Heroes and Heartbreakers, part II

Vander Woude sons

Thomas Vander Woude, Sr. died saving his son’s life.  Even though his son had Down syndrome, this father didn’t hesitate to make the ultimate sacrifice (see part I).   In fact, Thomas had several sons – the oldest whom is a priest with his father’s name.  Fr. Thomas Vander Woude also intervened to save a life, when he learned that a woman planned to abort her child because he had Down syndrome – unless someone stepped forward to adopt him immediately.  Knowing the truth about abortion and the precious gift of life it takes, this priest asked for help via social media.  By the next morning, nearly a thousand folks from around the world responded because they were willing to take that child as their own.  (story)

Father Vander Woude extended a loving hand and shone as beacon of light amidst this woman’s dark struggle.  Was that woman in a difficult situation?  No doubt she was.  Would abortion be a good option to remove such a challenge?  No.  This is the lie of abortion – it is always a false solution that destroys and harms, causing real problems.  Difficult circumstances can never justify abortion because every human life has irremovable value and dignity (including those with Down syndrome) by virtue of being human, from their first moment of existence (conception).  Like his own father, who died holding up another son with Down Syndrome in midst of sewage, Fr. Vander Woude stood firmly in a sinking culture that judges certain lives more valuable than others.  This man’s strength and insight offer us an opportunity to peer into the hidden world of abortion.

Paint it Black

Imagine you are in a dark room.  You can see nothing but hear many voices.  You are concerned about the well-being of some around you as you hear discomfort and cries.  You suggest shinning a light on the situation to find out what is going on.  You are immediately criticized and ridiculed from other voices, and you are simultaneously told, “Everything is fine,” and “If you care, leave them alone.”  You are in the realm of Planned Parenthood, which depends on darkness for its existence and profit.

Are you anti-choice?

No one wants to be against freedom.  Obviously, we’re all pro-choice on some things (bedtime, sports) and recognize other free choices as immoral (murder, stealing).  Out of all the things we realize involve choice, why does this particular one get the description, “pro-choice”?  The answer is that the phrase “pro-choice” constantly pulls a hood over the ultimate question at stake, “Is it ok (morally justifiable) to end this baby’s life via abortion?”  Most will make this discussion about whether the child is actually a human person, while others admit the humanity of the unborn baby, but insist she has no rights.  Very few consistent and honest “pro-choice” advocates will admit abortion is without doubt “child-killing” (like this abortionist Dr. Curtis Boyd).  The phrase “pro-choice” constantly misdirects the heart of the issue away from the real question of human dignity. 

Focusing on choice is tactic of distraction.

The true crux of the pro-choice movement is not choice but power.  Fathers, grandparents, and Planned Parenthood employees regularly coerce, pressure, or force women against their will to have abortions. If choice is the ultimate right to be protected, pro-choice advocates would shout from the rooftops about these regular “you-don’t-have a choice abortions.”  Why do we rarely hear from these women who experienced heart-break at the hands of this powerful organization, by being pressured to have an abortion?  It’s easy to be pro-choice at a cocktail party, but inside the walls of Planned Parenthood, the pro-choice facade gives way to the true active mode: pro-power.

The pro-choice movement was born out of deceit and has always has thrived on people not fully comprehending the truth about abortion.  Dr. Bernard Nathanson, the co-architect of the legalization and furthering of abortion in our nation, revealed that they purposely came up with “pro-choice” to mislead and distract.  Why? Because people instinctively reject abortion.  But no one wants to be anti-choice.  Consider this: Who defends partial-birth abortion today?  Who defends late-term abortion today?  Only a few doctors in the whole country perform these particularly gruesome and violent acts.  But the reality is that first trimester abortions are also immoral.  They are more out of site – the little guys are cloaked in darkness. This is why Dr. Nathanson titled the film depicting an abortion, “The Silent Scream.”

Why there is such a strong reaction against protecting women’s health by requiring abortion facilities to follow the same conditions and standards as every medical practice?  Why should we not assume other abortionists like Dr. Kermit Gosnell are not also reigning over a house of horrors?  Why are we not allowed to ask more questions about Planned Parenthood execs admitting to selling “intact” vital organs?  The media’s obvious defense is the same tactic Planned Parenthood lives and dies by: do not confront and clarify, but simply ignore. For example, compare stories about “Cecil the Lion,” which received 4 times more coverage than Planned Parenthood’s house of horrors videos, by ABC, CBS, and NBC.

Science shows life, Religion justifies abortion

Dr. Nathanson, who presided over 10,000 abortions, was convinced that neonatal technology would cause Americans to be disgusted by the reality of abortion.  Surely, we’d see the truth and reject abortion as horror.  He didn’t know the power of the darkness that would continue to fuel the scourge of abortion. 

Note – Nathanson came to this conclusion as an atheistic Jew, it had nothing to do with religion.  People tend to invoke religion to defend the pro-choice position.  Fr. Frank Pavone (pro-life advocate) relayed that when he speaks to abortionists he focuses on biology to explain his pro-life stance. They respond by saying, “I don’t know when the soul begins to exist.” 

Ironic that the priest appeals to science displaying the logic of his pro-life stance and the doctor invokes religion to defend his pro-choice stance.

That response, “Maybe it’s not a human,” is weak anyway.  Scientifically, there is no doubt that human life begins at conception (here’s a list of Embryolgy text books and doctors).  Only when one desires to justify abortion does the “question” of the start of human life come up.  The problem with this argument is that appealing to uncertainty should lead to caution.  Should a hunter fire into shaking bushes because whatever is in there might not be human?

Similarly, if life begins at some point after conception – when the heart beats, at post-womb viability, or at birth – shouldn’t such advocates fight to defend the lives of those innocent babies after those so-called defining moments?  Where are they speaking up against late-term abortion and infanticide that regularly happen in our country (Jill Stanek’s testimony helped pass Infants Born Alive Protection Act).  Have you ever heard someone adamantly defend the right to abortion in the first trimester equally outspoken about protecting children after the arbitrary stage in the child’s life they just selected?  The reason?  You cannot have your strongest desire to kill a child, then a second later have your strongest desire to save the child.  Ultimately, both stances create consistency.  Either every human life is equally valuable, or in justifying abortion we also justify infanticide, euthanasia, and genocide.  Which side are you on?

Abortion – a good option or false solution?

False – Human life is only as valuable as the mother judges it, and may be disposed in a difficult situation.

Truth – Each human life has intrinsic dignity from his or her first moment.

Evil – Child-killing is a good. 

Goodness – Follow Fr. Vander Woude’s example, and stand against abortion and with struggling mothers.

Selfishness – Convenience justifies abortion.  

Beauty – Sacrifice for an innocent life is the greatest embodiment of love.

To expose and tear down Planned Parenthood’s triple bulwark of lies, immorality, and self-idolization, we must proclaim and embody truth, goodness, and beauty

If abortion is such an obvious good, why divert the discussion away from the child?  If choice itself is the ultimate good, why is the “pro-choice crowd” not vocal about the many coerced and forced abortions?  Fr. Vander Woude’s actions reminds us that we too can speak the truth about the dignity of human life and shine the light of hope into the darkest of situations.

My thought on the recent Planned Parenthood shooting in the comments

Advertisements

One thought on “Heroes and Heartbreakers, part II

  1. This post was written before the recent shooting at Planned Parenthood.

    That sad event does not change anything written here. At root, the problem with any shooting is the same problem with abortion: a lack of recognition of the value of human life. No pro-life person would want or promote such violence. That would be a contradiction of the very stance that upholds human dignity. In fact, I have previously criticized those who make doctors, nurses, and other abortion workers the ultimate problem (link below). They are instruments but not the cause of this evil. They in fact are victims who need our sympathy. They may very well believe they are doing something good. We should condemn their acts, but not them as persons. Hence, a violent act against such a person is never justifiable. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/06/awesome-guest-post-should-we-stone-abortion-clinicians.html

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s