Apologies from your Church
The Handmaid's Tale is a 2017 USA futuristic dystopian television series1, based on the 1985 Canadian novel2, about New England becoming a totalitarian theonomic Republic, after overthrowing the US government, where powerless women are forced to produce children for the ruling class (“Commanders”) and resist by various means to try to regain individuality, independence and reproductive rights. The pro-abortionists showcase it to prove how abortion is a neo-slavery that forces women to give up their bodily autonomy until birth.
In 1971 Judith Thomson came up with the “violinist case”3:
“You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.” Shouldn’t she have the right to unplug, even if that would mean a sure death to him?
She argues that one can now permissibly unplug oneself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: this is due to limits on the right to life, which does not include the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist, one does not violate his right to life but merely deprives him of something – the use of someone else's body – to which he has no right. "If you do allow him to go on using your kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due." Abortion does not violate the fetus's legitimate right to life, but merely deprives the fetus of something – the non-consensual use of the pregnant woman's body and life-supporting functions – to which the it has no right. Thus, by choosing to terminate her pregnancy, a pregnant woman does not normally violate the fetus's right to life, but merely withdraws its use of her own body, which usually causes the fetus to die.
Comment from a female physician: “No one, no matter whom they might be to the world, to God or to the woman in whose body a conception has occurred, can tell the woman that someone else now owns her body and can use it against her will. There are fundamental principles and the ultimate evil and unacceptability of slavery, reproductive or otherwise, is one of them. All the arguments ultimately come down to that: are you willing to enslave women on your behalf or someone else's or are you not?”
For pro-choicers, abortion is the right to have a choice, to have freedom from a 9 month enslavement.
1. The rape-only objection: the lack of the woman’s consent only support a rape case, considering that she did not consent to having the violinist plugged into her and she did nothing to cause the violinist to be plugged in, just as a woman who is pregnant due to rape did nothing to cause the pregnancy. Voluntary intercourse would mean that she consented to plugging herself for 9 months in the first place.
2. Consent objection: in many cases of abortion, the woman had voluntary intercourse, and thus has either tacitly consented to allow her baby to use her body. 4
3. Contraceptive objection: failing contraception would mean that she consented to be plugged in for a few minutes, but the scissors failed to cut the tube, and she had tacitly consented to keep the contract for 9 months in case of such failure. All contraceptives fail: using contraception is a tacit consent for procreation.
4. Responsibility objection: she has a duty to sustain the baby because the pregnant woman herself caused the baby to stand in need of her body.
5. Parental responsibility objection (stranger versus offspring objection): “the fetus is the pregnant woman's child, whereas the violinist is a stranger.”
6. Murder objection (killing versus letting die objection): abortion directly and intentionally murders the unborn child, whereas unplugging the violinist merely lets him die of natural causes.
7. Utilitarian objection: even pro-abortion Peter Singer argued that, “despite our intuitions, a utilitarian calculus implies that one is morally obliged to stay connected to the violinist.” What is 9 months compared to a life? The utility for the violinist is much higher than the 9 month discomfort, which should be compensated at least with payment equal to the violinists or society’s gain, just as many workers should be overcompensated in an emergency situation where they want out but they are irreplaceable and needed.
It's not about slavery of the mother, but about her true freedom.
Imagine a female scientist in the North Pole living alone. A helicopter leaves her the supplies.
Now, the little daughter of the scientist, who was staying with her father back home, had sneaked in the helicopter and then into the base. The divorced father had custody because the scientist preferred to focus on her career, but the girl missed her mom. The chopper left. There’s no way it could return before 9 months.
1. Does the scientist have a right to kick her daughter out of the base, causing her sure death, just as a mother would kick her baby out of the womb-base?
In the analogy, the child is not viable to survive outside the base, just as the unborn baby is not viable to survive outside the womb-base.
2. Would keeping her daughter until the chopper's return mean that she is a slave of her daughter? or of the father or grandparents or government?
3. Why is it that in every single country of the world, the scientist would be guilty of murder by abandoning her daughter, because abandoning anybody to death is a crime everywhere in the world and even worse if the person is a relative, and worst of worse, if the abandoned is a relative where you have obligation to care for, like a daughter or mother?
The analogy is good enough to show that abortion has nothing to do with slavery but everything to do with abandonment of a helpless person causing his/her death.
4. A definition of slavery is to treat a living human being like a thing.
Isn’t abortion a type of slavery, where the mother decides that a living human being is a thing and that she has the right to ask someone to stop the heart of the “thing”, which, by the way, is her own daughter/son?
There no such thing as a "thing", when in time, the “thing” has a beating human heart, which could be transplanted to keep alive another human being!
Abortion turns the mother into the enslaver of her child. Pro-choice means choosing slavery, murder and genocide, in that order.
Forcing someone to do something against her will is also a definition of slavery.
52 % needed more time to make their decision 5
71 % felt their questions were ignored or trivialized 6
74 % were pressured to abort 7
78 % had regrets, being abortion the wrong solution 8
79 % were not counseled about alternatives 9
83 % wanted to have the baby 10
95 % blame men in the decision to abort 11
60% of women who had abortions said they felt that “part of me died.”
62% increased risk of death from all causes, including suicide.
65% suffer multiple symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Suicide rates are 6-7 times higher if women abort vs. giving birth. 12
- Contraception: it turns them into human-objects of men (definition of sexual slave)
- Failing “contraception”: the majority of aborting women were on contraception
- Being pressured into abortion by
a) by the threat of abandonment by their unstable partner (sometimes blaming them for failing contraception, to hide their selfishness and not wanting to pay alimonies for 18 years)
b) by their parents and relatives
c) by their domestic abuser who wanted a cover-up abortion to vanish the baby-evidence of rape.
Murdering a baby never solves problems, only increases them.
Being pro-choice
is pro-unchoice:
only abortion
never adoption
Abortion hides coercion.
Babies aren’t the problem,
just a fuse of environment
The solution to abortion
is help, love and adoption.
95% of women don’t regret having a baby. 13
Abortion not only proves enslavement of the child in all cases, but enslavement of women in most cases, while birthing proves real freedom.
The opposite to reproduction
is contraception and abortion
Choosing life, means reproductive rights.
Choosing death, means reproductive wrongs.
Being pro-abortion means being pro-slavery.
The real abolitionists are pro-life.
“I know of not a single case where anyone came out of the chambers alive” (Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess on the destructive capacity of Zyklon B gas, 1947) and “It never ever results in live births” (an experienced abortionist on the merits of dissection and extraction, 1981);
“The subjects were forced to undergo death-dealing experiments ‘without receiving anesthetics’” (Dachau freezing experiments, 1942) and “the fetuses are fully alive when we cut their heads off, but anesthetics are definitely unnecessary” (Fetal researcher Dr. Martti Kekomaki, 1980);
“No criticism was raised” (conference of German physicians to the Ravenbrueck death camp sulfanilamide experiments, Berlin, May 1943) and “no one ever raised an eyebrow” (meeting of American pediatricians to an experiment involving beheading of aborted babies, San Francisco, 1973); and “What should we do with this garbage” (Treblinka, 1942) and “an aborted baby is just garbage” (fetal researcher Dr. Martti Kekomaki, 1980).
In “Mein Kampf” (1925) Adolf Hitler referred to Jews as “a parasite in the body of other peoples”; fifty years later, the year of Roe v. Wade, a radical feminist group branded the unborn as “a parasite within the mother’s body” (an early edition of “Our Bodies, Ourselves: A Book By and For Women”).
(From William Brennan, The Abortion Holocaust: Today’s Final Solution [St. Louis: Landmark Press, 1983], Chart 6, and 100-102.)
Conclusion
Pro-abortion hides eugenic and racist arguments. Pro-choice is a Nazi choice.
Abortion proves that Hitler won the war: the ideological one!
4Warning: voluntary accepting alcohol or drugs, doesn’t imply sexual consent, and places women in a vulnerable position for rape, where they can’t or it’s very hard to clearly say “no” or stop advances, while being outgoing, uninhibited and unrestrained. Voluntarily engaging in foreplay is usually interpreted by men as giving consent, even if the woman is incapable of consent under substance abuse. Also, some men usually don’t know that a woman could be drunk with less than half the amount of alcohol they take, and wrongly assume that she is as conscious as himself.
Women who don’t want to be raped, should avoid alcohol and drugs, should control that they are not added to what they drink (on purpose or not), and should be very careful about body language saying “yes” when they mean “no”, when engaged in sexual foreplay (even mouth kissing should be assumed as the prelude to intercourse). “Foreplay -- also called "outercourse" -- is any sexual activity that happens before sexual intercourse.” https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-foreplay
5VM Rue et. al., “Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women,” Medical Science Monitor 10(10): SR5-16, 2004
6 D. Reardon, Aborted Women, Silent No More (Springfield: IL, Acorn Books, 2002)
8D. Reardon, J. Makimaa, and A. Sobie, eds., Victims and Victors: Speaking Out About Their Pregnancies, Abortions, and Children Resulting from Sexual Assault (Springfield, IL: Acorn Books, 2000).
9 VM Rue et. al., “Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women,” Medical Science Monitor 10(10): SR5-16, 2004.
10 D. Reardon, Aborted Women, Silent No More (Springfield: IL, Acorn Books, 2002)
11 M.K. Zimmerman, Psassages Through Abortion (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1977)