Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? / Video

	Duration: 12:06 minutes Upload Time: 2007-11-11 00:44:59 User: rosaryfilms :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day
Description: Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? What if someone brought up these arguments to justify the killing of an infant: "The baby was conceived through rape" - "The infant is deformed and mentally handicapped" - "The mother's health is suffering as a result of her baby." Would anyone who endorses abortion in the womb openly justify the killing of an infant using these excuses? No, they would not. This proves that these objections are insincere and that the heart of the matter is whether the fetus is a living human. If it could be proven that the human fetus is just as alive and just as human as the infant, then these objections would not justify aborting a fetus any more than an infant. We must respond to all tragic circumstances of pregnancy from the unshakeable foundation of two indisputable premises: human life begins at conception, and it is always wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human being. The unborn child's right to life and liberty is given by his or her Creator, not by his or her parents or by the state. The right to life is inalienable: that is, not to be trespassed upon by another. In tragic circumstances such as rape or incest, we want to care for both the mother and her unborn baby. We want to relieve the suffering of the mother and her unborn baby. It is never right to intentionally kill an innocent person, even if it does relieve another's emotional or physical suffering. It's not up to a vote, and our obligation to submit unto divine judgments does not sway with our circumstances. We should not kill an unborn baby to alleviate the suffering of the mother any more than we should kill her infant to alleviate her suffering. Neither should we commit an abortion of a malformed fetus in order to prevent his or her suffering later in life. Being handicapped is not a capital crime. The intentional destruction of health is not compassionate and it is not healthcare, it is assault. We must not be swayed from our pro-life ethic by emotional appeals that admittedly swell our eyes with tears. Truth and compassion prevent us from this fatal compromise. We find it extremely unfortunate that many pro-lifers have regarded the health of the mother to be a consideration in whether or not she should have the right to terminate the life of her pre-born baby. Politicians who herald the title "pro-life" on the campaign trail frequently tout this health exception, as well as exceptions for rape and incest, as pragmatic compromises that will not offend political moderates and not alienate the pro-life community. We do not consider this compromise consistent with pro-life Hippocratic principles at all. To intentionally kill or condone the intentional killing of one innocent human being precludes one from being considered "pro-life" at all. A murderer of one person is not any less a murderer if he allows thousands to live, nor if he saves thousands from dying! When the life of the mother is truly threatened by her pregnancy, if both lives cannot simultaneously be saved, then saving the mother's life must be the primary aim. If through our careful treatment of the mother's illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical and is consistent with the pro-life ethic. But the intentional killing of an unborn baby by abortion is never necessary. It is only ethical to remove the tubal pregnancy if spontaneous resolution does not occur after watchful waiting and if the physician is 100% certain that there are no twins. At this point, the embryo in the fallopian tube is likely to be dead and, even if not, the death is unavoidable and unintentional, and the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother. In conclusion, there are no occasions in which the intentional killing of the pre-born child is justified. Scientific fact and divine law are clear: life begins at conception, and there are no exceptions to the prohibition of intentionally killing an innocent human being. We must stand true to these foundational principles through every emotional appeal and in every tragic scenario if we are to have any principles at all for which to stand. Public domain text. All images from Fair Use.
Comments
nagzul ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:20:59 Human life begins when the spurm gets to the egg. When it's growing, it's living. When it comes from a human it is a human, no matter what state it's at, it is our species. I agree that the excuses are selfish excuses, and that a fetus life is of the same value as the mothers life. If you had to choose between not saving a life and killing a life which would you choose? __________________________________________________
nagzul ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:32:10 ..of course I just relized this video covers it all, and is really good at it. Props. A must see, all the way. and dude, people who are pro-choice, stop being close-minded and brainwashed, just watch and listen. I'm pro-choice to a point, I don't suport the choices murderers make. __________________________________________________
isilder ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:37:05 There are many cases where abortion is required to save the mothers life. Certainly when the mother would die if the pregancy is left. Video didnt even mention removal of ectopic pregnancy. Technically its a form of pregnancy. But other cases exist, eg severe immune system conflict. __________________________________________________
isilder ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:38:36 And how do I know ? My sister would be dead if she didnt abort. so how do you feel about suggesting that doctors should have negligently allowed my sister to die ! what idiocy this video represents ! __________________________________________________
rosaryfilms ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:46:59 isilder, the video text is straight from physicians, who have far more medical expertise than yourself. __________________________________________________
rosaryfilms ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 01:49:27 isilder, the text of the video, created by physicians, clearly states there are no cases where the intentional killing of the unborn child is necessary to save the life of the mother. The video does discuss ectopic pregnancies in detail. Did you watch the video? __________________________________________________
loveislamictruth ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 08:17:36 i agree with you here actually becaiuse even in my religion the mother must be put first and if the baby will harm the woman it must be aborted and i think these are rare occasions when abortions shud b allowed however 4 rape i am sorry but the baby is still an innocent and why should the baby be murdered for somebody elses crimes. __________________________________________________
chicagociccone ::: Favorites  2007-11-11 15:35:51 Innocent? Original Sin would imply otherwise. __________________________________________________
lounakin ::: Favorites  2007-11-13 19:38:37 Didn't Jesus die to absolve 'us' of that original sin? __________________________________________________
chicagociccone ::: Favorites  2007-11-14 02:13:16 If that were true, wouldn't that mean that baptisms are moot? __________________________________________________
rhthth ::: Favorites  2007-11-14 12:18:17 i could not do it at all just give the baby a chance. __________________________________________________
Nejjidragon ::: Favorites  2007-11-20 23:37:06 Why is the question always "is it human, is it alive"? I would think that they are fairly obvious. Of course it's human, it wasn't conceived by any other species, so what the hell else would it be? Is it alive? Of course. If you REMOVE it, it DIES, hence...I think it is safe to say that it is alive. The question should be: Is it a PERSON. __________________________________________________
PereztiToaleay ::: Favorites  2007-11-26 04:57:58 The statement "...and divne law are clear, life begins at conception," is untrue. While this video was the most convincing one yet, and has turned me anti-abortion, Islam states that life begins a set number of days after conception, (I only know this b/c I was looking up something on stem cells, and they said that there is no Islamic basis for opposition). __________________________________________________
HierPower ::: Favorites  2007-11-27 14:20:00 no government or religion should be deciding something so personal as abortions. __________________________________________________
PereztiToaleay ::: Favorites  2007-11-27 20:49:26 Anti-aboriton is being against abortion, not advocating the legislation against such action. Or legislators, as an honest Christain will admit have much higher priority things to worry about. __________________________________________________