A CRITIQUE OF AN ANTI-ABORTION OP-ED
Jeremiah Dys, president of The Family Policy Council of West Virginia, in a column titled “Taxpayers must not finance abortions,” objects to the position of Planned Parenthood regarding tax dollars to fund elective abortion procedures. This is a critique of his objections and method of his objections.
He repeatedly uses the expression “innocent life” in reference to a fetus. A fetus is presumed to be amoral with no chance to choose between right and wrong. Yet, the newborn child is baptized, presumably to wash away original sin and clear the way to enter Heaven upon death. Why the baptism if innocent?
He uses the expression “innocent person.” He gives personhood to an embryo, a clump of cells, in order to appeal to the emotion of his readers. No one can look at an embryo and than at a person and say an embryo is a person. It has nothing in common with a person except that it is a combination of cells.
Dys: “We should not allow Planned Parenthood, or any other organization, to treat life as a commodity.” A commodity is an article of trade or commerce. Something used or sold for income. Is Planned Parenthood guiltier of using life as a commodity than is The Family Policy Council of West Virginia? Further, is not the economic system of this nation using persons as commodities for profit?
Dys uses the expression “the sanctity of human life.” That is, human life is sacred and holy. Even though it is established beyond a reasonable doubt that all life has a common ancestor and beginning and a like genetic makeup, humans, at this time of the year, show no mercy on deer and other wildlife because they are not sacred and its fun to kill them. Who has pronounced that human life is sacred except humans in a book that humans wrote and attributed to a god? Humans are sacred only because humans say they are.
Dys: “Nor should we allow [Planned Parenthood] to use tax dollars to profit from an innocent person’s life.” Tax dollars by the billions are use to take innocent life, inadvertently and deliberately and as collateral killings. Wars are subsidized by tax dollars and innocent children and adults die by the thousands. The profit comes from winning the war. And the enormous income of the makers of armaments.
Dys uses words and expressions that have negative connotations against his opponent and he attacks his opponent instead of attacking the issue of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. He charges that Planned Parenthood uses it money to “abort black and minority babies, cover up statutory rape and instruct young girls how to circumvent parental notification laws.”
He accuses it of ‘using sleight-of –hand rhetoric.” He declares that “Planned Parenthood and its comrades have deprived millions of innocent little girls of their most essential right: life.” He demonized Planned Parenthood.
He could have mentioned that the millions of mothers of those millions of daughters were made desperate by too many children, too many debts, too many violent and abusive mates, too many worries, too many sleepless nights and too many meals with too little to eat. And mention that Planned Parenthood is a haven for women.
“In a lust for profits, Planned Parenthood has physically and psychologically scarred the millions of mothers of these children.” Not only does Dys seem to have a lust for profits, he seems to have a lust to denigrate Planned Parenthood as a means to profits.
Planned Parenthood “has denied fathers the privilege of joyfully weeping over the birth of their children.” “Joyfully weeping”!? This tearful hyperbole emphasizes the hysteria of Parenthood’s opponent.
Dys: “What’s more adoptive homes remain empty because of the abortionist’s curet.”
It’s estimated that 30 million children die every year from lack of adequate nutrition.
There is no lack of children to be saved and adopted. And if the population of this earth reaches in the next ten years 7 billions or 8 billions as is predicted, then there will be enough children to adopt to fill every household in this nation with ten of them, just the number it was when this was a nation of farmers.
Dys is an advocate for fetuses. He seems to be unaware that a fetus resides in a woman’s womb and that the woman is a sensitive and emotional and rational person, a real person, who has knowledge of her condition and has a notion of what she would prefer its end. It must be screamingly frustrating and maddening for a pregnant woman to have a man and an organization trying to dictate and to force her to do with her fetus other than what she wishes to do with it—when that man and organization knows nothing of her circumstances, her woes and her history. Further, it must be noted that no woman conceives immaculately.