Martin Fox, President
National Pro-Life Alliance
One of the awful side effects of abortion –- even ignoring the slaughter of unborn human life involved -- is the cavalier attitude it creates toward human life in general.
So it should be no surprise to anyone when recently the so-called Journal of Medical Ethics, based in London, published a study advocating "post-birth abortion."
I'm not making this up.
These self-proclaimed "ethicists" (who I should point out have all already survived the womb themselves) actually argue that parents should be given a kind of "trial period" of unspecified time in which to change their mind and eliminate their baby.
Now not surprisingly, a huge outcry of protest has arisen against this wholly barbaric proposal.
Do you know how the authors defended their arguments?
They simply applied the Planned Parenthood / National Abortion Rights Action League mantra.
They argued that if you accept the abortionists' claim that what they do is ethical under any circumstance, then nothing really changes right after a baby is born.
And you know . . . intellectually, they're right.
If it really is OK to kill a child the month before his birth, or three months before birth, or by partial birth abortion, how do they make a distinction? Why is there any difference in killing one right AFTER birth?
Killing babies is killing babies.
Of course, given the obvious horror, I don't think it's necessary to argue why the advocates of "post-birth abortion" are wrong.
But that is why it is vital that you and I do all we can to force Congress to vote on, and ultimately pass, the Life at Conception Act to reverse Roe V. Wade and ultimately end abortion-on-demand.
Ever since the dreadful Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 55 million precious unborn babies have lost their lives.
The National Pro-Life Alliance's members, staff and volunteers are dedicated to halting this slaughter once and for all. And despite the many remaining obstacles, there is light at the end of the tunnel.