From The American Thinker:
November 13, 2010
Planned Parenthood Is Worried...and Should Be
By Peter Heck
In an e-mail to supporters the day after the 2010 midterm elections, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards wrote, "There's no getting around it: the results of yesterday's election are truly alarming." She lamented the "extremists" who have been elected and who will "pursue a dangerous agenda." That agenda, of course, is saving unborn children from being murdered.
Still, amidst the doom and gloom of her correspondence, Richards pointed to one shining success for the movement of legalized child-killing: Colorado's ballot initiative 62 -- an amendment that would have defined the child in the womb as a person and therefore entitled to legal protection -- was defeated by voters 70% to 30%.
Ironically, though this is perceived as a victory for the abortion lobby, the debate that preceded it actually exposed the Achilles heel of the anti-life movement in America. It is now beyond question that the entire case for legalized abortion totally eschews science, medicine, logic, and rational thought. The best justification Planned Parenthood can offer for the perpetuation of this barbaric practice is a relativistic brand of emotional appeal that offends the intellect and shock the conscience.
For proof, consider what happened at Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado just weeks before the election. Debating the two sides of Amendment 62 were spokesmen for Personhood USA and an organization called Advocates for Choice, the college outreach group of Planned Parenthood.
After being presented with the biological evidence of the unborn child's humanity, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman proudly proclaimed to the audience, "We are not going to try to use science or evidence -- the fact of the matter is, this is, this is opinion. We all have our own opinions as far as when human life begins."
The utter stupidity inherent in such a statement is hard to digest. Is it seriously the position of Planned Parenthood that what constitutes human life and what does not is merely a matter of personal opinion? A murderer is no longer a murderer if he or she simply declares that he or she doesn't believe in the humanity of the victim?
This relativistic tripe makes a mockery of what is legitimately and scientifically known: that the terms "embryo" and "fetus" -- just as other terms like "infant" or "adult" -- don't refer to nonhumans. They refer to humans at particular stages of development. But this blatant antipathy towards science, expressed by the Advocates for Choice, was just beginning.
Later, that same Planned Parenthood spokeswoman enlightened the audience that "[w]hat is inside a body that cannot function outside its host is not a child." Leaving aside the galling use of the word "host" to define the relationship between a mother and her baby, this argument represents a transparent strategy of misdirection.
Viability -- that is, the ability to function independently and autonomously -- is an arbitrary line drawn to determine what a person can do. It does not determine what a person is. Highlighting that significant detail implodes this entire line of faulty logic.
Yet seemingly undeterred by these inconvenient facts, the anti-science activists from Planned Parenthood railed on: "We're talking about science as if it is something that is absolutely concrete, like there is absolute proof that there is life and there is not life."
Knowing how to respond to that ridiculousness is difficult, because it demonstrates not only a total disregard of simple biology, but also a bizarre contempt for rational thinking. Ignorance is frustrating. But taking pride in ignorance is scary.
And how can we not be frightened when considering that the same Planned Parenthood activists who went on to level further jewels of idiocy, like "science cannot be applied to my body" and "the heart doesn't beat 'til 24 weeks" (medical science has established that the heart begins beating at three weeks), are the very ones who have crafted our national policy on abortion?
Listening to their parade of buffoonery, I understand why the leadership of Planned Parenthood is concerned about the outcome of the recent elections. To their eternal shame, the Democratic Party have sold their soul to forces perpetuating the great moral evil of our day. In exchange for campaign donations and votes, they have been willing to facilitate the transfer of millions of taxpayer dollars to this abortion mill.
But with heavy Democrat losses at the national and state level comes the possibility of dealing with Republican lawmakers who will not be willing to barter the lives of unborn children for Planned Parenthood's blood money.
Indeed, Indiana's staunch conservative Representative Mike Pence has already authored legislation to strip the abortion chain of their federal funding. And with Republicans gaining almost 700 state legislature seats across the country, several states have signaled their intent to do the same.
God willing, they will follow through. For as the Advocates for Choice demonstrate, the science of this issue was settled long ago. All that remains is for us to have the moral courage to act on it.
Peter is a public high school government teacher and radio talk show host in central Indiana. E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org or visit www.peterheck.com.