Royal baby: all along, the world knew a baby is a baby
Posted in the Abortion Forum
#1 Jul 28, 2013
As Eric Metaxas pointed out during Kate Middleton’s pregnancy, the world finally, for once, settled on the fact that a baby before birth is a human baby [ http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entr... ]
While abortion activists normally call a child in the womb anything but a baby or a child, this was one rare occasion where “Royal Baby” won out over “Royal Fetus.”
As Metaxas notes:
"The battle over human dignity is waged not just at the local abortion clinic or crisis pregnancy center, nor merely in the halls of Congress or the Supreme Court. It is also carried out in our choice of words.
The war on the sanctity of human life relies on bullets of deception and warheads of untruth—in short, on what George Orwell called “political language,” which he said “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
Those who support the legal killing of unborn human beings in the womb have used political language for decades, cloaking their morally indefensible position in innocuous-sounding terms such as “choice” and “women’s health”—hoping the rest of us will forget about the status and rights of the other person directly affected in the abortion transaction—namely the fetus.
For any who express the slightest qualms about the unborn, these political language manipulators are quick to deny the humanity or personhood of the fetus, calling it a “lump of tissue,” a “product of conception,” or even a “potential person”! Thus, by their choice of vocabulary, they attempt to subvert thought and the normal human compassion we would feel for the 50 million defenseless human beings legally aborted—make that snuffed out—in their mothers’ wombs since Roe v. Wade in 1973.
But it’s hard to keep up the verbal sleight of hand all the time. A case in point is the considerable elation over the news that Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, was carrying a child. That’s right, a child, not a “product of conception”!
We are told that her “baby” will be third in line to the throne, behind only Prince William and Prince Charles. I’m not the only one to have noticed the unusual descriptions of the royal baby in the press.
One bemused observer is a British blogger who goes by the tongue-in-cheek pseudonym “Archbishop Cranmer,” referencing the 16th-century Protestant divine who was executed during the reign of Queen Mary on the charge of heresy.
Noting the excitement in British society about the child who is “destined to ascend the throne,” the modern “Archbishop Cranmer” points out the slip of so many tongues.“Surely such ‘pro-choice’ newspapers and journals (and people) should be talking about a bunch of pluripotent stem cells, an embryo or a foetus?” he asks.“For reports suggest that the Duchess is still in her first trimester, so this is not yet a baby; and certainly nothing with any kind of destiny. At this stage, surely, it is a non-person, just like the other 201,931 non-persons who last year were evacuated from wombs in England, Scotland and Wales.”
The Brits are clearly—and rightly—treating the royal baby not as a clump of cells to be disposed of for any reason but as fully human, as a person. Yes, friends, the language we use matters. Is the life in the womb a “product of conception” or a person, maybe even a prince in waiting?
Philosopher Peter Kreeft says that the “personhood of the fetus is clearly the crucial issue for abortion, for if the fetus is not a person, abortion is not the deliberate killing of an innocent person.” Kreeft adds,“Persons have a ‘right to life’ but non-persons (e.g., cells, tissues, organs, and animals) do not.”
Friends, our greatest weapon in the defense of human dignity is not bombs or bullets but the truth. Let’s wield it. For as Orwell also said,“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
“And the Horse You Rode in On”
Since: Sep 08
#2 Jul 28, 2013
Changing Lives, Minds and Communities Through Jesus Christ
Kate was pregnant and going forward with the pregnancy. Obviously this is to much for "christians" to comprehend, at the end of pregnancy a baby is produced.
I am sure the website is loaded with the atypical christian patriarchy. I checked and sure enough I am right!
Thanks Debs for more religious BS. We can always count on you!
#4 Jul 29, 2013
Let her rant as part of that ever-dwindling pro-abort minority. Ultrasounds, the Internet, 2,300+ pregnancy medical clinics, and millions of pro-lifers are steadily obliterating the decades-old lies of pro-aborts about the nature, humanity and appearance of preborn babies.
It's no wonder that Gallup found only 27 percent of Americans who'd allow second-trimester abortions (vs. 67 percent opposed) and only 14 percent who'd allow third-trimester babies to be butchered (vs. 80 percent opposed).
Michael Medved adroitly skewers the sophistic pretensions of the tiny pro-abort minority:
"Moral equivalence is an article of faith for activists of the secular left, with their insistence that a baby is no better than an abortion, or that traditional marriage is no more consequential than a same sex union.
"Fortunately, the worldwide euphoria over Britain’s “Royal Baby” powerfully undermines such claims. Would anyone think to celebrate a “royal abortion”? Or would any same sex union of future royals produce the same powerful emotions as the wedding of Will and Kate? The royal family’s life cycle events touch us deeply because they seem timeless and natural, connecting the present to both past and future.
"All people would love to share some of the blessings of her Majesty, the Queen – living to see a great-grandson that’s her own flesh and blood, ready to carry on family traditions."
“And the Horse You Rode in On”
Since: Sep 08
#5 Jul 29, 2013
GREAT!!! And we will let you cut and paste!!
Debbie, Debbie Debbie........you forgot to add the Gallup poll that found 61% favored abortion rights in the first trimester consistent with RvW!! Isn't that grand???
So Debs....I suspect you are prochoice in the first trimester?? I believe I have asked you this before and you disappeared....hmmmmmm. So do you have a answer??
#6 Jul 30, 2013
Yep. Deb's an expert at religionist NONSENSE, if nothing else.
Add your comments below
|Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08)||2 hr||ffj||322,336|
|Activist: "Abortion Threatens Black America's F... (Sep '12)||20 hr||zef||6,136|
|Senate GOP on track to OK judicial pick rated n...||Dec 13||Trump is a joke||13|
|Waste Hauler Dumps Kentucky's Last Abortion Cli...||Dec 13||Escondito||5|
|This election will test Trump's staying power i...||Dec 9||Christian Fumblem...||1|
|Oregon man charged with federal tax evasion say...||Dec 8||cpeter1313||1|
|Pro life for women||Dec 8||June VanDerMark||67|
Find what you want!
Search Abortion Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC