Gendercide in America

I’ve written about gendercide in China over the years (read about The China Model and Forced Abortion in China), but did you know that Planned Parenthood will tell you how you can do the same here in the US? In fact, in Arizona–where it is illegal to get an abortion based on the gender of the baby–they tell you specifically NOT to tell the abortionist that this is why you want an abortion or else he won’t do it.

You can see the Live Action videos that expose this practice from Texas (Part 1), New York City (Part 2), Arizona (Part 3), Hawaii (Part 4), and North Carolina (Part 5).

Why is it important to know this is happening? Because some pro-aborts suggest that it’s okay to get an abortion for whatever reason you want, including the gender of the baby. From a recent blog on the website, Slate:

Let’s just remember that we are talking about fetuses. No matter how many ultrasound pics get posted to Facebook, these are fetuses with female genitals or male genitals—not little girls and little boys.

Beside the incorrect understanding of biology–if you have female genitals, then you’re a girl; and if you have male genitals, then you’re a boy–the author makes sense in the rest of the article. If pro-aborts hesitate to say that abortion is okay even if it’s based on the baby’s gender, then what other reasons can a pro-lifer offer where it doesn’t make sense that a woman should get an abortion?

For the pro-abort this is a slippery slope the other way, one that will lead to abolishing abortion-on-demand completely. They understand what’s really at stake, so no matter how immoral the reason for getting the abortion, or how sickened you might be to know that people want to kill their babies just because of the baby’s gender, the author of the blog on Slate say, “Gulp for a second if you must, then get over it [emphasis added].”

Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, Part 2

This is part 2 of my thoughts from The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Jay Lifton (click here to see it on Amazon.com)  Click here to read part 1.

The inculcation of genocide into the medical professional’s psyche was methodical. It began with dehumanizing the perceived “enemy” of the state: the Jews. Lifton wrote: “At the heart of the Nazi enterprise, then, is the destruction of the boundary between healing and killing” (14). He then recounts a discussion between a survivor physician and a Nazi doctor (15ff):

But there is another perspective on medicalized killing that I believe to be insufficiently recognized: killing as a therapeutic imperative. That kind of motivation was revealed in the words of a Nazi doctor quoted by the distinguished survivor physician Dr. Ella Lingens-Reiner. Pointing to the chimneys in the distance, she asked a Nazi doctor, Fritz Klein, “How can you reconcile that with your [Hippocratic] oath as a doctor?” His answer was, “Of course I am a doctor and I want to preserve life. And out of respect for human life, I would remove a gangrenous appendix from a diseased body. The Jew is the gangrenous appendix in the body of mankind.”

Isn’t that exactly what we have today in the abortion industry? In fact, abortion and abortifacients are often sold to the public as “women’s healthcare” because the easiest way to get people to support what you want is to tell them that you’re trying to help them. By calling abortion and abortifacients a part of women’s healthcare a wall is built so that those who are pro-abortion care for women and those who are against abortion do not care for women.

But the reality in Nazi Germany was the leaders, the perpetrators of the ideology, didn’t want to help anyone but themselves and those that were caught up in it (the doctors) didn’t even realize what had happened to their view of reality.

Click here to read about the five identifiable steps to the Nazi plan in part 3.

Updated July 16, 2012.

The Depths of Grieving

C.S. Lewis expressed the depths of his grieving in A Grief Observed (see it here in Goodreads). In a way, I can empathize with him in that I, too, did not find love until later in life but his marriage was brief as cancer took his wife within a few years. And he took it hard. Lewis could not fathom the goodness of God that would bring such love into his world and then, just as abruptly, snatch that love from him. From the book (25ff):

Talk to me about the truth of religion and I’ll listen gladly. Talk to me about the duty of religion and I’ll listen submissively. But don’t come talking to me about the consolations of religion or I shall suspect that you don’t understand.

Unless, of course, you can literally believe all that stuff about family reunions ‘on the further shore,’ pictured in entirely earthly terms. But that is all unscriptural, all out of bad hymns and lithographs. There’s not a word of it in the Bible. And it rings false. We know it couldn’t be like that. Reality never repeats. The exact same thing is never taken away and given back. How well the spiritualists bait their hook! ‘Things on this side are not so different after all.’ There are cigars in Heaven. For that is what we should all like. The happy past restored.

And that, just that, is what I cry out for, with mad, midnight endearments and entreaties spoken into the empty air.

And poor C. quotes to me. ‘Do not mourn like those that have no hope.’ It astonishes me, the way we are invited to apply to ourselves words so obviously addressed to our betters. What St. Paul says can comfort only those who love God better than the dead, and the dead better than themselves. If a mother is mourning not for what she has lost but for what her dead child has lost, it is a comfort to believe that the child has not lost the end for which it was created. And it is a comfort to believe that she herself, in losing her child or only natural happiness, has not lost a greater thing, that she may still hope to ‘glorify God and enjoy Him forever.’ A comfort to the God-aimed, eternal spirit within her. But not to her motherhood. The specifically maternal happiness must be written off. Never, in any place or time, will she have her son on her knees, or bathe him, or tell him a story, or plan for his future, or see her grandchild.

Oh, what must the post-abortive woman be thinking when I walk up to her and say, “Be of good cheer, your sins are forgiven” and my implication: “Now stop grieving over your child and move on.” She smiles politely and nods, all the while thinking that I don’t understand. And I don’t, not exactly. I can empathize in part with my lost fatherhood, that’s something I’ll never experience with children of my own. But that’s not the same as lost motherhood, and that’s not the same as a woman who aborted her child. All I can offer is the Word of God and pray that the Comforter gives her the peace that surpasses all understanding.

Through the Lord’s mercies we are not consumed,
Because His compassions fail not.
They are new every morning;
Great is Your faithfulness.
“The Lord is my portion,” says my soul,
“Therefore I hope in Him!”
The Lord is good to those who wait for Him,
To the soul who seeks Him.
It is good that one should hope and wait quietly
For the salvation of the Lord.
Lamentations 3:22-26 (NKJV)

If you are experiencing the effects of an abortion decision in your past, please contact Option Line or call 800.712.HELP.

Click here to read the next part of my thoughts on my observations from this book.

Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, Part 1

Yes, it’s true…after seven years, I finished reading The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Jay Lifton (click here to see it on Amazon.com).  I began reading this book because I had just started working at Lutherans For Life and I wanted to see if I could gain more insight into how doctors, nurses, and others in the medical profession could take part in abortions.

If you’re not familiar with the book, I highly recommend it for two reasons. The first is that although everyone knows that six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, most people don’t know that non-Jews were also killed en masse. Most people also don’t know of the breadth of medical experiments that were perpetrated on unwilling subjects. It’s important for each of us to understand how the sinful human self can so easily overtake whatever “goodness” we think is inside us.

The second reason why I recommend this book is that Lifton (a psychiatrist) attempted to unravel the psychology of those who were for the most part, normal, everyday doctors outside of concentration and extermination camps of Nazi Germany. One example is a doctor who had a private practice in his hometown that helped Jews at night prior to his posting at Auschwitz, but after arriving at Auschwitz, he easily took part in the experiments on Jewish prisoners and selections of Jews for death.

There really is too much to cover in a blog, but I wanted to highlight some of the things that struck me, even as I think about today’s medical professionals who take part in abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicides. I saw many parallels in what happened 70 years ago and what is happening in our society today.

Lifton identified that post WW I Germany was a beaten down and depressed state. From that situation arose a new collective desire to restore the people and to rid the people of its problems. Not wanting to identify the German people (the Volk) as the cause of their own misery, the Nazis created a mythical ancestor, the Aryan race, that was pure and strong. But that race had (and continued to have) a disease running through it due to impurities brought in by people of other ethnic backgrounds or those with genetic diseases in their families. To cure the Volk of that disease, the impurities needed to be removed, even if it meant death for the “impurities.” In other words, death became a cure and from that cure, the strength of the Aryan race would re-emerge. From the book (page 472):

Totalistic ideology avoids the sting of death in its claim to invincibility and omnipotence. It puts forward its own claim to immortality and exclusive truth in specific psychological manipulations of the environment…:

  1. Milieu control (of all communication);
  2. Mystical manipulation (continuous efforts at behavior control from above while maintaining the spontaneity from below);
  3. Demand for purity (constant accusations of guilt and shame in the name of an unrealizable ideal of absolute devotion and self-sacrifice);
  4. The cult of confession (ritual self-exposure to the totalistic “owner” of every self);
  5. The sacred science (combining deification of the Word with the claim of equally absolute secular scientific authority);
  6. Loading of the language (into definitive, thought-terminating solutions for the most complex human problems);
  7. Doctrine over person (so that the evidence of individual experience must be subsumed to or negated by the idea system); and
  8. The dispensing of existence (the ultimate and inevitable line drawn between those with a right to exist and those who possess no such right).

The last, the dispensing of existence, is the larger principle that encompasses all of the others, whether expressed in merely metaphorical or, as in the case of the Nazis, in directly murderous ways.

Indeed, the Nazi movement brought a new literalism to the dispensing of existence by making the existence of each individual a matter of either harm or benefit to the biological health of the group.

Although I can see  pro-abortion tactics in each of these steps, the dispensing of existence is the most fearsome. That has already happened in our society since pregnancy (and thus the acknowledgment that human life has been created) is seen as something to be avoided at all costs. In fact, this ideology is so steeped in American society that it is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that keeps track of fertility and pregnancy rates in the US…as if pregnancy was a disease to be controlled and prevented…as if that human life in the womb has been determined to be a “harm or a benefit to the biological health of the group.”

Stay tuned, there’s more to come. (Click here for part 2.)

When is Choice Not a Choice?

I’m not quite sure how to interpret this political cartoon which appeared over the weekend in the Chicago Tribune by Scott Santis.

Is he acknowledging that Susan G. Komen for the Cure gave Planned Parenthood the boot because Komen acknowledged that PP does abortions (baby into the garbage can)? If that’s so, then I think it’s great.

Ultimately, Komen made a choice not to support an organization that killed nearly 330,000 babies last year. BTW, that’s only the surgical abortion procedures and doesn’t include the RU-486 abortions; and who knows how many may have been caused by emergency contraception (1.46 million distributed).

But the bottom line is that Komen chose not to support Planned Parenthood for whatever reason it chose and the so-called pro-choice folks didn’t like it. That’s great, but that’s now their choice not to support Komen and  just move on instead of continuing to vilify Komen and its directors and employees for their choice.

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems the only time a choice is not a choice is when it’s not for the pro-choice agenda.

Update: Shortly after, Komen decided to continue supporting Planned Parenthood due to the media blitz PP did on Komen.