by Mark Crutcher, September 3, 2010

Over the years, George Orwell’s observation that some things are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them has proven to be frighteningly accurate. One example was recently seen in a Durango, Colorado, newspaper article in which local abortionist, Richard Grossman, was asked when he thought life begins. His answer was that he believes in the strength, intellect and fortitude of women and that they are the ones who make that decision. He went on to say that it is women who empower the fetus.

It is no secret that the pro-life community is constantly accused of being a bunch of knuckle-dragging troglodytes who’ve been mesmerized by religious superstition while the abortion lobby is portrayed as deep-thinkers guided only by logic and science. Yet here, a practicing baby-killer is asked a question related to science and biology and he responds with some moronic new-age mumbo-jumbo. And, of course, he got away with it because the “journalist” who wrote this puff piece was a card-carrying member of the mainstream media who knew better than to question the “party line” on abortion.

In any event, to appreciate the shear idiocy of this idea that women must be allowed to decide when life begins, imagine two children who are conceived at the same moment. Three months later, one mother talks about her baby, knows its gender, has named it, and has even seen it on an ultrasound screen. Meanwhile, the other mother contends that the life of her child hasn’t begun yet and decides to have it killed by the goons at Planned Parenthood. The pro-choice argument is that both of these mothers are correct, despite the fact it is physically, biologically and scientifically impossible for that to be the case.

Also, if women are going to be the ones who decide when life begins, why should they lose that right by giving birth? Let’s say there’s a woman who sincerely believes that life doesn’t begin until speech is possible and she kills her three-month-old daughter. Should she be charged with murder? What makes her belief that life begins at speech less valid than another woman’s belief that life begins in the second trimester, or at viability, or at birth, or at any other arbitrarily chosen point? And what gives society the right to charge this woman with murder? After all, if she claims that the life of her child had not begun, and if she’s the one who gets to make that decision, then by definition she did not commit a murder. Or is it that only pregnant women have this mystical ability to know when life begins and, somehow, they lose it at the moment they are no longer pregnant?

Like I’ve said a million times before, the entire pro-choice position is a testament to the fact that the human brain is the only organism in nature that has the ability to intentionally deceive itself. And if you need further proof of it, in this same article, Grossman said that the reason he does abortions is because he is a Christian.