Basic HTML Version
prerequJS ites for life is that
someone wants you to live.
If
you are not wanted, you don't
have tqe basic prerequisite to
live in our society, no matter
what the age" (p. 19).
What horr ifying words! lf you
are not "wanted," you do not
have the prerequisite to live.
What a terrible confirmation of
the Bible prophecy that in the last
days men would be "fierce," and
"without natural affection"!
But Dr. Franklin is not alone.
Other influential people are
al–
ready
extending the
attitude
of
abortion to the rest of us!
Thus Francis Crick, a Nobel
Prize winner has been quoted as
saying "no newborn infant
should be declared human until
it has passed certain tests re–
garding its genetic endowment,
and if it fails these tests it for–
feits the right to live" ("What–
ever Happened to the Human
Race? " by Francis A. Schaeffer
and C. Everett Hopp,
Catholic
Digest,
March, 1989, p. 47).
You aren't even "human" un–
less you can pass "certain tests
regarding genetic endowment"!
How like Hitler's Germany!
What a monstrous statement!
The abortion attitude is already
being extended to
newborn in–
fants.
Pro-abortionists themselves
are becoming holder in admitting
the connection. Thus Dr. Robert
Crist, testifying before the Loui–
siana state legislature, said that
he was just as comfortable killing
a newborn child a week old as a
week befare birth, and that only
lawyers haggle over this point of
birth as having any special signif–
icance ("A New Conscience of
the Pro-Life Movement,"
Con–
servative Digest,
December,
1979, p. 19).
The liberal, pro-abortion
New
Republic
reflects the same atti–
tude. The following words were
taken from its J uly 2, 1977, edito–
rial on abortion. The words accu–
rately reflect the magazine's posi–
tion. They also reflect just where
the abortion attitude leads:
"Metaphysical arguments
about the beginning of life are
fruitless.
But there is c/early no
logical or moral distinction be-
26
tween
á
fetus and .a young baby;
free availability of abortion can–
not be reasonably distinguished
from euthanasia.
Nevertheless we
are for it.
It is too facile to say
that human life is always sacred;
obviously it is not . .. " (emphasis
added).
Here are pro-abortionists wbo
realize
that there isn't any "Jogi–
cal or moral" difference between
unborn children and born chil–
dren . Yet they still support abor–
tion! We have come to the point
in our society where influential
people no Jonger even seem to
care about murder!
Logically, if you favor abortion
and
you also realize that an
unborn child is no different from
a born one, then you also will
permit the killing ·of a newborn
child. But newborn children are
really no different from other
dependent people-elderly or
handicapped. What terrible re–
sults spring from the underlying
premises of the pro-abortionists!
A New Da rk Age?
"Regard for human life is consid–
ered a test of civilization," writes
Andrew Hacker in
Harper's.
Giv–
en the attitudes that have accom–
panied widespread abortion, it
would appear that man's civiliza–
tion now totters. Killing unborn
children is now just another form
of birth control.
Because many people, Mr.
Hacker writes, "are casual about
intercourse and seek to avoid its
responsibilities," unborn children
are slaughtered. About a million
and a third unborn children are
killed in the United States each
year-somewhere between 40
and 55 million worldwide.
Doctors are now concerned
with a growing incidence of "re–
peat abortions."
It
seems that we
have now cometo the point where
promiscuous people aren't even
willing to take any birth control
precautions-lest their precious
lustful "spontaneity" be inter–
rupted. It is easier to kili th.eir
unborn children.
One of the fascinating aspects
to the abortion issue is that it has
at long last provoked the last
vestiges of h'umanity in our sick
society. More than 1
O
years ago,
Editor Herbert W. Armstrong
noticed that there weren't many
"indignant, emotionally aroused
well-organized protests" over new
liberal abortion laws. Today,
there are. There is a whole "pro–
life" movement going.
It
is one of
the few hopeful signs in a society
rapidly careening down the moral
tobogganslide. As the
New Re–
public
put it: "These misguided
people represent the only major
pressure group on the política!
scene whose cause is not essen–
tially self-interest."
But as a matter of probabili–
ties, the pro-lifers seem bound to
lose. One of the most perverse
facts of American law is that the
right to kili your unborn child is
more jealously protected than
freedom of speech! In technical
legal theory, the American Su–
preme Court is
tougher
on state
laws that in sorne way restrict
your right to kili your unborn
child than it is on laws that
restrict your right to express your
ideas. The Supreme Court says
your right to kili your unborn
child is "fundamenta l" - tbe
most sacrosanct a right can be in
American jur isprudence.
So the pro-lifers, to end the
slaughter, seek to get around the
Supreme Court by amending the
Constitutíon. But it takes two
thirds of both houses of Congress
to amend the Constitution, and any
good política) scientist will tell you
that at least a third of both houses
will remain very much pro-abor–
tion for years to come.
Is there no hope? When the
U.S. Supreme Court handed
down its decision on abortion
(Roe v. Wade),
Editor Herbert
W. Armstrong described it as the
"most sweeping and sensational
decision of the Nixon Court."
Mr. Armstrong has also pointed
out, that about the hardest thing
in the world for a man to do is
admit he is wrong after he has
become set in his way. The prin–
cipie applies to the Supreme
Court also. Rather than admit
any error in its prior decision the
Court has seized every opportuni–
ty to extend the right to kili your
(Continued on page 45)
The PLAIN TRUTH