If the possibility of suffering is the foundation upon which is built the philosophy of so-called "merciful" abortion and euthanasia, then not one of us is safe from those wielding that bloody sword. Even those wielding it must one day face another wielding it in their direction. Cherry Bieber

February 1997 - Quote from Mother Teresa at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington attended by the President and the First Lady - "What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"



KJV Psalm 94:16-23 "Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? Unless the Lord had been my help, my soul had almost dwelt in silence. When I said, 'My foot slippeth;' Thy mercy, O Lord, held me up. In the multitude of my thoughts within me Thy comforts delight my soul. Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with Thee, which frameth mischief by a law? They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood. But the Lord is my defence; and my God is the rock of my refuge. And He shall bring upon them their own iniquity, and shall cut them off in their own wickedness; yea, the Lord our God shall cut them off."

"We do not stand any taller nor is there any work we do that is any greater than when we stand strong for the unborn child." Alabama State Senator Greg Reed

Other commentary I have written can be read at www.onthewritenarrowpath.blogspot.com

My husband's great blog is at www.christianease.blogspot.com


Friday, May 27, 2011

Who participated in THAT study??

Proponents of abortion seem to be in a perpetual state of performing "studies," the results of which they believe make them the authoritative voice of knowledge of the following [among other purported enlightenment]:

  1. According to “studies,” mentally/physically handicapped children will likely be a burden to their parents and society.
  2. According to “studies,” a baby will likely be a burden to a young girl.
  3. According to “studies,” a child not “wanted” by the birth parents is “unwanted.”
  4. According to “studies,” a child conceived unexpectedly will likely interfere with the necessary growth of the girl/woman.
  5. According to “studies,” a child conceived in rape/incest will likely be a constant reminder of the rape/incest.
  6. According to “studies,” a child conceived in rape/incest will not likely be wanted by anyone.
  7. According to “studies,” a child born to poverty is most likely destined to live out life in poverty.
  8. According to “studies,” a child born to poverty is most likely to be abused and/or neglected.
  9. According to “studies,” young [teenage] parents will most likely abuse/neglect their children.
  10. According to “studies,” children born to parents on welfare will most likely become generational welfare users.
  11. According to “studies,” children born to women over 35 years of age are likely to be mentally/physically handicapped.
  12. According to “studies,” if certain medications have been taken during the first trimester of pregnancy, it is likely that the child is severely mentally/physically damaged.
  13. According to “studies,” a woman carrying a child following a devastating illness will likely die if she chooses to carry the child to term.
The list goes on.  The presumption never ends.  These “so-called” studies are never ending and have supposedly been performed for decades.  I read the statistics borne of these alleged studies, but neither I nor anyone I know has ever been asked to participate in them!  How is it that a select number of individuals in select areas are chosen for the interview and then the results of how they respond are considered the “majority opinion?”

If I go out and interview 100 people regarding the road construction being performed in our town and 90 of them say it is an absolute useless nuisance, can I then presume that 90% of the population in America finds road construction to be a useless nuisance?  Isn’t it entirely possible that if I were to interview a second set of 100 people that 90% would say that although road construction can be a nuisance, they feel it is very useful and necessary?  Why then should that 90% of the first 100 interviewed be allowed to represent the whole of society?   

Sadly, a multitude of pro-abortion individuals who have never even seen, let alone filled out, a survey on abortion will sit on the couch eating potato chips, listening to the “factual” study results [spoon fed to them by the “life-friendly” media] in favor of murdering the unborn, and shake their fist in anger at those “unmerciful” abortion opponents.  They make presumptuous statements like, “Those opposing abortion don’t care about what those children will suffer!”   

There are two things I believe every single person desiring their unborn child to be murdered should see.  First, they should undergo an ultrasound of the child in their womb.  Second, they should watch at least one video of every type of abortion that is performed [These videos being those already in existence rather than making even more unborn children suffer for the visual entertainment of abortionists!!]. 

6 comments:

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

A saying Mark Twain popularized is that there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies and statistics. I find statistics by the media, and especially the Left (wait, isn't that redundant?) are usually the sort that your construction example shows. But they are important to them because they are an appeal to ghostly authority, which is a logic fallacy at which they are very good.

Cherry Bieber said...

Very well said, Glenn!

I am often approached with the "...but, the statistics say..." I think I would rather hear what the "people" say and would like myself and others I know to be participants in that discussion.

I want to hear from those children born to the aformentioned circumstances whose lives the claw of death was not allowed to destroy. They alone can tell us the truth of the matter with regard to themselves. However, even they cannot state that because their lives are such and such, that the lives of others born to like circumstances will also be like theirs, good or bad.

And, of course, there are those who never seem to move beyond the difficult circumstances under which they were born, but even those cases cannot be deemed a rightful cause to deny another the right to the life God has given them.

runlevelfivepointer said...

Here's the deal. Yes, children are "burdens." I was a "burden" for my parents. My children are "burdens" for me. On the other hand, these "burdens" are also made in the image of God and Christ thought so much of children he blessed them and said that anyone who offended a little one should have a millstone tied around their neck and then be thrown into the sea.

Americans who whine about their "burdens" need to man/woman up. Fathers need to be men. Mothers need to be women. Stop whining and crying about your "burdens." Stop running your kids through the bloody tines of Planned Parenthood.

Cherry Bieber said...

Thank you for your comment, runlevel. The term "burden" is used so loosely in our culture and most who use it have no idea what a true burden is!

caheidelberger said...

Ah, how convenient it must be to insulate your failing worldview against any and all substantive challenges by glibly dismissing scientific evidence with your own folksy one-liners.

Studies are real. They can be done wrong, but the proper rebuttal is not to dismiss them all as hogwash. The proper response is to get educated, do your own study right, and prove your opponents' claims wrong with evidence, not wishful thinking.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

caheidelberger,

How convenient is must be to insulate YOUR failing worldview from the truth. These so-called studies have an obvious anti-child/pro-abortion bias. There is no “scientific” evidence for any of this stuff, which is why they can be so easily dismissed. Common sense tells us these are just bias being expounded.

Sure, children are a “burden,” but how do you define the word? Just about everything in life can be a burden of some sort. But children being “burdensome” is not justification for murdering them in the womb - conscience would dictate that. However, I think by your comment your conscience has been seared. "The sound of the trumpets of conscience falls deafly on a brain that has no ears."