Taking the time to really think things through...

It is clear that to murder the unborn is to punish them for a crime they did not commit, but this act is repeated again and again.  We would react with outrage if a woman were executed because a man raped her.  We would react with outrage if a storeowner were sent to jail because someone robbed his store.  Our outrage would be justified because the woman and the storeowner were being made to pay for crimes that someone else committed!  Where is the outrage that the unborn are being made to pay the death penalty having committed no crime!?  Where is the choice for the unborn child that the so-called "pro-choice" groups are clamoring for?  Having taken time to really think things through, can one honestly come to the conclusion that murdering an unborn child is the right thing to do?  Having taken the time to think things through, can a woman truly come to the conclusion that murdering her unborn child will solve her problems?  Since when did murdering another person ever solve anything? 

Following is an excerpt from an excellent article on my husband's blog, Christian Ease:

I read another letter expounding a woman's right to choose, after all our country was founded on freedom of choice...I am by far not as well read as I should be, but in all the historical accounts that I have read, I've yet to find one based on everyones right to choose what they want to do. They always want to apply a precept such as "freedom of religion," one of many principles our country was founded on, and liberally misrepresenting it, likening it to butter or jelly smothering the bread beyond recognition. I have read enough of the Founding Fathers to say with confidence that you're not going to find one that would not be repulsed at the killing of the unborn let alone the the idea that they implied any inherent rights to do so. They did overwhelmingly adhere to the idea that freedom of choice was restricted by biblical scrutiny and biblical truth trumped man's law. You were free to do good, period, as the Bible states. I realize they forget to teach that now, but omission doesn't change the reality of what was. Now I'm going to readily admit that while I would be opposed to a woman aborting her body I am adamantly opposed to her aborting someone else's body.  I like to reason these things out. You start with a common sense test like the following.

      If a woman is raped, who should pay?
            1. The woman
            2. The taxpayer
            3. The rapist
            4. The baby

     If a couple has sexual relations outside of marriage resulting in pregnancy, who should pay?
            1. The couple
            2. The taxpayer
            3. The baby

     The baby is the obvious fiend and punishment should be quick. Surely, if the little fiend can't be pulled apart in the womb then the job can easily be finished outside of it quickly enough or not. Payment for his or her crime can be made by way of research or by way of ingredient in a multitude of useful products.