Part eleven in the series.
11: Doctors swear the Hippocratic Oath, and one of the most important parts of the oath is that they do no harm. However, some doctors will withhold care from babies born just short of the age of viability when if they did give care, that child is much more likely to survive. Last I checked, denying someone care like that that allows them to die is doing harm to someone.
Part ten in the series.
#10: This reason encompasses four common arguments for saying an unborn child is not a human: size, level of development, environment, and dependency. Let’s start firstly with size. People who are smaller of size; children, people with dwarfism, or people of shorter stature, are not less valid as human beings. They are equal. In the mainstream, we still consider them to also be humans. Therefore, a fetus, simply because he or she is small, does not make that human any less valid. Next, let’s talk level of development. A forty year old is more developed than a ten year old, and a four year old is more developed than a fetus. But is it okay to kill the ten year old simply because they’re less developed? No, it is not. FYI, that’s called murder (premeditated?). So in the same way, it is wrong to kill an unborn human simply because they are less developed than their born counterparts. Next, let’s consider environment. In a short span of time, when the baby exits the vaginal canal and moves from one environment to another, just a foot or so away, does this miraculous passage instill humanity in that baby? No, it does not. In the same way that a person in Indiana is no less valuable than one in Ohio. Or if a person travels a few feet, it does not change their value as a person. Finally, let’s consider the level of dependency. Just because a person is dependent on another, does not mean it is okay to kill the dependent. Toddlers and newborns depend on their parents to feed and support them. Even teens and college students still rely upon their parents in some ways, depending on how autonomous they are. If a toddler were to fall into a swimming pool, and need your help to be rescued, would you deny your support because that toddler depends on you for their survival? In society, we already condemn such inaction as neglect and worse. In the same way, we should not deny the unborn our support because they depend on the mother for life support.
Part nine in the series.
#9: This reason is all about the criteria science has laid out for life and related biological facts. While there are some things mentioned that there seems to be some disagreement on, some of the other things presented are well agreed upon and not up for debate, no matter what popular opinion is. For example, lack of heartbeat during the early stages of development is often used by pro-choice advocates for this–but if a person has a cardiac arrest or another cardiac cessation…we don’t consider them to not be a human being just because their heart has stopped…the same should be true for the littlest human. Additionally, feeling pain is another common argument (as the recent House bill indicates). There seems to be argument on when exactly unborn children feel pain (I’ve seen 20 and 24 and 27 weeks). Regardless of this, there are actual born and grown people who can no longer feel pain in parts of their bodies because of nerve damage. We don’t think of these people as any less because of this, so why should we for the unborn? To drive this point home, there is no objective way to measure amount of pain, and there seems to be some variation in this development. Also, as we well know from the variety of human appearance, a baby has distinct DNA from both his or her mother and father….if we didn’t, we’d be clones of our parents. Sometimes, children even have different blood types from one of their parents. I don’t remember if that is true for myself, but I do recollect having read articles of this possibility. Additionally, the criteria for life is that living things are distinguished from dead things and non-living things by the capacity to grow, metabolize, respond to stimuli, adapt, and (eventually) reproduce. A human embryo has this life-denoting capacity.
I don’t remember where I saw this article (probably Facebook), but this article is a fantastic argument against the whole preferred pronouns business of the transgender movement. Enjoy!
http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/11/dont-use-female-pronouns-transgender-brother/
Part eight in the series.
#8: The point that a baby is viable (able to survive) outside of the womb is a constantly changing distinction, and different in almost every case. In the past, we didn’t have the technology to help out babies born very early, but as technology advances, the point of viability becomes earlier and earlier, so this does not serve as a proper and constant distinction between human and not yet human as it is not a fixed constant.
My mom sent me this video she found on Facebook a while ago about the history of the national anthem. I got chills watching this video, and it only reaffirms my belief that during the national anthem is not the time or place to be protesting police brutality or anything or the sort. I hope you enjoy and learn something new from this video!
Part six in my Reasons to Not Have an Abortion series.
#6: It encourages casual sex without consequences. Then, this casual sex becomes a cycle. When you have sex with someone other than a spouse or before you’re married, you are more likely to get STDs or an unplanned pregnancy. No matter what society might say, the only 100% reliable way to prevent these things is to not have sex. Other methods may work, but they are always subject to failure. In addition, in the case of sexual abuse and sex trafficking abortion can hide evidence–a child. The fact that there’s an unborn child is evidence that sex has occurred (at least, unless you happen to be the Virgin Mary, it is otherwise impossible for humans to naturally conceive without things such as IVF), and if someone is otherwise not supposed to have sex, an unborn child just serves as another red flag. Additionally, just as the idea of “keeping the baby” can be used to manipulate women to stay in a bad relationship, abortion can also be used to manipulate the woman to stay in a bad relationship by a man saying that he won’t stay with a woman unless she aborts the child (although, to be real, the fact that a man would use an abortion to pressure a woman into staying in a relationship is a very good sign that the guy isn’t worthy of you anyways).
This a little lesson about civil rights that I found on Facebook that everyone should be reminded of when it’s implied that the Democrats have always been virtuous freedom fighters and the Republicans have always been racists. Enjoy!
I believe I saw this article in a post one of my friends shared on Facebook. It is an eye opening article into why Democrats have supported illegal immigration in recent years–although I think many conservatives have come to these conclusions already. Enjoy!
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-democrats-immigration-mistake/528678/
I saw this on Facebook a few weeks ago, and I thought I it thoroughly encapsulates how privileged Congress is and how we we want them to be treated the same as us. Enjoy!
Letters to a Young Conservative 