Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter
The birth control pill has been with us for a long time. The “morning after pill”, as it has been called, a pill designed to abort birth after conception, is readily available in Connecticut for about $25, and surgical abortion, Planned Parenthood’s money maker, is also readily available in birth control Connecticut.
When churches, synagogues and mosques make the distinctions mentioned above – for both scientific and theological reasons – it is unscientific and contrary to settled theology to accuse them of political or theological apostasy. In the imperial Roman world, the Christian Church was among the first social organizations to oppose abortion. Opposition to abortion in the year AD 70 was “cutting edge” reform.
The c, also known as The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations, parts of which constitute the oldest extant written catechism, dating from AD 70, states: “The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child.”
A product of Jewish and early Christian thought, the Didache set its course against the settled secular culture of the day, which included the uncontested right of the Roman paterfamilias to determine whether or not a child should survive abortion or infanticide.
In modern times, science and relatively new technological instrumentation such as ultrasound both have reinforced the view of the early Christian Church that the birth process begins at fertilization and ends with a live child, provided the process is not aborted through chemical or surgical intervention.
Common sense tells us that mighty oaks from acorns grow, even though there is a notable difference between an acorn and a full grown mighty oak. No lucid mind would care to defend the proposition that mighty whales from acorns grow. Birth is the natural fulfillment of innate human potentiality. In this perception, science walks hand in hand with theological perception.
The often unstated Didache of Planned Parenthood is that categorical distinctions may not be made between the fetus any time during the birthing process and the final birth product. For purposes of law, to continue the analogy, Planned Parenthood’s operational principle is that the fetus, even in the late stages of pregnancy, is categorically different than the born child, the disposable property of the mother; throughout the birthing process the fetus is little more than a part of the prospective mother’s body, a notion that is both theologically and scientifically absurd. Visible proof of the error may be found in ultrasound technology – and why, it may be asked, does such technology not play a prominent part in birthing classes, abortion centers or education courses in public or private schools? Are ultrasound videos of the birthing process made available to prospective mothers unplanning their births at Planned Parenthood facilities?
Yesterday’s edition of the Hartford Courant tells us “The state House of Representatives in Connecticut voted overwhelmingly Thursday night to codify into state law that minors can consent to contraception without parental notification. After a lengthy debate, the House voted 117 – 27 as four Democrats joined with 23 Republicans against the measure.”
Connecticut government has yet to consider codifying into law the “right” of minors to procure without parental notification abortifacients or surgical abortions – both forms of “birth control,” we are told by Planned Parenthood, fast becoming a fourth branch of government in the state. However, it has not escaped public notice that arguments favoring the proposed legislation may also effectively be used – or misused – to support the position of Planned Parenthood on all forms of birth control.
The position of Planned Parenthood on abortion may be summarized as a sort of secular commandment: There shall be no effective opposition to any form of abortion in Connecticut, however reasonable. Perhaps the most ardent supporter of Planned Parenthood in the land of unsteady habits is U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal, often caricatured by Connecticut Commentary as “the senator from Planned Parenthood.”
“Blumenthal’s fanatical support of abortion and his fierce opposition to reasonable abortion restrictions is granular,” Connecticut Commentary noted in December 2021. “He even voted against S.311/H.R.962, the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act’, which provides ‘If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws.’”
Republican State Rep. Nicole Klarides-Ditria, a Seymour Republican, said of the bill granting minors the right to purchase birth control pills without parental notification, “This bill is going to prevent pregnancies. It is going to prevent [chemical and surgical] abortions … We want to make sure that our minors have the ability to get the care safely and without fear of repercussions from anyone … In a perfect world, we all want our kids to talk to us every day about everything we do. But unfortunately, we know that doesn’t happen. This bill, I truly believe, will help prevent unwanted pregnancies, and that’s the most important thing we need to do here today.”
So then, the way to rid Connecticut of the scourge of chemical and surgical abortions performed on minors is to veto a parental veto, generally regarded as an effective opposition to a minor’s choice to take birth control pills. And, of course, if preventing unwanted pregnancies is an unwavering political good – “the most important thing we need to do here today” – would it not be as important to offer a like bill affording minors the ability to procure abortifacients and surgical abortions without parental consent because “we live in an imperfect world?”
By the way, it is rarely the pregnancy that is “unwanted.” All women are discomforted by pregnancies. It is the baby, the fruit of the womb, that is unwanted. And every pregnant woman who has given birth knows that it is an Orwellian abuse of language to say that a pregnant woman has given birth to a removed appendix or liver, legitimate parts of the human body.
