Know Your Enemy! The Language of Pro-Abortion Manipulation

One thing that has been clearly evident since the abortion debate began is that pro-aborts will go to any lying lengths to maintain their bloody sacrament. Yes, I call it a sacrament because they are as religious in their beliefs as any Christian committed to Church doctrine. I remember attending a Women's Conference in Richmond back in the 70s during the Carter Administration. Similar meetings were being held in every state and they were supposedly about listening to women. But the meetings were skewed and were clearly about listening to pro-abortion feminist women. In Virginia the meeting was heavily lesbian and I remember visiting the exhibits including tables sponsored by covens of witches. (I am not joking!) It was a sobering and awakening moment for me about the kind of battle in which we were engaged. It's a religious war and the other side has its own equivalent of priests.

Which brings me to the language of manipulation. I've noticed more and more these days that when I read blogs about abortion and sex ed I find people claiming that pregnancy begins with implantation. Of course, biologically that's nonsense, since the little one in the womb is already a week old and about 100 cells before implantation occurs. But the advantage of changing the definition of pregnancy to begin at implantation means you can claim that chemicals and devices that prevent implantation don't cause an early abortion.

It's a lie, just like the lie that the ten-twelve week old baby killed by suction abortion is "just a blob of protoplasm" or a "blood clot" or a "mass of cells." Often the sources used to defend such nonsense are questionable. For example, the Guttmacher Institute claims that federal policy and the scientific community define pregnancy as beginning at implantation - convenient for Planned Parenthood (PP), the largest abortion provider in the world. Ah - but then Guttmacher is PP's research arm. Would you say they have something to gain by their fraudulent "scientific" definition of life's beginning? The morning after pill immediately becomes, not a source of early abortion, but a "contraceptive" preventing pregnancy. (The word contraceptive is a little inconvenient since it means "against conception," but word play is their specialty.)

Princeton, not exactly a bastion of pro-life sentiment, has a long list of sources that define pregnancy as beginning with the single-celled zygote. The claim that it begins at any other time is nonsense and illustrates the policy called for back in 1970 when California Medicine carried an article titled A New Ethic for Medicine and Society. It labeled as "semantic gymnastics" the “avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intrauterine or extrauterine until death.” The editorial also stated that “a schizophrenic sort of subterfuge” was necessary to pretend that abortion was something other than the taking of a human life.  The article defended the dishonesty saying that, “while a new ethic is being accepted, the old one has not yet been rejected.” Interestingly, overpopulation and environmentalism were being used forty years ago to justify the need to lie and control, just as they are today.

Yes, indeed, the "semantic gymnastics" and "subterfuge" continue today. The onset of pregnancy at conception, which was well-known in 1970, continues to be a scientific fact. And the new (and immoral) reproductive technologies make that fact even more obvious. If life only begins with implantation what is in the petri dish before the baby is transferred to his mother's womb during the IVF (in vitro fertilization) procedure? One feminist blog I read said there is no life before implantation. Can the blogger really be so stupid or is this just one more convenient lie to rationalize a personal choice for evil?

The fact is that semantics can be used to fool people, but don't change reality. A builder can put in an elevator with no button for the thirteenth floor to mollify the superstitious. Does that mean there's no thirteenth floor? Of course not. If you call a dollar bill a twenty, will the clerk in the store accept it as one? People that believe things that aren't true are delusional. When an entire culture believes things that aren't true it often sinks into superstition and barbarism. The more serious the issue being falsified, the more serious the consequences of the delusion. History is filled with examples of atrocities that began with lies. Abortion is certainly one of them.

For a great article on the language of deception by Dr. William Brennan go here. As he points out so well, before babies are aborted in deed, they must first be aborted in words. That's what the new definition of pregnancy accomplishes. It's a lie like all the rest to disguise the killing fields.