dave@teltone.UUCP (07/13/83)
Children-Things We Throw Away? by Melody Green (Parts copied by
Dave, for a copy of the entire tract, order LD#3 from Melody
Green, Last Days Lifeline, P.O. Box 40, Lindale, TX 75771.
"Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my
body for the sin of my soul?" -Micah 6:7.
Non-therapeutic abortion has become the second most common surgi-
cal procedure after circumcision. Non-therapeutic means that the
abortion is not performed to insure the life or health of the
woman, but rather because of her desire for convenience, absence
of distress, and her so-called happiness.
Doctors perform 1.2 million abortions per year in the United
States alone...that's one for every 2.8 live births. Abortion has
become so frequent, that population experts say that it has be-
come in effect, a new form of birth control. But abortion should
not be confused with birth control, which prevents a new life
from beginning-abortion destroys that new life once it has al-
ready begun. Of the women having them, 75% are unmarried, 32% are
teenagers and 20% are "repeat customers."
Abortion techniques
The following are the most commonly used abortion techniques:
DILATION AND CURETTAGE(D&E): The opening of the cervix is dilated
with a series of instruments to allow the insertion of a curette,
or sharp scraping instrument, into the uterus. The fetus is then
cut into pieces and scraped from the uterine wall. Bleeding is
usually profuse. The operating nurse must then re-assemble the
parts to make sure the uterus is empty, otherwise infection will
set in.
SUCTION CURETTAGE (Vacuum Aspiration): Using this method, the
cervix is dilated as in a D & C, and then a tube is inserted into
the uterus and connected to a strong suction apparatus. The vacu-
um is so powerfull that the baby is torn to bits and then sucked
into a jar.
SALT POISONING (Saline Injection): This method is used after 16
weeks when enough fluid has accumulated in the sac around the
baby. A long needle is inserted through the mother's abdomen into
the baby's sac. Some fluid is removed and a strong salt solution
is injected in. The helpless baby swallows this poison and
suffers severely. He kicks and jerks violently as he is literally
being burned alive by the solution. It takes over an hour for the
baby to die by this method...his outer layer of skin is complete-
ly burned off. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the
mother will give birth to a dead baby. (Quite frequently these
babies are born alive. They are usually left unattended to die.
However, a few who have survived the ordeal-due to the mercy of
the hospital staff-have later been adopted.)
HYSTEROTOMY OR CAESARIAN SECTION: Used mainly in the last 3
months of pregnancy, the womb is entered by surgery through the
wall of the abdomen. The tiny baby is removed and allowed to die
by neglect or sometimes killed by a direct act.
PROSTAGLANDIN CHEMICAL ABORTION: This newest for of abortion uses
chemicals developed by the Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. These chem-
icals cause the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the
developing baby. The contractions are so abnormally severe, that
babies have even been known to be decapitated by them. Many how-
ever, have also been born alive. The side-effects to the mother
are many-a number have even died from cardiac-arrest when the
compounds were injected.
HYPOCRITIC OATH?
"To none will I give a deadly drug, nor offer counsel to such and
end...but guiltless and hallowed will I keep may art."
"Sure, the money was important. And oh, it was and easy thing,
once I had taken this step...to see these women as animals and
these babies as just tissue."
The Myth of the "Unwanted Child"
One of the most frequently heard excuses of the "pro-choice"
groups is, "it would be unfair to bring another 'unwanted child'
into the world." Actually, there is no such thing. Once a baby
is born it will never be unwanted because of the extreme shortage
of newborn babies available for adoption. It is obviously not the
child's happiness and well-being that is of utmost concern
here...but that of the parents.
If you are about to make the fatal mistake of ending a life given
of God(PSALM 127:3), then I beg you to reconsider. Please don't
do something that you will regret for the rest of your life.
Don't destroy something that isn't yours. That baby belongs to
God, even though it may be in your womb. If you do not feel
equipped to raise a baby at this time, I urge you to take another
look at the situation... maybe there is a way...pray about it.
If you still feel that this is an impossibility-then BE A GIVER,
NOT A TAKER.
There are good agencies that will help you place your baby in a
loving, gratefull home. I know of good Christian families just
waiting for the chance to adopt a child. You can give the
greatest possible gift of all...the gift of life! In fact, you
can give it twice..
There was a lot more to this tract but I felt that these would be
good parts to give my view point. Though these are not my words,
this is how I feel. I am a married father with another on the
way. Though I do not know what it is like to be with child, I
have some ideas since I am living with my wife whom is pregnant.
If you have any questions please send them to the name and ad-
dress at the top of this letter.
"Do not kill the innocent...for I will not acquit the
guilty"(Exo. 23:7). The eyes of the Lord are in every place, be-
holding the evil and the good"(Prov. 15:3).
Respectfully, David Heppner.hutch@dadla-b.UUCP (07/15/83)
In regards to David Heppner's quoting of a tract on abortion to this newsgroup. David, your article made some interesting points, which I will not discuss in this inappropriate forum. Instead, I want to comment on the text of the tract. I have not seen such a fine example of propagandistic argument since the last time I read the Communist rag printed on the Berkeley campus by the CIA as an attempt to get a handle on "young anarchists". Specifically: Graphic description of the procedures used in an abortion (which were useful information) need not be packaged with such exaggerated phrasing nor is it necessary to use the tricks of half-truth, the glittering generality, the loaded phrase, and so on. Referring to a barely developed fetus as a "tiny baby" is the same kind of exaggeration used by groups like GreenPeace, talking about the "helpless, baby seals with their large, trusting brown eyes". I have no quarrel with GreenPeace, nor with people who want to remind us that a fetus is a developing human being, but I resent the manipulative approach. The fact that this kind of "persuasion" is being applied to such an improtant issue (important, I mean) is a symptom of the kind of wholesale emotional manipulation which is being used nowadays instead of reasoned argument. Politicians have to have "image-makers" wo sell them to the public, and the ones with good image-makers can be senile, dithering, uneducated, ill informed, vulgar, and incompetent, but with the proper presentation, an actor with no qualifications can become a governor, or even a president. Now. Quiz time. Can you spot the propaganda devices I used in the preceding paragraph? Do you really WANT to have your decisions made for you, not by reasoning them from the best information you can get, but by indirect appeals to your emotions, with the intention of changing your mind by swaying your passions? In conclusion, Dave, thanks for publishing the INFORMATION, but no thanks for the format it came in. Steve Hutchison Tektronix Logic Analyzers
nrh@inmet.UUCP (07/17/83)
#R:teltone:-16800:inmet:7800009:000:395 inmet!nrh Jul 17 03:36:00 1983 Look, if you want to start quoting the bible to us, please do it in net.religion. Or I'll start quoting "The Book of the SubGenius" to YOU! "Another View" -- BAH! I do appreciate the effort you make to keep it civil, and I like the positive attitude of your article, but I find it rather tiresome to find a topic which has been flogged to death in net.women appearing here in net.politics.
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (07/18/83)
David Heppner writes:
The Myth of the "Unwanted Child"
One of the most frequently heard excuses of the "pro-choice"
groups is, "it would be unfair to bring another 'unwanted child'
into the world." Actually, there is no such thing. Once a baby
is born it will never be unwanted because of the extreme shortage
of newborn babies available for adoption. It is obviously not the
child's happiness and well-being that is of utmost concern
here...but that of the parents.
I am afraid I have some news for you, Dave. There are LOTS of unwanted
children. If you ever travel in Central America and mention that you are from
Canada or the United States, there will be *literally hundreds* of mothers
who will want to give or sell their children to you. Some of these will be
motivated by "wanting the best for the child" but a lot are not. In addition,
in Honduras, San Salvador, Guatemala and poorer parts of Mexico, (presumably
in other countries where I have never been as well) infanticide is COMMON.
One of the best things I ever did was to help fix cleft lips and cleft palates
among children in Central America. You get to meet children whose mother has
kept them in a closet since they were born because they are ashamed of their
cleft lip. You meet a child who would have had a twin sister, except that the
midwife told the mother that there was a "good" twin and a "bad" twin, and
that after you had identified the "bad" twin (full of evil spirits) you
should kill it.
But, let us forget about the rest of the world for a bit. I have some
more bad news for you. There are other unwanted children, even in your
own town. They are the TEEN AGE CHILDREN who were adopted while babies by
foster parents who now regret the decision. Surprised? So was I. On the
other hand, in the Toronto area is a group of parents (about 200 parents)
in all who feel that they have been had.
they adopted a child and the child didnt turn out. They are the parents
of adopted kids whose children are up to their necks in trouble with
the law. Some are murderers. Some are drug-dealers. Some are guilty of
robbery. Some are dead. The current consensus of every psychologist who
has viewed the situations of all the Toronto parents is that it was the
ADOPTION ITSELF which produced the bad children. The parents may have
contributed to the children's dilinquency, but any adopted child is at
a very high risk to be immoral, or rather amoral.
I can post the current theories on why adopted children do not turn out.
It would be a very long message, so unless people are interested, I will
stop here. I honestly only know one person who has adopted a child and
does not regret the decision 18 years later. I honestly know more than
20 people who regret it, including my parents.
If we are going to get a huge number of adopted kids because we ban all
non-theraputic abortions then we are going to have to learn how to raise
them. It seems to be an entirely different problem from one of raising
kids in general. And I dont know anyone who has the answers.
Laura Creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laurageo@watarts.UUCP (07/22/83)
Laura Creighton, in the article to which this is a followup, countered the claim posted in an earlier article, that there was a large, unfulfilled demand for children to be adopted. I just wanted to add that in North America healthy white babies get adopted. Non-white babies, or those with visible birth defects, get left in institutions. Cordially, Geo Swan, Integrated Studies, University of Waterloo (allegra||ihnp4)!watmath!watarts!geo
ucbesvax.turner@ucbcad.UUCP (07/28/83)
#R:teltone:-16800:ucbesvax:7500023:000:412 ucbesvax!turner Jul 21 23:43:00 1983 After committing the rhetorical equivalent of arson, Dave signs off with the self-cancelling "Respectfully". It would have been far more honest for him to close by asking us how we would have liked it if *we* had been torn to bits and sucked into a jar. That seems to the ultimate retort in the "pro-life" arsenal. Reassembling the Pieces of my Aborted Composure, Michael Turner ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner
courtney@hp-pcd.UUCP (Courtney Loomis) (07/28/83)
#R:teltone:-16800:hp-pcd:17400026:000:1248
hp-pcd!courtney Jul 27 13:14:00 1983
It is noble to make graphic the biological realities of abortion so
that people can be aware of the act that the may choose to instigate.
I hope that those who are so vocal and righteous about the "unholiness"
of abortion are as equally vocal in response to:
-the slaughter of dolphins and whales for the sake of COST-REDUCING
perfumes and pet food... intelligent, social, and feeling
beings (as much or more so than a fetus).
-the use of leg-hold traps... a slow death of an agony that
most humans can hardly imagine.
-the use of scarce world resources to build arsenals beyond conceivable
utility, instead of using those resources to feed the millions of
people in this world who live in pain daily for lack of a basic meal.
FACT -hunger is a problem of resource distribution, not one of
inability to produce the food.
The list could go on. Perhaps what is needed is an abortion technique
which kills the fetus much more quickly and painlessly. Abortion is a
recognition of the fact that humans are fragile and subject to error.
It is absurd to exacerbate the mistake of conceiving an unwanted child
by bringing such a pregnancy to term.
Courtney Loomis