Category Archives: Culture of Death

Abortion Harmful to Women’s Mental Health – Study

From Family First (with my emphases):

The study, “Abortion and Mental health: Quantitative Synthesis and Analysis of Research Published 1995-2009” by Priscilla Coleman, Ph.D., took into account 22 studies and over 877,000 participants over the 14-year period. The study also reveals that as many as ten percent of all mental health problems are directly attributable to abortion.

“This confirms and is consistent with previous NZ research which showed that abortion harms women. Abortion harms women but pro-abortion groups refuse to acknowledge this, seeing the right to abortion more paramount than the long-term health and welfare of the women. We believe women have the right to the best independent information and advice before making a decision that could impact them later in life,” says Marina Young, Spokesperson for Family First NZ, who through her own abortion experience formed the Buttons Project.

A University of Otago study in 2008 found that women who had an abortion faced a 30% increase in the risk of developing common mental health problems such as depression and anxiety. Other studies have found a link between abortion and psychiatric disorders ranging from anxiety to depression to substance abuse disorders. And the Royal College of Psychiatrists in the UK recommended updating abortion information leaflets to include details of the risks of depression. They said that consent could not be informed without the provision of adequate and appropriate information.

Advertisements

Case against Abortion: Fetal Development

15-week-old Fetus Thumb-Sucking
15-week-old Fetus Thumb-Sucking

In an issue as heated as abortion (or, ‘feticide’, to disrobe the politically-correct label for killing of the fetus), it’s important first to look at the hard cold facts.

Here’s a fetal development chart from the Voice For Life Fact Sheet on the Unborn (Keep in mind in reading this that most abortions [at least in the UK] happen around the 8-9-week period):

1st day the child’s conception takes place
7 day a tiny human implants in the mother’s uterus
10 days the mother’s menses stop
18 days the child’s heart begins to beat

21 days

the heart pumps own blood through separate closed circulatory system with own blood type.

28 days

the child’s eyes, ears and respiratory system begin to form

42 days

the brain waves can be recorded, skeleton is complete, reflexes are present, hiccoughs first occur.

7 weeks

thumbsucking has been photographed, startles first occur from 6-7 1/2 weeks

8 weeks

all body systems are present, isolated arm movements begin about 7 1/4 to 8 1/2 weeks after conception. Breathing movements begin during the eighth week. Stretches first occur during the eighth week.

9 weeks

the child squints, swallows, moves tongue and makes a fist. Rotations of the head also begin from the middle of the seventh week after conception to the middle of the tenth week.

10 weeks

Hand to face contacts first occur 8 to 10 1/2 weeks after conception.

11 weeks

spontaneous breathing movements, the child has fingernails and all body systems are operating. Jaw openings and forward head movement begin during 8 1/2 to 12 1/2 weeks after conception.

12 weeks

the child weighs one ounce

16 weeks

genital organs clearly differentiated, the child grasps with hands, swims, kicks, turns and somersaults (still not felt by the mother)

18 weeks

the vocal cords work and baby can cry

19 weeks

Kenya King’s birth, Florida, June 1985

20 weeks

the child has hair on its head, weighs one pound, 12 inches long

23 weeks

15% of babies survive premature birth

24 weeks

56% of babies survive premature birth

25 weeks

79% of babies survive premature birth

39-40 weeks

normal birth

Soap Opera: Sex, Sadness & Suicide

This is from a post on the Family Life NZ blog, Semper Vita, in response to a poster who asked what was so wrong with showing intimate scenes on TV given violence that is depicted and accepted.


As bad as depiction of gratuitous violence on television is, I think it’s evident enough that depiction of sexual scenes affect people much more immediately and internally, to an extent that would not be healthy for children who are neither emotionally nor relationally ready. Such exposures tend to make them regard as normal, and more likely to go into, something that they are unprepared to go through with with commitment due to the consequences and responsibility that naturally follow. This much is usually common sense.

As the article “Sex, sadness and suicide” from WorldNetDaily points out, there’s something of a glamorization of licentious lifestyles on television that’s far from reality:

“Even those TV viewers who consider themselves big fans of the teen soaps – “Beverly Hills 90210,” “Party of Five” and the now-defunct “Dawson’s Creek” – must have realized that something about the way those shows depicted sex just didn’t ring true.”

It quotes a research paper from Heritage, “Sexually Active Teenagers Are More Likely to Be Depressed and to Attempt Suicide”, which shows a significant correlation between early sexual activity and rate of depression and suicide among teenagers. 63% (v.s. 32%) of boys and 72% (v.s. 25%) of girls admit they regret having early sexual encounters when they were not ready.

The greater percentage among girls is particularly notable when placed in context of greater likelihood of life-long effects for them, including (from “Harmful Effects of Early Sexual Activity and Multiple SexualPartners Among Women: Charts”) greater likeliness of contracting STD’s, having out-of-wedlock pregnancies, less stable marriages and abortions, becoming single mothers, and so on and so forth. In real life, as these research clearly show, those with more sexual partners and those who become sexually active at an early age are in fact less happy, and more likely to be depressed.

Those promoting promiscuous attitudes are clearly acting irresponsibly (knowingly or otherwise), and they do not have the best interests of the person in mind.

Seeing the Truth about Reality through Science and Realist Philosophy

Here’s a rather important question about life, the universe and everything: How do we know what is real? What’s the truth about our existence, and in our experiences of the world?

I’m going to suggest something that may not be too apparent to some. I’m going to suggest that we find ourselves in the contemporary world, amidst all the latest discoveries and technological progress, that we’re further and further out of touch with the true reality; artificial belief systems and environment of the contemporary world tends to make difficult the search for the truth about what’s real, since we’re less exposed to what is truly real. It’s almost as if we’ve constructed for ourselves a highly comfortable and even more effective versions of Plato’s cave, and think ourselves more enlightened for it.

There is possibly a danger of seeing science as the only way to encounter the concrete reality and relegating philosophy to a real of abstract speculations that have nothing to do with our concrete experiences. While science is a very good way of seeing the quantifiable world, Realist philosophy of Aristotle (with background in Socrates and Plato) can help up in jogging us to being awake to the reality that’s been in front of us all the time.

It’s quite helpful to realise that, in a sense, the experiences that are most “concretely” real to us are not experiences of the scientific sort at all, but experiences of the everyday reality; the sort that we end up expressing in the grammar and ways of talking about things. We never say, “a previously encountered carbon-based biped produced high-frequency aural outbursts toward this set of aural receptors at 1132 hours GMT” – we say, “my annoying little sister was screaming at me this morning” (well, some of us might 😉 ). The qualitative and holistic ways of looking at things is the most real to us – the quantitative is real, yes, but only secondary. A person is seen as a whole person that is living (life being the source of that wholeness) and does meaningful things, not as a mere collection of bits of flesh and chemicals operating as a clever but lifeless (because lack of life means lack of any real unity and wholeness) machine that only does mechanical (and hence meaningless) movements and actions in space and time.

We don’t wonder enough at the mysterious reality present in plants, animals and human persons, and in the fact that they exist as unities (an animal is one real thing, which also contains within itself many bits). The difference is apparent in the change when a thing comes to be, or dies. In coming to be, it start almost from a point, and expands out of itself, actually accumulating more matter into itself (and so transcending the parts it’s made of), all the while remaining the same actual thing (a baby and a teenager are both human beings – the difference is in their stages of growth). When it dies, there’s no longer that unity, but only a collection of bits (which is seen more readily as it scatters as dust). This is why when a person dies, we know (even when we’re looking at the body) that he or she is no longer there.

It’s a funny society that we have today. We tend to think the deepest reality is to be found in the artificial deconstruction of what’s in front of us, little realising that a real, living thing dies when it’s dismembered from its wholeness. We must learn again to look at the reality holistically, and recover the art of preserving living and holistic realities when studying their complexities.

[Compiled and edited from my posts in a Being Frank thread]

The Modern Holocaust

Unborn Baby at 5 months

Unborn child at 5 months after conception

Imagine a white-robed doctor, taking the incision scissors and moving toward the operating table. Next, he takes a stab and proceeds to suck out the brain of the unborn child.

Cold. Bloody. Evil.

Yet, aborting the baby this way even a day before delivery is judged worthy of a standing ovation – it is a frightful fruit of the Culture of Death; the legalized child-killing, the so-called “woman’s choice”, the modern holocaust. A precious life – defenseless – is snuffed out in order to preserve the perverted self-serving desires of the ‘sexual revolution’. This is proclaimed as a ‘right’, a right to massacre, and promoted by the radical Feminists and organizations such as Planned Parenthood.

A society which carries out this holocaust will not go on without repercussions. Unless we repent and turn back from this evil with contrite hearts, we will suffer what we fully deserve. As Mother Theresa said, abortion is the greatest destroyer of peace – we must end this holocaust if we are to again restore sanctity of life and save our souls and civilizations:

…I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself.

And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love and we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts. Jesus gave even His life to love us. So, the mother who is thinking of abortion, should be helped to love, that is, to give until it hurts her plans, or her free time, to respect the life of her child. The father of that child, whoever he is, must also give until it hurts.

By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems.

And, by abortion, the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world. That father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion.

Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

The Non-sense of Abortion

History has shown that the persecuters must dehumanize the victims before ill-treatment is made permissible. Hitler called the Jews “pigs”. Slave owners called blacks “animals”. They’re all labels which reduce the inherent dignity present in a human person, which free the perpetrator to act out their ill motives without public outcry or the deserved consequences (at least in the short term or in this life).

Here in the case of abortion, they dehumanize the unborn child, the fetus (Latin for “offspring”). The motive seems obvious: sex. “For abortion is backup birth control, and birth control is the demand to have sex without having babies.” (Peter Kreeft. A Refutation of Moral Relativism). The recent resignation of a virulently pro-abortion Governor is a case in point – he was involved in high-level prostitution. The gross irony is that it is the the very same people who hold themselves up to be the self-less champions for “women’s rights”. Thus, they manage to dehumanize the mother and the child – making the former into a sexual object to be toyed with, and killing the latter – all the while making themselves appear as the angels of light (II Corinthians 11:14). It’s no wonder that Kreeft would write: “Plainly put, abortion comes from Hell and it can lead us to Hell if not repented” (Peter Kreeft. Human Personhood Begins at Conception).

I posted the following for a Being Frank thread discussing the recent anti-pro-life article on NZ Herald (not only is it pro-abortion, it specifically attacks Voice for Life), and in support of Brendan Malone of Family Life International:

Thanks for being pro-active, Brendan (as well as pro-life). It’s good – nay, a God-send – to have a voice like yours for those powerless to speak.

I agree 110% about “the most important question of all – is a human embryo a living human person?”. Really, all the issues on abortion comes down to this one question. As Peter Kreeft points out in Human Personhood Begins at Conception, there are only four possibilities:

1. that it is not a person and we know that,
2. that it is a person and we know that,
3. that it is a person but we do not know that, and
4. that it is not a person and we do not know that.

As he writes in The Apple Argument Against Abortion, abortion was legalized in the US by appealing to uncertainty, which would be 3 or 4.

This is ridiculous, because the only permissible case is #1. For the other possibilities, abortion would be in each case:

2. Murder.
3. Man slaughter.
4. Criminal negligence.

There is no justifiable position in the absence of evidence proving non-personhood of the fetus. In fact, the medical texts prior to the abortion controversy accepted that life began at conception.

Given the above, I have to agree with Brendan that Mr. McCarten’s article on the NZ Herald is “astounding on account of its lack of reason and logic, and in the end it reads as shallow pro-abortion propaganda and fear-mongering.”