Abortion advocacy consistently claims a woman's "right" to choose an abortion, even as medical science makes it abundantly clear that a pregnant woman carries a living human person. A disturbing and illuminating parallel between abortion and slavery comes to mind. From its inception until the end of its civil war in 1865, the United States allowed white people to keep black people as slaves. The United States Supreme Court called slavery-the possession of human beings as property-a constitutional right in its 1857 "Dred Scott" decision. Abolitionists at the time argued that it is wrong for some people to keep other people as property. These abolitionists were told "You may not like slavery, you may think it is morally wrong, and you need not choose to keep slaves. But do not force your morality on slave owners. They have a legal right to keep slaves." Today, this argument sounds as absurd as it is morally repulsive.
Today's pro-life advocates assert that abortion is wrong, because no one has the right to kill an innocent person. In an eerily similar fashion, these pro-lifers are often told "You may not like abortion, you may think it's morally wrong, and you certainly do not have to choose an abortion. But do not force your morality on women who want to abort. They do (or should) have a legal right to abort their baby".
In 1858, Stephen Douglas ran against Abraham Lincoln for the presidency of the United States. The two of them engaged in a series of lively debates during the campaign. Douglas advocated letting each state choose to keep slavery legal or not. Lincoln answered Douglas this way: "No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong".
Abortion kills a human being. It often injures or kills the mother too. May the citizens of the Kingdom of Swaziland protect the right to life of all people, from conception to natural death.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Peace on Earth
We are approaching Christmas, the time of "Peace on earth, good will to men". In 1994 Mother Theresa, the nun famous for working among the very poor in India, addressed a breakfast meeting in Washington D.C. The crowd included then-President Bill Clinton and other Washington luminaries. During her address, Mother Theresa said "The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child...and if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
As we prepare to remember the birth of baby Jesus-the One who made peace between God and man-may Mother Theresa's words ring in our ears. For the sake of peace on earth and good will toward men (and women), may Swaziland say no to abortion and yes to life.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
As we prepare to remember the birth of baby Jesus-the One who made peace between God and man-may Mother Theresa's words ring in our ears. For the sake of peace on earth and good will toward men (and women), may Swaziland say no to abortion and yes to life.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Friday, November 19, 2010
The Morning After Pill
When discussing life issues like contraception and abortion, truth is very important. Friday's (12 Nov) Times carried a full-page article discussing so-called "emergency contraception" pills. Readers were told that these pills can be used "to prevent an unwanted pregnancy".
We must note first that human life begins at fertilization (also called conception), which is the moment when the sperm and the egg join. The Letters page of the Times lacks the space to contain all the quotes from medical experts testifying to this fact, so one example will have to do. Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni from the University of Pennsylvania (USA) told the US Congress in 1981: "I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life". Medical research and understanding has grown exponentially since that time, and all the gathered information confirms that human life begins when the egg and the sperm join. After conception (which usually takes place in the tubes leading from a woman's ovaries to her uterus), the new person travels to the uterus and attaches to the wall of her mother's womb. Nine months later, if all goes well, the baby is born.
I visited a prominent chemist in Mbabane on Saturday, and they graciously gave me an information page which comes in the box with the morning after pills. The information page says that the active ingredient (Levonorgestrel) in this pill (Norlevo) "acts as a contraceptive by inhibiting ovulation and preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum in the uterine mucosa".
The information sheet is half right. "Inhibiting ovulation" means to stop an egg from leaving a woman's ovary. This is a contraceptive action, because if no egg is present then the sperm has nothing to join with, and conception is impossible. "Preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum", however, is not a contraceptive action; it is an act of abortion. A "fertilized ovum" is nothing less than a new human being, as Dr. Bongioanni explained above. "Preventing nidation" means to make it impossible for the newly-conceived human person from securing herself to the wall of the uterus. In this way, the morning-after pill causes abortion. Senior Nursing Officer Gibson Sibanda was quoted in the Times as saying "After 72 hours conception may have taken place, and once fertilization takes place the ECP (morning after pill) is useless". The paper that comes with the pills indicates that the pill can still have an effect after fertilization--at that time it may prevent implantation. Sexually active women should have accurate information as to what effect this pill might have on a child she may conceive. The Times, FLAS, and the pharmaceutical companies would do well to provide accurate information in a form that does not require a university biology degree to understand.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
We must note first that human life begins at fertilization (also called conception), which is the moment when the sperm and the egg join. The Letters page of the Times lacks the space to contain all the quotes from medical experts testifying to this fact, so one example will have to do. Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni from the University of Pennsylvania (USA) told the US Congress in 1981: "I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life". Medical research and understanding has grown exponentially since that time, and all the gathered information confirms that human life begins when the egg and the sperm join. After conception (which usually takes place in the tubes leading from a woman's ovaries to her uterus), the new person travels to the uterus and attaches to the wall of her mother's womb. Nine months later, if all goes well, the baby is born.
I visited a prominent chemist in Mbabane on Saturday, and they graciously gave me an information page which comes in the box with the morning after pills. The information page says that the active ingredient (Levonorgestrel) in this pill (Norlevo) "acts as a contraceptive by inhibiting ovulation and preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum in the uterine mucosa".
The information sheet is half right. "Inhibiting ovulation" means to stop an egg from leaving a woman's ovary. This is a contraceptive action, because if no egg is present then the sperm has nothing to join with, and conception is impossible. "Preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum", however, is not a contraceptive action; it is an act of abortion. A "fertilized ovum" is nothing less than a new human being, as Dr. Bongioanni explained above. "Preventing nidation" means to make it impossible for the newly-conceived human person from securing herself to the wall of the uterus. In this way, the morning-after pill causes abortion. Senior Nursing Officer Gibson Sibanda was quoted in the Times as saying "After 72 hours conception may have taken place, and once fertilization takes place the ECP (morning after pill) is useless". The paper that comes with the pills indicates that the pill can still have an effect after fertilization--at that time it may prevent implantation. Sexually active women should have accurate information as to what effect this pill might have on a child she may conceive. The Times, FLAS, and the pharmaceutical companies would do well to provide accurate information in a form that does not require a university biology degree to understand.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Saturday, November 13, 2010
One Child Policy?
According to the Swazi News on 6 November, MP Johannes Ndlangamandla has floated the idea that limiting by law the number of children people can have will help Swaziland develop. The News did mention that "globally" some countries, like China, limit the number of children a couple can have. Policymakers and policy influencers (like the News) would do well to tread carefully in this area.
First off, note that no one lives "globally"; we all live in some particular place. The question is, do we want some policy from another part of the globe to become policy in our own country?
China does indeed have a one-child policy, but it has led to a numerous and serious problems. Population Research Institute says that victims and witnesses report the following government activities in China related to its one-child policy: "age requirements for pregnancy; birth permits; mandatory use of IUDs (the loop); mandatory sterilization; huge fines for breaking one's child limit (in one instance, a couple was fined approximately 500,000 Emalangeni for having twins after they already had one child); jail sentences; destruction of homes and property; forced abortion and forced sterilization." Such dreadful actions would not improve Swaziland's position on the Mo Ibrahim log for democratic governance. Additionally, killing daughters via abortion is common, since sons are highly valued in China and couples want to make sure they get a boy. Being killed precisely because one is a girl is the epitome of gender-based violence, and Swaziland (rightly) hears continuous calls for an end to gbv.
China's experience shows that bringing the force of law to bear in order to reduce the number of births is a bad idea. Swaziland has development problems, but limiting the number of children by law is not the way to solve them.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
First off, note that no one lives "globally"; we all live in some particular place. The question is, do we want some policy from another part of the globe to become policy in our own country?
China does indeed have a one-child policy, but it has led to a numerous and serious problems. Population Research Institute says that victims and witnesses report the following government activities in China related to its one-child policy: "age requirements for pregnancy; birth permits; mandatory use of IUDs (the loop); mandatory sterilization; huge fines for breaking one's child limit (in one instance, a couple was fined approximately 500,000 Emalangeni for having twins after they already had one child); jail sentences; destruction of homes and property; forced abortion and forced sterilization." Such dreadful actions would not improve Swaziland's position on the Mo Ibrahim log for democratic governance. Additionally, killing daughters via abortion is common, since sons are highly valued in China and couples want to make sure they get a boy. Being killed precisely because one is a girl is the epitome of gender-based violence, and Swaziland (rightly) hears continuous calls for an end to gbv.
China's experience shows that bringing the force of law to bear in order to reduce the number of births is a bad idea. Swaziland has development problems, but limiting the number of children by law is not the way to solve them.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Choose the Option that Gives You the Most Options
The book "The Art of the Long View" says "Choose the option that gives you the most options". This rule applies to the abortion debate. A mother carrying an unplanned baby faces the question, "Should I abort the baby or not?" Which option gives her the most options? Carrying her baby to birth means she can rear the baby herself, ask her parents to help with rearing the child, join the Swaziland's newly-created support group for single mothers, or marry the dad and have a complete family. The "birth option" allows the mom to view and influence her growing child, to enjoy the fruits of seeing that daughter or son mature, and to receive the support of her child in her own old age. The birth option also opens up all the small and large life choices to that child. The "abortion option" offers a brief and bloody end to the baby, often accompanied by long and short term physical and emotional harm to the mother. It offers the mother a lifetime of "what if" questions she will not be able to answer. In short, the choice of life gives mother and child the most options. Let us help moms and the babies they carry enjoy the maximum range of choices in their lives: let us help moms choose life.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Modernism and abortion
I worry sometimes what effect modernism will have on Swaziland. By modernism I do not mean antibiotics, near-instantaneous electronic communication, rapid transportation, or any of the other many life-enhancing benefits of contemporary technology. I mean a mindset that centres solely on the benefit of the individual, and that makes life an activity concerned solely with the maximization of pleasure and the minimization of pain. Such a mindset locks people into a highly self-centred mode of existence, one which is ultimately unsatisfying. We are made not to live only for ourselves, but for others, too. When we generously look out for the interests of others, we find our own lives enhanced.
Sadly, abortion represents the selfishness of modernism at its worst. Abortion pits a mother against her own son or daughter; when the abortion is carried out (many times due to pressure from the father or parents and against the wishes of the mom), this selfishness reaches its murderous conclusion.
Let Swaziland keep the benefits of modern conveniences while protecting the rights of all her citizens, born and unborn. By doing the latter as well as enjoying the former, we will build a community where we all prosper.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Sadly, abortion represents the selfishness of modernism at its worst. Abortion pits a mother against her own son or daughter; when the abortion is carried out (many times due to pressure from the father or parents and against the wishes of the mom), this selfishness reaches its murderous conclusion.
Let Swaziland keep the benefits of modern conveniences while protecting the rights of all her citizens, born and unborn. By doing the latter as well as enjoying the former, we will build a community where we all prosper.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Men and abortion
It takes a man and a woman together to make a child. The best situation for rearing a child is also a man and a woman committed to each other for lifelong marriage. When it comes to abortion, however, women often find themselves alone or pressured by men to abort.
64% of women in one study felt pressured by others to have an abortion. That same study found 52% felt rushed and 54% were not sure about the decision at the time, while 79% of survey participants said they received no information about alternatives to abortion. One survey of women at abortion clinics found that in 95% of cases, men in these women's lives played a major role in the abortion decision.
All the while, as many as 83% of abortions are unwanted. If someone would just step forward and support these women, they would carry these children-whom, according to the statistics, they want to keep-to term. Unfortunately, post-aborted women make comments like this one: "No one would support me ... The worst day of my life got closer and closer. I think in more cases than not, it isn’t the woman’s choice. It should be called 'Your Parents’ and the Guy’s Choice'...I needed someone to tell me that it was possible to keep my baby, but no one did."
Men are meant to be protectors and providers. The first way for them to protect women is to not have sex with them until marriage. Sex brings deep and abiding changes to a person's life, not least of which is parenthood. Those deep changes are best experienced within the secure bonds of faithful and lifelong marriage. Second, men should take care of the children they father by supporting the mother before and after birth. By doing so they will benefit three people: the mother, the child, and themselves. A man who is making the effort to support and love his wife and children will not only help them prosper-he will, as he receives the gratitude from wife and children, be energized by the love he receives from his family.
Abortion just kills and destroys; love protects, provides, and makes people prosper. May men stand up and fulfill their masculine role of provider and protector. All of society will prosper. No to abortion; yes to love and life.
For more information about abortion's effects on women, visit www.afterabortion.org
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
64% of women in one study felt pressured by others to have an abortion. That same study found 52% felt rushed and 54% were not sure about the decision at the time, while 79% of survey participants said they received no information about alternatives to abortion. One survey of women at abortion clinics found that in 95% of cases, men in these women's lives played a major role in the abortion decision.
All the while, as many as 83% of abortions are unwanted. If someone would just step forward and support these women, they would carry these children-whom, according to the statistics, they want to keep-to term. Unfortunately, post-aborted women make comments like this one: "No one would support me ... The worst day of my life got closer and closer. I think in more cases than not, it isn’t the woman’s choice. It should be called 'Your Parents’ and the Guy’s Choice'...I needed someone to tell me that it was possible to keep my baby, but no one did."
Men are meant to be protectors and providers. The first way for them to protect women is to not have sex with them until marriage. Sex brings deep and abiding changes to a person's life, not least of which is parenthood. Those deep changes are best experienced within the secure bonds of faithful and lifelong marriage. Second, men should take care of the children they father by supporting the mother before and after birth. By doing so they will benefit three people: the mother, the child, and themselves. A man who is making the effort to support and love his wife and children will not only help them prosper-he will, as he receives the gratitude from wife and children, be energized by the love he receives from his family.
Abortion just kills and destroys; love protects, provides, and makes people prosper. May men stand up and fulfill their masculine role of provider and protector. All of society will prosper. No to abortion; yes to love and life.
For more information about abortion's effects on women, visit www.afterabortion.org
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)