Bravo! Bravo! Andrea Bocelli

A great pro-life testemony from Andrea Bocelli and a second video; a repeat from a couple of years ago.

The Word Is The Word, No Matter How We Distort Him

I suppose I should clarify the title of this article. Yes, "The Word" is a Him. The Word is the second person of the Trinity, that is Jesus. Here the apostle John explains in John 1:1-5 and 14-17:

¹In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was with God in the beginning.³Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. ⁴In him was life, and that life was the light of men. ⁵The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

¹⁴The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. ¹⁵John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " ¹⁶From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. ¹⁷For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Often times Christians refer to the Word of God, that is the Bible, as "The Word". This is also an acceptable use of the term "The Word" because Christians believe that the words in the Bible are a direct revelation from God.

Then I cam upon this video and I wanted to cry. She is talking to a Catholic organization, being a professing Catholic herself. Her speech is dealing with how her agenda, now the agenda of the majority in positions of power in Congress and the administration, is what Jesus would want.

I will not cast judgment for I am as guilty as she is. Just how one's thinking can be bent so far away from God, yet convince yourself it is true, is beyond me. This is a woman who supports all methods of abortion, even late term partial birth abortion. And that's only one of many. But listen to her, can you see it? Read Matthew 7:15-23, it's titled "A Tree and It's Fruit". Absolutely one of the scariest passages in the Bible, and it's aimed at all those who say they follow Christ.

The Evil Of It All...It Comes To This

We have such an evil view of the sanctity of life....

In this story a drugged up 18 year old hit and killed an elderly woman while driving a van, but she seems to be able to see the positive in all of it:

The thing that made me not feel so bad was, she was old

From the Guardian "Let premature babies under 23 weeks die, doctors told" and this was back in 2006.

This is the latest example of deception in action perpetrated by America's abortion industry.

Embrace Life! Always Wear Your Seat Belt

Yes I am pro-life. All life. I loved this video!

Understanding The History: Abortion 101

I know this is a more reading than you want. Heck, my ADD prevents me from reading most anything longer than one page UNLESS I find it fascinating or very important. To me all of this fits both bills.

While on one hand I tend to think our nation has "progressed" too far to ever turn back. On the other hand I know that with God all things are possible. What I am getting at is the possibility of eliminating abortion from our country...and the world.

This issue has a long and ugly history in our country. To understand how it came about you must read the following articles:

The History of Planned Parenthood: When reading this article if you come across a term you don't understand Google it! Learn about things like eugenics and the Supreme Court case of Buck v Bell. If you thought the Nazis were the authors of ethnic cleansing you don't know your history.

Margaret Sanger's focus was not to promote birth rates among the nations educated elite, but rather eliminating births among those deemed unfit, or as she called them "slum mothers". If you think that was then, but things are different now, here are just a couple of examples:

Hillary Clinton praised Margaret Sanger when she received Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger award in April of 2009 saying, "I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision ... "

Or the interview with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsberg in the New York Times, July 2009. I've linked to it and the quote I use below is found at the top of page 4, but I recommend you back up to page 3 and read a couple of questions that lead up to her giving the answer. In answering about a case that upheld the Hyde Amendment which prohibits abortion funding for Medicaid, Justice Ginsberg tells how she was surprised by the ruling because she thought that Roe v Wade was intended to be for the poor. Why did she think that (emphasis mine):

Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.

How about the fact that President Obama's advisor for Science and Technology co-wrote a book called Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment; in which he discussed the possible role of a wide variety of solutions to overpopulation including enforced population controls, like forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children, placing sterilants in the nations water supply or ever better, forced abortions for certain undesirables.

This only scratches the surface of the evil behind what has cleverly been branded health and reproductive rights.

Pro-Choice Hypocrisy

If you've been following the uproar over the not yet released Tim Tebow Superbowl ad, you've seen the hypocrisy of the pro-choice advocates; at least in their leadership and spokes persons. To me it unveils the true intentions of the so-called pro-choice lobby. They are not pro-choice at all, but rather pro-abortion. This is something I have written about time and time again.

At the time of this posting this ad has only been seen by it's producers and some of the execs at CBS. Yet, even though the pro-choice lobby hasn't seen it (and they admit they haven't seen it) they know they hate it, making claims that it aims to "deny a woman's right to choose". This is ridiculous. The ad tells the story of a woman who did choose and her choice was to give birth to the baby rather than abort it, even against the advice of her doctors. That's it!

The pro-choice movement isn't interested in choice at all. They want you to get an abortion, period. They are consumed with the "right" to control life and death and by doing so, to me, they reveal their true intentions. Complete autonomy. I see the world through spiritual eyes and it is the same lie that caused the fall of the first man and woman; the promise of being a god.

Here is a great article from the Washington Post to read and I've also linked to a video interview that shows the extent the pro-choice lobby will go to make their point. I know that there are many ordinary people who are pro-choice that have no issue with a positive story that celebrates the CHOICE of life. But there is an element within the pro-life movement that is focused on death. They err towards death at every opportunity and to them I say, may God have mercy.

Sorry I couldn't embed the video, but here is the link.

Killing The Unborn - A Fundemental Right?

This past Friday (Jan. 22, 2010) President Obama commemorated the 37th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision by releasing a statement:

Today we recognize the 37th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which affirms every woman’s fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion, as well as each American’s right to privacy from government intrusion. I have, and continue to, support these constitutional rights. I also remain committed to working with people of good will to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and families, and strengthen the adoption system. Today and every day, we must strive to ensure that all women have limitless opportunities to fulfill their dreams.

A statement artfully crafted with doublespeak in order to support this evil act. He couples the right to an abortion with every American's right to privacy from Government intrusion. He say he supports more prevention of unintended pregnancies and couples that with his stance for limitless opportunities for women to fulfill their dreams.

As I write this our nation has allowed the killing of nearly 45 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. Abortion is the number one method of killing Blacks and Hispanics today. The President himself has said that he wouldn't want his daughters "punished with a baby" as the result of an unintended pregnancy. Supreme court justice Ruth Ginsberg admitted in a Dec. 2009 NY Times article that she voted in favor of Roe v Wade because she saw it as a method to rid the nation of certain "undesirables". Evil!

The big question I have to ask is ultimately where do rights come from? For those who believe in God the only answer you can have is that rights come from God. Our founding fathers believed this; read the Declaration of Independence. For the unbeliever rights are granted by the government and the government determines rights, not based on what the majority want, no. Rather, the government decides what rights we have based on the ideas of a few elitists who just happen to be in power at the time. When a people allow their government to supplant God, it never ends well. Refer to Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China under Mao, and the darling of today's elitist progressives, Communist Cuba and the dictatorial regime in Venezuela.

The hypocrisy of our President knows no bound. He calls himself a man of faith yet embraces the elitist power structure that brings huge government control over our lives. Didn't he say that a person's right to abortion was a victory against government intrusion into our private lives? Just asking....

All rights come from God and God never gives us the right to do that which is as inherently evil as the act of abortion.

The Abortion Trick

Great. Our Health and Human Services Secretary just luuuvs the accounting trick in the Seneate Health Bill that will not only allow abortions, but mandate everyone pay for them. But that can't be true! She said it's not for abortions.

I honestly hate these people. Listen to the double talk from the one with the forked tongue.

Pro-Abortion? You Know The Truth.

I keep saying this; I just don't get it. Watch the video and you tell me, how do the answers given make you feel? Deep down in your heart of hearts is this right or wrong? Or is it a gray area?

Gray?! What could be gray about the issue of abortion. The doctor is very clever with his answers. For example when the woman asks the doctor what will be "removed" and the doctor answers "a fetus..but a fetus is not a baby", is that a truthful answer? In one way it is; a fetus is not a baby. However, the next question that the woman should have asked is "Is a fetus a living human?". The answer to that question is absolutely YES. From conception to natural death we are always a living human. A zygote is a zygote, an embryo is an embryo, a fetus is a fetus, a baby is a baby, a toddler is a toddler, a child is a child, a teen is a teen, a man is a man. All are stages of human life.

I've written before about this and you can read more in my article The Logic Cop Says It's A Human Baby. Also click on the Abortion topic on the right menu bar for more heart stopping sadness.

Updated: The Guilt Of An (Ex) Abortionist

Read this article: Planned Parenthood Director Leaves, Has Change of Heart and be sure to watch the accompanying video as well.

While I think this woman's decision is the right one and I am very thankful for it, the report leaves me wanting more. From what I understand, the straw that broke the camels back was based on her not liking the new "business model" of Planned Parenthood. Because of the economic downturn, Planned Parenthood executives were de-emphasizing pregnancy prevention to one that encouraged abortion. I personally do not think that their business model was anything other than a "cha-ching" abortion mill, buuuuut that's just me.

Honestly I would have preferred it if her change of heart was in fact caused because she finally couldn't take being part of such a monstrous act, realizing that abortion was abhorrent and sinful. She did say that she felt like all of the guilt is gone, so she must have felt guilty over something. Was it the practice of abortion alone or the emphasis on the new business model? But I won't complain about what did it for her, I will celebrate the fact she saw the light.

One last observation; what was Planned Parenthood's reaction to this? They are suing her and issuing a restraining order! Something having to do with client confidentiality. Whatever.

UPDATE: Here is a better article that puts the decision in a more understandable light.

A New Level Of Disgust

Just when I thought the evil practice of abortion couldn't get even more disgusting. A swiss company is using cells from aborted fetuses in their cosmetics.

I link to the source I found it on, and they link directly to the company:

Sick. Skincare Company Now Using Aborted Fetal Tissue In Anti-Aging Cream

For anyone who might read this and be pro-choice, I have to ask the question again; Do you or do you not believe that abortion is the taking of a human life? If you answer yes to that question and still support the right to an abortion, then I would like to understand how you can convince yourself that the choice out weighs the life. If you do not think abortion is the taking of a human life, or maybe you are not sure, then please read my article called The Logic Cop Says It Is A Human Baby and tell me what you think of the logic I use in arguing that abortion IS the taking of a human life.

Or maybe you think, like our president, that if you get pregnant at the "wrong time" that having the baby is a punishment.



May God have mercy on us all.

Hear and Believe

As I've said in the past I tend to stay away from the everyday political chatter, but this topic has to do with life. Which if you've read anything I written before you know I am staunchly pro-life.

Frankly I am pissed off at the deception by all politicians in Washington and by the "advisers" they rely on to help devise their schemes.

The current health care debate is just so full of deception. Listen to Robert Reich, former Labor Secretary under Bill Clinton, and current advisor to president Obama. This sums it up all too well. Believe me when I tell you this is exactly what a government run health plan will be. The president and all his cronies say one thing and they plan on doing the complete opposite.

Listen to the audio from a 2007 speech and pay close attention...here I'll help you:

1. The first part of the audio, Reich tells everyone that candidates for office only tell half truths and often tell us what their advisers tell them we need to hear.
2. He says he is going to run for president and I guess he said the first part as if to tell us he's not like other candidates, he's going to tell the truth. - Gee thanks
3. At the 0:45 mark he tells us we have the only health care system in the world set up to avoid sick people. He even affirms what he just said as being true. - I believe this is not true, but what the heck.
4. At the 0:57 mark he says he's going to change the health care system to make it more "amenable to treating sick people". - Thank you sir.
5. At 1:08 he says that young healthy people "you are going to have to pay more" - Understand he's saying this in 2007 and here we are in 2009 and the bills being presented force everyone to have insurance. Even if you are young and healthy, and you don't want it!
6. At 1:20 he says that if you are old we are not going to give you all the drugs you need or the technology needed to keep you alive for the last couple of years of your life, "It's too expensive so we're going to let you die" - My heart sank when I heard this. The evil of these people.
7. At the 1:35 mark he says he'll use the power of the federal government to force drug companies and medical equipment manufacturers to lower their costs. He goes on to say that he knows this will mean less innovation and less innovation means less new drugs and new products, which means you shouldn't expect to live much longer than your parents - I have no more words...

Before you listen to the audio, did you know that the presidents special adviser on science and technology, John Holdren, co-wrote a book called Global Climatic Disruption: Risks and Opportunities in which he describes some of the so called "opportunities" to avoid this global climatic disruption as forced sterilization for a majority of the population and mandatory abortions for unwed mothers who can't "take care" of their expected babies? Did you know that? NO! Then get off you fat frikkin a$$ and start paying attention because our country is being flushed down the toilet because people are more caught up in knowing what happened on JOHN AND KATE PLUS 8!!!

My God! The presidents staff is loaded with the most pro abortion, pro death people ever assembled. Not to mention the lunatics that HATE our way of life.

I can't talk any more today, this stuff exhausts me.

If You Don't Have Something Good To Say, Then ...

I was surprised to find out that Time magazine is concerned because the Pope has been silent regarding the death of Senator Edward Kennedy.

I can only hope it's because of the late Senator's voting record on Abortion:

• Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance program).
• Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion.
• Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines.
• Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.
• Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.
• Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.
• Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions.
• Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.
• Voted NO on banning human cloning.
• Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.

Forget the Pope; I'd be worried about having to explain that position to God.

Speaking With A Forked Tongue - "Free Abortions For Everyone"

Have you noticed the counter on the side bar of my blog. At the time of this posting it is nearing 45,000,000 abortions since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

Now the debate in our land is over the President's Heathcare Reform. Lots to worry about, but one of the many debated points on this legislation is whether the public option will include tax payer provided abortion services. The President claims it doesn't, but notice his double speak. In trying to promote his plan he spoke to a gathering of religious leaders, albeit, very liberal religious leaders.

In a late Wednesday conference call with several faith groups that supported his presidential bid, President Barack Obama claimed it is a “fabrication” and “distraction” to say abortion funding is included in the health care reform plans pending in Congress. He said it is false to suggest that the government-run health care plan he favors would result in “government funding of abortions,” and that this is “untrue.” - Associated Press

Notice the President said the government-run health care plan he favors wouldn't support government funding for abortions. Sure. He says that as if to say, I am not in favor of it, but if the version that comes to my desk has it in it... what? Will he sign it, or won't he sign it? What do you think?

First of all our government already uses our tax money to fund abortions both here and abroad. One of the first Presidential actions was to reverse the Mexico City Accord which in doing so now allows US funds to be used for abortions overseas. Our government already subsidizes Planned Parenthood the largest for profit abortion provider in the nation. So what do you think? Is the President telling the truth? Let's listen to Mr. Obama's own words and thanks to the group who put this together for providing explanations on screen to translate the double talk.



Did you hear how he also wants to force private insurers to provide abortion services just like the government plan will. This is just like his disdain for doctors who refuse to provide abortions or pharmacists who won't dispense "morning after" pills for reasons of conscience. He could care less.

What Happened to Teaching The 3 "R's"?

I just read this article from New York's Channel 2 website titled N.Y. High School To Provide Pregnancy, STD Testing. I would like to know your thoughts on it. As for me I have to wonder why would we want our public schools involved in this?

The article states that they hand out contraception and perform pregnancy and STD testing and are completely confidential - No discussing with the parents. The lone vote against having this at the school was the school board president. But those who voted for it said:

"..this is just the reality of taking care of students in today's world. I think this is progressive and I see this as a positive."

What? The reality of taking care of kids in today's world?! Yeah, a world created and promoted by these very same liberal thinkers and now costing tax payers to provide contraception and pregnancy testing...oh but lets not tell the parents! And the cost doesn't even account for the results; STD treatments, councelling, abortions, and on and on.

Honestly it really doesn't matter. From my point of view, American parents prefer that the state be in charge of raising their kids. These parents are lazy, uninformed, morons. They are only concerned with their own personal comfort and could care less about what their kids are actually learning about life, morality, truth, justice, mercy, hard work and equity. These are the same parents who want the government to provide for them.

And the public schools, who you have to admit are very liberal institutions, are more than happy to provide the service. They want to raise your kids. They want to teach them their liberal, progressive, atheistic ideology. It ensures future votes for their way.

At times I wonder how any parent who cares about their kids would ever subject them to public schools. But you know what? I've seen kids come out of public schools that know right from wrong, who can think for themselves and know about absolute truth. Why is this? IT'S BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS RAISED THEM!!!!!! They didn't leave it up to the schools, or the government, or the video game manufacturers, or the music industry, or any other corporation.

A Culture of Death

The more I see the more disappointed I get. My ultimate faith is in Jesus, so while our wayward path is upsetting to me and causes me to stand up for the things of God, our continued decent into this culture of death does not cause me to want to give up.

People who say they are Christian yet do everything they can to support and promote abortion may be fooling themselves and some of the people, but not everyone and certainly not God. I've asked this before; if you call yourself "Christian", what do you think God's attitude toward abortion is? Does He like it?

President Obama's answer to Pastor Rick Warren when asked about if abortion was wrong, answered that the answer was above his paygrade. Rick Warren's followup should have been something like, if it's above your paygrade then that means there is a 50/50 chance you believe in God's eyes abortion is wrong. Then why err on the side of death? Disappointingly the Pastor didn't go anywhere with that

I continue to point out that what counts is ones "walk" not just their talk that tells where a person stands. Mr. Obama has never once voted for any form of restriction to abortion. His record:

• Has voted for legalizing the late term procedure known as "Partial Birth Abortion"
• Is in favor of embryonic stem cell research
• Re-instituted funding for abortions in other countries (The Mexico City Accord)
• Promises to pass the Freedom of Choice Act which will in effect remove all States laws that restrict abortions such as parental notifications, late term, etc.
• Is against allowing doctors, nurses and pharmacists from not performing abortions or distributing oral contraceptives due to conscience.
• Looks to his massive health care overhaul bill to further expand the practise of abortion throughout our land

A few more tidbits to chew on:

• In a recent interview with the New York Times, Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg candidly shared: “Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
• Hillary Clinton was recently given an award by Planned Parenthood (The largest for profit company in the abortion industry), in which Mrs. Clinton stated during her acceptance “The 20th-century reproductive-rights movement, really embodied in the life and leadership of Margaret Sanger, was one of the most transformational in the entire history of the human race.” In a 1921 article, Sanger explained: “The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

Did you catch that! One of our Supreme Court justices said that when she voted in favor of Roe v. Wade, she thought she was voting for a way to reduce the amount of undesirables in our society. Don't believe me? Here is the article in the New York Times Magazine. Where was the outrage! And Mrs. Clinton is not ever phased by glorifying Margaret Sanger who, like Justice Ginsberg, is in favor of Eugenics. I am going on the record to say that our President is in the same camp, as is the speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (who's a professing Catholic) and Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (who states he is pro-life).

Their walk doesn't equal their talk. Their yes means no, and their no means yes.

Sigh....Abortion Parties

I came across this article and honestly I am experiencing a range of emotions; disgust, sadness, a feeling of losing control of our senses. How far have we fallen? Can we ever recover from this?

The article was written to ask the question about what is the role of the male when deciding to have an abortion. But I read the article through the eyes of a person who values life and believes that abortion is the purposeful taking of a human life; in other words abortion is murder.

Below is a link to the entire article, but here is something to wet your whistle:

"What are you going to do?" Maggie, a 22-year-old college senior with no intention of bringing a child into the world yet, was going to have an abortion. She told us that she had already made up her mind; she had even determined the time, date and location. A better question might have been, "How are you going to pay for it?" She answered that one before we had a chance to ask. "We’re having a party Friday to raise money," Maggie said. "You guys are obviously invited."

Link to the article: My First Abortion Party

Good News. Take a Human Life for Free!

Abortion Business in Philadelphia Gives Away Free Abortions Honoring George Tiller

But there's a catch. It's Tuesday only so you better get there early and bring a snack.

The Murder of George Tiller

It's been a few days since Dr. George Tiller was murdered and I held off writing anything right away so I can digest some of the news. In a sort of twist of fate another murder took place the very next day when Pvt. William Long was shot to death outside of a Little Rock, AK Army recruiting station.

First Dr. Tiller. He's been an enemy of pro-lifers for a long time. He was one of only three Doctors in the US who performed late term partial birth abortions, usually on pre-born babies over 21 weeks old, no medical issues and fully viable. To see how this practice is carries out, click this link to see my previous post called Here We Go. It is reported that Dr. Tiller had aborted some 63,000 babies in his career.

I got into an heated discussion on a Facebook group with Christians who said they felt that Dr. Tiller deserved to be killed and his killing was the judgment of God. I completely disagree with that thinking and believe it lowers those who think that to the level of an abortionist. I understand if someone is glad that Dr. Tiller can no longer perform abortions, but there is no way any Christian can justify the murder of Dr. Tiller as a good thing.

Now to Pvt. William Long, murdered in cold blood by a convert to Islam. Truly a tragedy. But I found it odd how our President commented on the two incidents. The President immediately issued a statement about Dr. Tiller, but took a three days before he issued a statement about Pvt. Long. Remember the President is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Notice the difference in language and tell me what he is most aligned with.

I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence.

I am deeply saddened by this senseless act of violence against two brave young soldiers who were doing their part to strengthen our armed forces and keep our country safe. I would like to wish Quinton Ezeagwula a speedy recovery, and to offer my condolences and prayers to William Long’s family as they mourn the loss of their son.

In keeping with the Obama administration’s passive language, such as the euphemisms “overseas contingency operation” or “man-caused disaster”, Obama’s statement on the murder of Pvt. William A. Long is just as passive in voice and blame. He’s not outraged, he’s saddened. Not by someone who committed a “heinous act” but rather by a senseless violence. It might have been a bolt of lightning for all the pushback Obama has to share.

He waits three days and then the best he can muster is an abstract sadness at something that, judging by his statement, might well have been a mere accident of fate…

The Logic Cop Says It's a Human Baby

Back when the Presidential campaign was in full swing, both Barak Obama and John McCain took part in the Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency. During that forum candidate Obama was asked “When does a baby get human rights?” His answer was:

Well, you know, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.

What does pay grade have to do with the facts?

President Obama stated during his speech at Notre Dame

I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away.

He is right; this controversy should not be shoved aside. It is a life-and-death matter and someone is wrong about it. That is something everyone should think about, one side of this debate is wrong; but who?

Think about the logic pro-abortionists use to justify their position. That life doesn't start until the fetus is "viable". Early on it is just a mass of cells, not a human. They also hide behind the more socially acceptable title of "pro-choice", rather than calling them selves exactly what they are "pro-death". After all death is the opposite of life, so pro-death is a more accurate description.
I've stated very clearly in the past that if you consider yourself "pro-choice", you are in the same camp as a pro-abortionist, so lets start the debate there. If you are pro-choice, what are you choosing between? You are choosing between eliminating something or keeping something.

The next question is, eliminate what? Is this “thing” an inert globule of organic matter? Or is it a zygote, a blastocyst, an embryo, or a fetus? These latter terms are employed to describe different stages of gestational development. But do they define whether the “it” is human or non-human? It must be one or the other. This is like using the words “baby,” “child,” “teen,” “adult,” and “senior.” Do these expressions refer to humans or non-humans?

Let’s think about this issue from a coldly logical vantage point. Upon what core issues can all sides agree? (1) When a male sperm and a female egg unite, something happens. Something is henceforth there. (2) That something either is living or non-living. Is there a third option? Clearly it is living. It takes nourishment and receives oxygen. It exhibits movement. It undergoes cell replication. This is undeniable. (3) This living thing either is human or non-human. DNA analysis will clearly identify it as human; 100% of the time, no matter the ideology of the scientist. If it were identified as non-human, say it were determined to be an avocado or a duck, then it may be eliminated at any time, at any stage, and for any purpose. We take the lives of plants and animals, to be used for a higher good, without hesitation. The assumption of civilized society always has been, however, that human life constitutes an entirely different category. Therefore by logical examination this "thing" that is being taken is a living human and one must agree that abortion can only be described as an action that is the taking of a human life.

The President clearly believes and supports the theory that the lives of pre-born infants are subject to the choices of society’s democratic process. He obviously chooses not to believe that a living human being is purposefully killed in the abortion procedure. Since this is the case, why does he call for us to “reduce the number of women seeking abortions”?

There is something wrong with this logic and I hope you understand it.