Sunday, May 18, 2008

UK Abortionist: Abortion limit should be at 16 weeks

You never see feminists talk about late-term abortion. Feminists don't want to touch late-term abortion, the way med students don't want to touch late-term dismembered fetuses.

If you care about the unborn child, you're a "fetus fetishist". You're some kind of nutcase. How dare you care about a clump of cells, as deBeauxOs of Birth Pangs would put it.

They do everything to portray people who care about unborn children as mentally unstable.

Dr. Vincent Argent is a UK abortionist who says point blank: late-term abortions are distressing. He doesn't pull any punches.

When it comes to abortion, a lot of the debate is somewhat euphemistic; the pro-lobby prefer to talk about "terminations" of "foetuses". But if an IVF clinic shows you the first scan of your baby in the womb, you won't find them using the word foetus to describe it. We are killing babies far older than that, and if we are going to have an honest debate then we have got to be straight about that.

Are feminists straight about that? No. First off, they use euphemisms like "clump of cells", when it's not even close to a clump of cells, especially in the latter stages.

Secondly, they downplay the fetus. "Fetuses are not that important" abortion advocate Joyce Arthur once wrote. Oh sure, when the woman thinks of the fetus is important, then he's important. But that's patronizing. I am 31 weeks pregnant. My fetus is important not because I say so: but because she is important. And if Joyce Arthur only accords my fetus value because of what I feel, that's not resepcting my fetus, as far as I'm concerned.

Feminists are not straight, because they do everything to hide the truth from the public about the nature of abortion, especially late-term abortion. They accuse pro-lifers of using fake abortion pictures. They expect people to believe them, based only on their word, that the picutres pro-lifers use are fake.

Are they willing to prove they're fake? Why no. Because that would not be very politically expedient. It would underscore what pro-lifers have been saying: abortion is a barbaric practice, a killing of a human being. And you know what? This abortion doctor, as well as many of his colleagues, happen to agree:

Now, with increasing specialisation in gynaecology, many younger doctors are avoiding abortion completely, preferring to go instead into areas such as IVF or cancer treatment. Abortion has become the part of gynaecology that no one wants to be associated with, and late abortion is the least popular type of work of all.

For some doctors their objections are religious or ethical. Often, as with me, it is based on a distaste for carrying out a procedure which is so traumatic.

Most people do not realise just how distressing late abortions can be. The procedure remains the last taboo. While heart and brain surgery are regularly shown on television, the reality of a late abortion has never been seen on British screens.

And neither on Canadian screens, either.

How are these abortions performed? Says the abortionist:

There are two main types of procedure; the medical type, which kills the baby via medication, meaning that the woman miscarries a stillborn. If the baby is 22 weeks or older, it will be given a lethal injection in the womb, to ensure it is not born alive. Alternatively the surgical procedure uses instruments to remove parts of the dismembered body from the uterus, limb by limb. It is hard to describe how it feels to pull out parts of a baby, to see arms, and bits of leg, and finally the head.

Given the nature of this experience, it greatly concerns me how lightly some of these decisions are made.

Do the feminists care that a fetus has to die because of a potassium chloride injection in the heart? Do they care that a fetus has to be dismembered? No, no, no, that would be fetus fetishism, caring for teh babies, feeling a shred of humanity for the very babies they say should have to die if a woman says so.

Why don't you pro-lifers care for the living? They demand of us. With this line, they try to deflect their complicity, their lack of compassion for the deaths of sentient human beings. As if the baby rolling around in my womb this very instant is some kind of blob.

Why don't they care for all human beings, including the unborn?

"But when a woman asks for a late-term abortion, she has a very good reason." They reply.

Not necessarily so, says the abortionist:

For every woman who comes late to the clinic because she did not realise she was pregnant, there will be another who feels it is simply their right to have an abortion whenever they like, and feels no need to explain herself at all. A third will seek a late abortion because her circumstances have changed. It might be a change of job; a relationship has broken down; her partner is now in prison; perhaps money is tight.

People imagine that when women have late second- and third-trimester abortions, it's because they're carrying the second coming of the Elephant Man. And then when Margaret Somerville says that she's been consulted for a social abortion at 32 weeks (my God! That's older than my little one who's kicking right now) they call her a liar.

Dr. Argent gives his own testimony:

Recently, one woman came to me at the age of 42. After years of IVF treatment, she had finally conceived for the first time. Yet, when she found out she was carrying twins she wanted to have one aborted.

For me, that is the ultimate illustration of a throwaway society.

A little ironic, coming from an abortionist, but it is the truth.

Will the feminists at college campuses allow for discussion and debate about this issue?

I doubt it.

The ugliness of killing late-term babies is too strong an argument against abortion on demand, that sacred cow.

H/T: Verum Serum via Real Choice.

For more social conservative news check out