Tragedy and hypocrisy. A 9-month pregnant woman was caught in the middle of a gun fight on an MBTA train in Boston last night. read how the Boston Globe and others in the article go through verbal contortions to, on the one hand, express sympathy and report the reality that an innocent life was taken when her unborn child was killed, and on the other hand, try to remain consistent in their pro-abortion attitudes.
- The fetus of a 29-year-old passenger on the Orange Line died last night after the woman was shot by someone in a group of young men who were arguing as the train pulled into the Massachusetts Avenue station about 8 p.m., authorities said.
The fetus died? How can that be? It’s jus an undifferentiated glob of cells, although at nine months it looks amazingly like a baby. (As it does at 8 days, as well.)
- “This is an unbelievable tragedy,” Mayor Thomas M. Menino said last night. “It’s senseless and it frustrates you. You have a woman on a train and these people have no sense of life. Our prayers go out to that woman and her family and that poor baby.”
Really Mr. Mayor? Then why isn’t it a tragedy when a woman in abortion clinic has her baby ripped from her womb?
My question is what would their reaction be if the woman was on her way to an abortion clinic for a partial-birth abortion? Would it be, “Oh it’s too bad she got shot, but she didn’t want it anyway?”
My point is that most pro-choicers do the intellectually impossible—they hold two contradictory ideas in their heads. Upon encountering a pregnant woman, they are paralyzed for a moment until they have determined whether it’s a wanted child or not. If not, then they offer their sympathy and check the mental box that says “fetus, clump of cells,” but if the child is wanted then they check the box that says “baby, unborn” and offer their congratulations. In other words we have a national case of schizophrenia over abortion. Our instincts (i.e. the natural law) tell us that we should protect and cherish the pregnant mother and unborn child, but selfishness and materialism and secular humanism tell us that the child is insignificant and subordinate to the woman, mainly because we can’t see him. I often wonder how things would be different if a woman’s belly was transparent. Besides being really gross, I’m convinced it would mean the quick end of abortion.
The reality is that we’re a world of doubting Thomases. If we cannot see it, if we cannot experience empirically, we do not believe. The sad thing is that aborting mothers can feel it, but not see it, and they don’t believe either.