Not Sure Why

Not sure why the "big A" issue has been on my mind a lot lately. But, I came across this article in the American Spectator which touched on another point of the abortion debate which continues to bug me as contratdictory: a lot of the people who advocate so strongly for the "right" to destroy human life in the womb, fail to acknowledge the racist origins of their theology of death.

Some excerpts from the article:

WASHINGTON -- After a lengthy incubation, the sick dreams of Margaret Sanger are finally hatching. Against the excuses of her modern defenders, it should be remembered that the founder of Planned Parenthood's main interest in the legalization of abortion was not that women should be freed from the bonds of childbearing, but that unsavory types should be cleansed from the larger population.

In fact, Sanger only turned to abortion when her original plan to "apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation" to those with "objectionable traits" -- sometimes derided as the stronger epithet "human weeds" -- found little support. Turned out folks felt a bit queasy about sending those of certain ethnic backgrounds and with disabilities and mental illnesses off to "farm lands and homesteads" to be "taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives."

Yes, dSt. Maggs, patron of the Culture of Death, was quite a compassionate liberal, concerned with "rights" and "freedom", more or less. Well, less, actually.

Sounds a bit like a concentration camp, no? Then again, she was a great admirer of the Nazi eugenics movement. Like Hitler, she had a long list of folks she wanted to eliminate from society, including "illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope fiends."

More to the point, Sanger considered non-Aryan people "a great biological menace to the future of civilization." The same woman considered a saint today by the pro-choice crowd warned supporters in 1939 that they did not want "word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population."

Ouch...it is hard to imagine anyone that doesn't wear a white sheet spewing such hatred. It just goes to show that if you "pretty up" Satan with the right words or "beliefs" you can get society (at least the portion who support abortion without reservation) to buy in. Much more effective than the goose-stepping and cross-burning, don't you think?

But look at the massive abortion rates in modern black neighborhoods and set them against, say, the merely moderate rates in white neighborhoods, and it becomes depressingly clear that Sanger helped accomplish something both depressing and far-reaching. If these high death rates were attached to a war, it would be called genocide. When it happens in a Planned Parenthood office we call it progress.

Forgive us for perpetuating, as a society, this evil beyond description.

According to a front page article in Sunday's New York Times, upwards of 500 medical conditions can be diagnosed by tests on fetal cells "with more than 100 tests added in the last year alone." And, as literally hundreds of science fiction novels predicted, those of us who fail to measure up to the state of normalcy determined by society-at-large are getting the axe in utero.

The results are fairly ugly. For starters, more Down's Syndrome children are now aborted than born. Not for any lack of sentience or capacity for joy or love, they simply move too slowly for modern tastes. Unborn children at risk for cystic fibrosis, expected to live 35 to 40 years, are also increasingly not worth the trouble. Tragic as the disease might be, we never react to the death of an 18-year-old in a car accident by wishing they'd never been born. Exactly how many years must people live before their lives are considered worthwhile?

And, why stop at physical or mental defects? Political and religious defects are just as damning. The signs held by abortion protestors lement the fact that the Pope's mother (or, Barbara Bush, in the case of political oponents) didn't abort him when she had the chance. If you don't look like us, act like us, agree with us, then you shouldn't be born. Why go to all the trouble of brainwashing or replacing people with androids ala the Stepford Wives when you can selectively breed the traits you want in your fellow travellers? If you want a beagle who is more brown than black, you breed for that trait. If you want a human who is more white, more upperclass, more inteligent, more "in line", why you just convince people to breed for those traits...pretty simple, really.

Except that it is evil.

But, just how evil?

As with anything else, the moment parents are allowed to selectively eliminate their children because of flaws, we have to grapple with the fact that what constitutes an abnormality can vary greatly.

Thus, the Times tells us the story of a woman who was born with an extra finger, which she later had surgically removed. So far she has aborted two children when ultrasound scans showed they had the same extra digit.

Another woman in Manhattan recently aborted a female child because she already had three daughters and wanted a son. Her physician, Dr. Mark Engelbert, told the Times that he was uncomfortable with the situation, but what could he do?

Stupid daughters...

Stupid extra finger...(although, if they had asked my opinion, I would have told them that if it had been a boy - a LEFT-handed boy, especially - that an extra digit might have been a beneficial thing to have. Imagine the kinds of pitches - the extra movement on the slider or break on the curveball - a sixth finger, used wisely, could give you. And with Major League contracts AVERAGING in the neighborhood of $3 million a year these days, that extra finger could be VALUABLE. People need to get their priorities straight.)

That's just it, isn't it? Those who have accepted the barbarism of abortion are forced to follow it all the way down. Any uneasiness about the reason for a particular "elimination" must be set aside for the greater good.