By now, everyone knows about the undercover video exposing the donation, exchange, or sale of aborted baby hearts, livers, and heads by Planned Parenthood (PP) facilities and their affiliates. It was released by an organization called the Center for Medical Progress, which has a history of critiquing PP and its practices. Dr. Deborah Nucatola is the “star” of the video, who serves as PP’s senior director for medical services. Her explanation of the best way to extract an unborn child in order to preserve the vital organs has drawn the most ire from anyone who has watched the video. Dr. Nucatola expresses these things while sipping red wine and munching on salad.
I have not watched the edited version because I chose to view the longer, unedited one after discovering its existence on You Tube. My reason is strictly a matter of principle. If any video, article, book, poem, or movie exists in two versions, then my default practice is to get my hands on the complete or unabridged one. I want the whole enchilada so to speak. This helps me to come to my own conclusions. The responses from those who support PP and those against it have been predictable. This is my initial observation from 10,000 feet up.
No matter how anyone slices it, abortion says that the unborn child does not deserve to live. Instead the rights of the adult mother supersede those of the unborn. Throughout the video, I kept marveling at the depravity of the human heart. There are sectors of the medical, research community that see more value in the aborted baby parts than bringing that child to full term. It seems to me that abortion devalues human life at its most basic level while arbitrarily assigning it value at some later point yet to be determined.
After watching the video, it seems like Dr. Nucatola, PP and their affiliates have come up with a solution for finding value with the unborn: the field of advanced, Biomedical research*. After all, PP and its affiliates must deal with a nasty, practical consequence of abortion: the disposal of aborted fetuses/babies. Around the one hour mark, Dr. Nucatola responds to a question about estimating how many remains are leftover in one day. She guesstimates about 18 liters, which failed to hit home for me until I divided the number by two, i.e. nine, two liter bottles worth of aborted babies. It goes without saying that neither PP nor its affiliates would bury these aborted babies because that affords them dignity and worth as persons. Cremation is not an option for the same reason. The solution seems to be donation for medical research purposes.
A whole host of questions bubble up to the surface at this point: Is the unborn child alive only at birth? How far along the pregnancy is the baby a viable human being? The core question at the center of the abortion debate is very simple. When does life begin for a human being? If the answer is at conception, then that settles it. If the answer is no, then choosing a point after conception is quite arbitrary. Who decides the criteria for determining the viability of the unborn? Our nations’ medical community? The US Supreme Court? The latter seems to be the preferred option over the last forty-two years.
In 1973, the US Supreme Court made abortion legal in the landmark case Roe v. Wade. Last month, the highest court in America imposed its redefinition of marriage upon all fifty states based upon its 5-4 decision in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. In effect, these two Supreme Court rulings have etched into stone that the rights of adults take precedence over the rights of children. This does not mean that I am for children’s rights. What I mean is that Roe v. Wade codified the view that unborn, developing babies have no right to live. The Obergefell v. Hodges decision advocates that the rights of two adults trump their responsibility to provide a child with a mother and a father.
Basically, our nation seems to be telling our kids that they really do not matter until they reach eighteen. I imagine that the conversation between a child and one of our social elites would sound something like this: “We do not believe that you are worth living for nine months in the womb. When you are born, it does not matter who parents you. We have not figured out how to correct the public education system; however, we blame private schools, charters, and vouchers for funneling money away from you in order to give you a decent education. One more thing, we think it is unhelpful for you to use the words boy or girl, male or female. Those are vague abstractions without any meaning.” The child may say, “So what am I?” “You’re a person. Isn’t that enough? Now go away. Play with your toys.”