Why do we allow this?

If you or I strap down a cat or dog and then proceed with a wrench or industrial size pliers to rip or tear off its limbs and crush its skull, if found out, we would be arrested and prosecuted on various criminal charges in all 50 states of the USA.

Yet, what we just described above is done to very small human children in their mothers’ wombs each and every day throughout the US.  It is called abortion.  For the politically correct and the “progressive”, this grisly practice is called “a woman’s right”, or simply her “choice”.

Why do we allow this?



We refer interested readers to a relevant and insightful essay by a concerned woman.  Click on this link:

Enough with the endless abortion euphemisms


other related thoughts

An interesting human reaction or phenomena to be aware of is the behavior of some passersby at protests where large color photographs of the dismembered and mangled bodies of children killed through abortion are on display.  (And, no, these photographs are not fake as former abortionists have verified the photographs’ authenticity.)

When confronted with these uncensored, unfiltered images of the results of abortion, many people passing by will not look at the images.  These individuals either do not care or are consciously choosing to remain in a state of denial.

This is where (harsh) reality contradicts one’s ideology.  And, this poignant contradiction does cause cognitive dissonance in any who still have some humanity, in any persons who are not dead to the truth.

When we dehumanize our children so as to assuage our guilt for killing them, do we not also dehumanize ourselves?

The US likes to lecture the rest of the world on human rights.  One might opine that Americans ought to practice what they preach by respecting and protecting the lives of innocent human children in the womb.  But, for the politically correct progressives of today, abortion is a human right and needs to be promoted around the world.

One may also see posters that say “A woman’s first right is to be born.” – food for thought.

copyright 2017 – larrysmusings.com


  1. Really interesting read, as abortion is definitely a contentious issue. It’s difficult both legally and scientifically to say exactly when life begins – is it at conception? 3 months in? 6 months in? – but I would say that the choice of abortion is essential for women to have, especially in the case where the mother-to-be could go through complications and die from childbirth, taking the child with her. There is no evidence for abortion increasing the number of teenage pregnancies etc. either – it just makes the lives of women everywhere safer. Those pictures that you mention above show the anomalies of abortion: 92% of legal US abortions are in the first trimester, where the embryo doesn’t even resemble an organism. I’d be interested to hear more of what you think about this!

    1. Jess:

      First off, I do not allow video links in comments until I have had time to review the video. There is so much propaganda out there and misinformation that that is the policy at this blog.

      Second, we have heard the same tired old arguments that you make in your comment above. You use a wedge issue, that of maternal morbidity in childbirth, to justify what we have in the industrial world, an epidemic of elective abortion, or call it abortion on demand for any reason or no reason at all. As to when life begins, consult any textbook on embryology and see what the doctors and scientists say.

      1. Thank you for taking the time to read my comment. I appreciate that you don’t want misinformation on your blog, but it is difficult to support arguments without scientific evidence. The wedge issue is relevant here I think, as abortions are absolutely seen as the safest way for mothers who cannot give birth to children (for any reason) to continue their lives. You cannot know whether or not they will die until they give birth, and by then it is far too late. Why not reduce the risk by allowing abortion? And contrary to your last point, Dr. Ricki Lewis, author of McGraw-Hill’s biology textbook Life, says “Life science textbooks from traditional publishers . . . don’t explicitly state when life begins, because that is a question not only of biology, but of philosophy, politics, psychology, religion, technology, and emotions. Rather, textbooks list the characteristics of life, leaving interpretation to the reader.” There are a lot of factors affecting the exact point that we consider ‘life’ to start, but considering biological factors only, she narrows it down to 17 possible points in time.

      2. Jess:

        Take note that I am in no way trying to convince you of anything. I respond to your comments for the benefit of future readers of this post.

        In your rather confused comment above, you invoke science and then quote someone who muddies the water by saying that when life begins is a question “not only of biology . . . . technology, and emotion.” So science does not have the final say? Or, is science not competent to answer the question?

        Again, you fall back on women’s mortality in childbirth. But, have you considered that C-sections can be performed safely for both babies and their mothers? As well, we are not talking about ectopic pregnancies here.

        Here is a link you will likely find helpful in your unquestioning support of abortion. The trolls on Amazon refuse to see that abortion kills children. Read the reviews and the comments to the reviews on this recently released book here:

        Gosnell book

        end of reply

      3. Science provides the evidence on which to base our debate, but it is the interpretation of the facts (like the question of what exactly life, and therefore a child, is) that is out of the realm of science, straying into emotion and philosophy.

        So yes, science does not have the final say, but it does show that abortion is far safer and better for society than C-sections and other methods of having an unplanned birth. Often, abortion is not a choice one makes lightheartedly, but only when the alternative would lead to worse consequences.

        Thank you for your link, I will take a look but I will request that you also link to the ASAPscience video I put in my last comment so that future readers can receive a balanced set of scientific facts.

      4. Your comments speak for themselves. Thus, no reply is needed.

        Emotion should govern the interpretation of facts. Thanks Jess, that is very enlightening.

      5. Indeed emotion should have some say, but also philosophy and consideration for all the mothers who are not ready to be mothers should come into it as well. Thank you for debating this issue with me. I think wherever people stand on this issue, it’s important that we talk and listen!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s