About Me

Name: Duck Archer
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Tiller's Third Trimester Abortions

  It’s amazing a Supreme Court can find a means to skirt the Constitution, to let Tiller, and hundreds like him, terminate millions of inalienable rights to Life. Without Life, Liberty is impossible. To say nothing of pursuing happiness …

[The following is copied here by request:]

What do LeRoy Carhart, Warren Hern, and George Tiller have in common? They are among an unknown number who perform abortions in the third trimester of pregnancy (the third trimester being the seventh, eighth, and ninth month!)

For two decades I have been proclaiming from the pulpits of America that abortions happen in the third trimester. Many Americans find it hard to believe. Now, in the aftermath of the death of George Tiller, this fact is getting a bit more attention.

The Associated Press reported on June 2 in an article by Eric Olson that physician LeRoy Carhart of Nebraska wants to continue performing abortions at this late stage, but he, as well as Warren Hern, also want to make sure enough physicians are trained in how to do so.

How many are we talking about? The AP story reported, "Carhart said 75 to 100 of the "several thousand" abortions he performs annually are in the third trimester."

Stanley K. Henshaw, a senior fellow at the Guttmacher Institute, the research division of Planned Parenthood, and the best source of these statistics, is quoted in a June 5 Washington Post article as saying, "The information just isn't available...This is an area that we just don't know much about."

The Guttmacher Institute does report in its official statistics, however, that some 13,310 abortions each year are at 21 weeks or more of pregnancy (that is, 1.1% of the 1.21 million abortions per year). Of the 40 states that reported in 2005 to the Centers for Disease Control, 32 states reported abortions of babies 21 weeks or older.

This means that every day, 37 babies the size of a large banana are dismembered and decapitated - and these include healthy babies of healthy mothers...and it's happening legally.

These are babies that the mother can already feel moving. According to MedlinePlus, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health, these babies are storing fat on their bodies, their heartbeat can be heard with a stethoscope, they can hear, they have eyebrows, eyelashes, fingernails and toenails. Incidentally, MedlinePlus calls them "babies." (See www.nlm.nih.gov/MEDLINEPLUS/ency/article/002398.htm ).

Many people wonder how they can get some traction in the seemingly intractable abortion debate. How can they get people to listen, or make pro-choice people believe that pro-life people have good reason to be against abortion?

My suggestion: start by discussing the facts I just mentioned.

It's morally legitimate to focus on late-term abortion; that doesn't deny that all abortion is wrong; it's simply a way to get the ball rolling, a pedagogical method of going from the most obvious to the less obvious, of starting with what people know and leading to what they don't know.

When people are astonished by these facts, as they will be, they are forced to re-evaluate just how much priority "privacy" and "choice" have over life. If they are "pro-choice," they are forced to figure out when in pregnancy the line is drawn - and why.

And now you're talking.

The text and audio of this column can be found online at www.priestsforlife.org/columns/columns2009/09-06-15-pro-choice-crisis.htm

Fr. Frank's columns are podcast. Click here for more information.

Comments on this Column?
Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
 
.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

4 quick Border Control points

 

1.  Secure the border

    a.  choose which parts of the border are inherently unfriendly to smuggling, which are simultaneously friendly to border control agents:  

         - build up facilities for fully processing/imprisoning illegals/smugglers  

         - incarcerate criminals (versus illegal migrant workers) in Arizona Tent City style, don't just put them in normal prisons, nor send them back to try again
 
    b.  secure, with actual and rumored defenses, the other parts of the border, with priority to those that are geographically undesirable/unfavorable to border control defenders  

         - deters illegals/smugglers, and slows down the reduced number who still try those areas

         - give border control agents more time and ability to work unfavorable terrain to best possible advantage  

    c.  any fence is better than no fence
 
         - anything at all that slows down the illegal activity will conversely increase the odds of apprehension

2.  Get serious about defending the country in its border regions, including citizens therein

    a.  arm & man the border commensurate with the low-intensity guerrilla conflict that it is

    b.  enhance ‘eyes in the sky’ with spectral remote sensors and people who know how to use spectral signatures, comm-linked to vectorable ‘boots on the ground’

3.  Address Illegals already here 

    a.  adopt a more realistic policy:  "OK, you broke our immigration laws, but we were often lax about enforcing the borderline, too"

         - grant amnesty to illegal immigrants who voluntarily depart on their own

         - publicize:  “we won’t shoot at anybody moving out of our country, moving towards & across our border”

    b.  burden becomes benefit

         - encourages illegals to return outward the same way they came in:  not at taxpayer expense

         - taxpayer burden dramatically lightened, and/or frees significant funds spent on in-country apprehension, for:

             - -  actual border defense operations

             - -  monitoring of identified “outward movers”, whether ID’d through traffic stops or self-identification 

    c.  enact a Constitutional Amendment clarifying triggers for USA citizenship, or seek a new lawsuit for the Supreme Court to overturn its ruling that a child born in the USA of illegal immigrant parentage has USA citizenship

         - that ruling is NOT the way the Constitution was written

         - outragious 'Dred Scott' decisions (including a grafting of citizenship though from illegal immigrants) are proper for overturning

    d.  Enact fully-funded federal legislation to *dramatically* increase, by start of Fiscal 2010, the numbers of LEGAL immigrant applications that USA Immigration officers can review and grant, though not for illegals until they have first left the USA


4.  Defend American citizens.  

    a.  eliminate ‘sanctuary cities’, and publicize & increase the frequency of the unannounced roundup raids on employers of illegals  
         - thus continue to enhance incentives for self-deportation in manner similar to original illegal immigration, but safer, since thugs can’t realistically threaten illegals with extreme measures in exchange for hiding (as long as movement is southward)
    b.  ensure all USA citizens within 100 miles of the border are allowed to obtain, should they desire:
         - ‘concealed carry’ permits & weapons
         - heavier caliber home/ranch-defense weapons … (the heavier cal probably wouldn’t be concealed …),
         - all other defense means & methods that can match the ferocity of weapons & tactics employed by illegal immigrants, smugglers, & drug cartels in/near our borders
 

These 4 steps to national defense on the border, are in accord with international, national, & moral law:

     a.  the international “nation-state system” recognizes each country's right to self-defense
         - by inherent definition, self-defense is meaningless if a nation cannot control its borders

   b.  our Constitution entrusts national defense to elected officials
         - and of the smaller-scale version (self-defense) to the citizens 

    c.  the Catholic Church states a grave duty, not a mere right, to national self defense:
         - "... governments cannot be denied the right to legitimate defense ... Therefore, government authorities and others who share public responsibility have the duty to protect the welfare of the people entrusted to their care and to conduct such grave matters soberly."
         - source: 2nd Vatican Council Document "The Church Today" [Chapter 5 "The Fostering of Peace ...", section 79, paragraph 5]
 
 - Duck Archer
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Not all 80% want the same 'change'!

Something's been bothering me for about a decade, and irritating me for some years before then. Now, retired, I can speak freely. 

I charge:
  - my fellow citizens, who I spent 20 years defending, to consider the logic I lay out below, and inform their elected leaders about conclusions based off this logic and any subsequent research.
  - politicians, who I spent 20 years obeying, to find some speaking nuggets here.  I hope they do indeed take an overpowering stand for energy sense... there should be something good they can do with the logic below.

I'm one of the apparent 80% of Americans fed up with the status quo. And I indeed want 'change'.

But my part of the 80% is the kind opposed to change that goes further in the liberal-socialist direction.
  - I have lived in 9 states and in DC, spanning from the Potomac to the Pacific Coast, from Texas to Minnesota. I've traveled extensively in 30-some other states. I have a good random sampling of conditions across the USA. In the USA we can have smog-haze, in addition to normal meteorological 'inversion' conditions. But at it's worst, whether a natural inversion or man-made smog layer, I could always at least find a brighter spot in the sky, and know where the sun was. Very few days were 'at its worst'.
  - I also lived in the Far East for two years, and traveled among various countries in Europe, Central America, and the Middle East. I have seen pollution. I have seen Chinese & Korean pollution so thick that I couldn't find the sun on a cloudless day... too many days to count, in just two years. Never seen that pure-white sky anyplace in the USA. I've never gone jogging in the USA, and afterwards felt like I'd just smoked two packs of cigarettes. I've felt that in Korea.
- I'm 44 years old. I have a memory. I use my memory. I've sampled some 16,000 days thus far in my life; about 12,000 days since achieving an age of reason. That should be statistically significant for any eyewitness.
- I can verify that the USA has absolutely no pollution problem, especially compared to other countries; current USA environmental regulation is over-achieving.
- As a friend of many liberals, I know the most radical of the environmentalists are grinning with glee at high petroleum prices, and want those prices to keep going up. That's their part of the 80%, not my part.  Rather, I say we have absolutely no need for even more government restriction.

I dare to assess, with a memory of the days I've seen, that we even have some room to relax a bit.

I want government out of the way.
- I'm fed up with ever bigger government. I can balance my budget, but my state and my Fed cannot.
- I'm not affiliated with any oil company, but I know oil companies procure, process, and provide all manner of historically stupendously efficient petroleum energy. Government does not produce natural gas, gasoline, nor any other product. Yet I witnessed federal legislators assuming a self-declared righteous position, grilling oil executives. The congress members behaved as pathetic buffoons. I know well that oil companies make only 2/3rds the profits that government makes in taxing that hard work.

In general, I'm fed up with government that assumes an elitist air, and dares to challenge the hippie song: "He can't even run his own life, I'll be damned if he'll run mine!" Ironic. That song is now a legitimate charge against amok liberalism.

I'm part of that 80% that wants a government to stand up for common sense and logic, over emotive hype and half-baked half-truths. A few simple points suffice:
- We drilled & pipelined Prudhoe Bay with 1970s technology, and Alaska has not suffered. ANWR, with even 1990s technology, should be a no-brainer.  Same conclusion for offshore drilling, just like China is doing off our very shores just on the other side of our oceanic boundary with another country's territorial waters!
- And I cannot comprehend who could seriously push for petroleum-produced food to be converted, with more petroleum, into a petroleum substitute.
- Again, I have a memory. I know full well that Impending Ice Age was the scare a generation ago. I know full well that global warming began before mankind began the Industrial Revolution.

In the real world, cause must precede effect. Yet state & federal government actions regarding all the above, and energy policy generally, is not short of ludicrous. A link could be made to our founding documents:  "When in the course of human events ... " But at the least, a quote from the comedian Gallagher definitely applies to current government over-intervention in American liberties and the general welfare in pursuit of happiness. As Gallagher once said, ironically, about government-run schools: "It makes no sense!"

I want government to wake up to reality, to stand firm against environmentalists, against their wacky pseudo-science, and against various earmark and other end-around pressures. I want government to get out of the way of current-technology oil drilling, pipelining, shipping, refining, and distribution. I want, indeed: "drill here, drill now, pay less". That's the most sense I've heard from any politician in about a decade!

Stop the madness of 'cap & trade'. Cease the Warner-Lieberman style of idiocy, and all state-level equivalents.

In this essay, I've focused on petroleum. And it's for good reason:  petroleum has been to energy what penicillin was to medicine. But similar can (and should) be said about nuclear energy. One might also, after hearing what geologists like Apollo-17 astronaut Harrison Schmitt have to say, become a lot more serious and urgent about nuclear fusion, and moon-mining operations to get this wonderful fuel. But nuclear fusion is at least several years away; we don't even any more have hardware that can get man and mining to the moon. However, we do have nuclear fission, and all manner of petroleum-based energy, that are technologically mature & 'immediately' available.

Bottom line:
1. Government, in general, get out of the way!
2. Government, specifically, loosen the reigns on American energy!
3. Government, eliminate regulations & laws, now!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »