 11 and held captive for 18 years. She was raped repeatedly and became pregnant twice. Incidentally, Dugard's kidnapper, Phillip Garrido, believed he was a chosen servant of God. Brian Mitchell, one of Elizabeth Smart's captors, believed he was an angel and a Davidic King.
The arguments made by Mr. Cassandra and others, often emphasize the "life" question because in their rationale if there is life, then there is a right to life, and this right is absolute. But if this right is declared absolute, then it supersedes the rights of a mother (and her family) to have/make a choice that is oftentimes extremely difficult, and highly situational. Most Americans do not believe the government should have this declarative power.
jim goodwin · February 19, 2020 at 8:17 am
Demos, isn't it a belief that murder is immoral? Isn't it a belief that we have unalienable rights? Isn't it a belief that men can be women?
Some beliefs are rooted in millions of years of evolution and thousands of years of human societal development and refinement. Some beliefs are rooted in 100 years of progressive ideology.
We need to argue the merits of all of them. But that argument can't be had when people deny facts. When one argues that the zygote is "my body" we have to ask, "Why?" Is it because it is connected to your body by shared tissue? Well, so is the baby that emerges from the womb still connected. Why can we kill one and not the other? Why shouldn't we be able kill the baby up until the moment the umbilical cord is cut?
A zygote is still human. That is a fact. It is simply a less developed form of human. Just like an infant is a less developed form of human; arguably useless in its current state and completely dependent upon other humans for its survival (pack of benevolent wolves notwithstanding).
Demosthenes · February 19, 2020 at 7:08 am
A human is an organism with a lot of complicated interacting systems and a variety of types of cells.
A zygote starts as single cell that is too small to be seen with the naked eye.
While some people are sure that a zygote is human since it has the DNA to grow and develop into a full-fledged human being, there are others who look at how different the zygote is from a human and sees it as a microscopic precursor to life, but not a human yet.
The point is that not everyone agrees. And where we stand on it is really about our beliefs. And our government does not have the right to regulate our beliefs.
jim goodwin · February 19, 2020 at 5:47 am
Demos, if a zygote isn't human, what is it?
jim goodwin · February 19, 2020 at 5:46 am
Demos, if a zygote is human, what is it?
Linda, we give our government the authority to "tell others what to do with their own lives" when they violate the rights of others. It's immoral and unlawful to commit murder but, by your morality, that only applies if the life is outside the womb. It is only seconds that separates inside the womb with outside the womb. Are you telling us that the human that emerged from the womb was not a human mere seconds before emerging and therefore has no rights? That's not rational.
DonkeyFarmer · February 18, 2020 at 7:49 pm
It's every decent persons business to be concerned when children, or any person for that matter, is killed. And I don't care what you do with your own body, there is another life involved, you don't seem to understand that.
Linda Ward · February 18, 2020 at 7:36 pm
It's none of your business what anyone decides to do with their own bodies. What and who gave your the authority to tell others what to do within their own lives? You are not anyone's moral or physical judge.
Demosthenes · February 18, 2020 at 6:58 pm
While I commend your strong stance on this important issue, most of your argument is flawed because it is based on, in your words, "...the clear scientific evidence that human life begins at conception."
That scientific consensus does not exist.
Without that scientific consensus, we are left with a variety of different positions, each with their own belief about when life begins.
Our government doesn't get to regulate our beliefs. That is one of the most fundamental aspects built into the Bill of Rights. Since issues related to abortion come down to belief and not a scientific consensus, that is an area where the government has no right to operate.
You are very certain that abortion is morally wrong. That is your belief, and I would encourage you to use your voice to educate others to believe the same things that you believe. But I would not agree with you that the government should be used to push your beliefs on others.
Enter your email address above to begin receiving
news updates from FauquierNow.com via email.
Monday, April 6
The Fauquier County Circuit Court clerk’s office recorded these real estate transfers March 26-April 1, 2020
Monday, April 6
Amy Andrejewski had her career-changing, ”light-bulb moment” while working as an advertising sales representative
More Fauquier news
Monday, April 6
Cliffs Mill Road property owner awakened Friday night by vehicle in driveway and encountered suspect, sheriff”s office says