Re-Blog from Patrick Mead called “Consequence of Choice”

By Patrick Mead                                                                                           November 9, 2011

I could have called this the Consequences of Voting or the Consequences of Mandated Murder just as easily as The Consequence of Choice. You’ll see why.

I’ve heard a lot of arguments against abortion [they list several] but doesn’t a woman have the right to choose?

The Problem with Choice:


No one column – or ten columns – can adequately deal with the subject of abortion. That said, I have no problem telling you why I am opposed to it even in the case of incest or rape.

First, the “incest or rape” exception is nearly mythical. I’ve seen a wide variety of figures on abortion and have never seen more than 0.5% attributed to incest and rape combined. Usually, the percentage is far, far lower. But why would I not agree that abortion, in those cases, is just fine? Because in a civilized society we do not kill the children of criminals. (I find it fascinating that the same people who oppose killing career criminals after multiple trials are, generally speaking, supporters of “a woman’s right to choose” but that’s a subject for another day)

Why do I oppose what is meant when someone says “a woman’s right to choose?” Because no individual has the right to kill an innocent life just because they choose to do so. The child also has the right to choose. The way abortion advocates get around this is to deny that the fetus is a child. The fact is that by law (in most States) and by virtue of its unique DNA and heartbeat, it IS a child. I will absolutely agree that there is room for disagreement on when the child is ensouled by God and even when we can call it a viable life (fertilization? Implantation? Heartbeat?) but by every scientific definition of life, it is alive.

While one or two statisticians have written in disagreement, most who have studied abortion tell us that abortion is one of the reasons that many of our social programs are now in great danger. We are not birthing workers and tax payers who we were relying on to pay for Social Security, Medicare, etc. And there are a great many other “side effects” of abortion. Some of these were covered in a book by a non-Christian who has no evangelical horse to ride in this debate. Mara Hvistendahl has written a book entitled “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.” I originally read a review of this book in Christianity Today by Marian Liautaud and I need to give her credit for getting me into this book.

Hvistendahl quotes the Chinese proverb “women hold up half the sky” and goes from that to show us that the entire planet is in serious trouble due to the lack of women being born due to selective abortions, especially in China, India, South Korea and other Asian countries. And, since 2008 and the Obama administration’s executive order reversing long standing American law, you are paying for some of those abortions directly and many more indirectly (by providing funds for other purposes knowing that that releases other funds to be used to directly fund abortion).

In China, by far the most populous nation on earth, the “one child” law means that girls are not only unvalued, they are considered a drain on resources. The average Chinese kindergarten is a sea of boy faces with very few girls in the mix. In Asia alone, Hvistendahl says that 160 million girls have been aborted.

In nations that do not have a “one child” policy, technology has arrived allowing people in Albania, Azerbaijan, and Europe to “weed out” girls, aborting them so that they can have a son. Sons are usually given easier access to education, cheaper to marry, and they continue the family name so when resources are limited, families choose to have one or two sons and no girls. Ultrasounds help them make sure they don’t accidentally have a girl. Hvistendahl goes after General Electric, Rockefeller, and the Ford Foundation (all HUGE supporters of leftist media and politicians) for supplying the technology knowing it will be used for sex selection. In fact, Hvistendahl shows the letters, emails, and balance sheets that prove that Planned Parenthood and the Rockefeller Foundation have given billions of dollars to India and other countries with the express stipulation that they can only have that money and materiel (food, medicine, etc.) if they agree to control their population with birth control and abortion. A nation has to agree to murder its (mainly female) children in the womb before they will be given food and medicine for the remaining population. Sick yet?

In the US we abort 3,700 babies every day. Every. Day. It is estimated (you would be appalled at how lax reporting rules are – or sanitation rules – for abortion mills) that 60% of those aborted are girls. So much for a woman’s right to choose. We are weeding out women by abortion. We are also weeding out African Americans who have dropped to third in the “majority race” sweepstakes behind Anglos and Latinos and, if current trends continue, may fall behind Asians in the lifetime of some reading this blog. Why? Because abortion is aggressively pushed in the African American communities by well meaning (I assume) social workers and politicians who believe that cutting down the number of African American children will also cut down on poverty. Rather than relax regulation on business and make a simpler tax code – which WOULD relieve poverty in a major way – they prefer to push the abortion option.

And the male population swells as the female population slowly disappears. These packs of young men are a problem. Untold millions of them have zero chance of being married and raising a family. Without the civilizing effect of marriage, they are more prone to violence and crime and we see both of those already passing epidemic levels in China and India. Governments may very well use these piles of men to wage war just to keep them busy. Better they fight in another country than in their home village. Women are slipping out of the picture, because of a “woman’s right to choose.”

I keep looking at this sociological and moral nightmare and hearing a phrase again and again… “Be not deceived. God is not mocked. What a man sows, so shall he reap.” (Galatians 6:7)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s