A New Jersey Appeals Court will hear a case of a woman who is suing an abortionist for not revealing that a first-trimester abortion ends a human life.
Rose Acuna says she was not told this information, and therefore could give informed consent.
It's a scientific fact that abortion ends a human life. The embryo is a separate entity with his own DNA. Abortionists will tell you they are taking human life. That is not even a point of dispute. An embryo fulfills every scientific criteria of a separate life.
The question is whether that life is worthy of respect. The mental gymnastics that pro-aborts have to use to justify abortion has to be an indication that something is wrong.
Militant pro-aborts will say that a woman has the right to consider a fetus part of her family. But if that fetus has a handicap, and the woman wants to kill him, whether he's at 10, 20 or 30 weeks gestation, they are perfectly okay with that.
So it's okay to kill a family member for not being perfect? What kind of family values is that?
Yes, I know the next objection: it's better for that baby not to be born because he'll suffer.
Okay, so let's make it legal for parents to kill their born babies if they discover a handicap at birth.
Oooh no, says the pro-abort...that's different!
The legality of abortion is not about ending the suffering of the baby. If this were the case, we'd allow newborns to be killed. The legality of abortion is predicated on the inferiority of the unborn child, the power of those are born, and their convenience.
It's basically a form of discrimination of other human beings. There are no group of human beings that we treat the way we treat the unborn.
Hat tip: Denny at Prolifeblogs.com
Check out the Big Blue Wave Message Board
