February 2, 2019 @ 10:27 AM

Luke 23:34

"[34] And Jesus said: Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. But they, dividing his garments, cast lots."

As I sat in one of the several overflow rooms at last Tuesday night’s hearings on H5125 and H5127, all I could think of was Luke’s Gospel account of what Jesus said as He was dying.   The several Rabbis who presented their pro-choice viewpoint made it very clear that these bills should in no way be morally based on any religion.  I agree, these pending RI House bills should not be religious based.  I do get that.  They should be based on fact, but I honestly could not keep my brain from thinking about Luke 23:34.  So, leaving morality based on religion completely out of a discussion on abortion let’s only look at facts.

The first fact is to define what exactly is abortion.  The second fact is to define what is an unborn?  Finally, do we value human life?

First answer:  abortion is the direct, intentional killing of an unborn child.  That is a very important fact.  Abortion is the direct (to cause to turn, move, or point undeviatingly or to follow a straight course), intentional(done on purpose, deliberate) killing(an act of causing death, especially deliberately) of an unborn (not yet born) child (baby).   Thus the fact: abortion is the undeviatingly, deliberate act of causing death to a not yet born baby.  That is the definition of abortion. That is the fact. Period.

Secondly,  what is an unborn child?

In order to answer that question, we have to ask ourselves some other clarifying questions:  1) When does a human begin its life?  2) Is an unborn a living entity?  3) Does an unborn have human parents?  

Human beings begin at the moment of conception, they are a living entity and they have human parents.  They are at the zygote stage.  If they are allowed to continue their human development, they will then become an embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, childhood, adolescent, young adult, middle age, old age until finally death.  These are all biological facts.   

Finally, do we value human life?

How is value defined?  Value is defined as the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.  Absent morality, are there any facts to the concept of value as it relates to an unborn baby?  The answer is yes.  The difference between unborn babies and other humans is their size, level of development, environment and dependency.  These are all factual differences that the unborn have with the born. Just as a  toddler is smaller than a teenager; an unborn is smaller than a toddler.   The brain of a toddler is smaller than the brain of a 25 year old; the brain of an unborn is smaller than both of them.   Born people live outside the womb and unborn live in the womb.   Disabled and old humans often are dependent on others as the unborn are dependent on their mothers.  So, yes there are factual differences between unborn and born, but that doesn’t make them less important or have less worth or are less useful!  In this way value is a statement of several facts.

In their zeal for a pro-choice argument, the Rabbis startled me with their vitriol concerning pro-life being a religious based argument.  It’s not religious based; it’s fact based.  Unborn children have a right to life because they are exactly where they are supposed to be at this point in their development.   Size, level of development, environment and dependency are their only differences and those facts are not religious based; they are biologically based.   One Rabbi called the “stink in God’s nostrils” as  being caused by the demands of religious based pro-life supporters.   That "stink" is  from the vitriol of a Rabbi who has lost his value for human life and who is sadly not a student of holocaust history.

I was also concerned that a number of female Brown University Medical Students came out to support the pro-choice cause.  I was under the impression that medical training universities called for the saving of lives not the taking of lives.  One young women threatened to leave Rhode Island and not practice medicine in our state should these bills not pass.  That statement went over very poorly in the room I was sitting in as shouts of “who cares,” “good riddance” where heard.  I do not think that threats are a good strategy in argument.  I also wondered whether these young women came to the hearing of their own accord? Where they asked to come by their University professors?  Did they represent a Brown University stand on pro-choice?  I do not have the answer to any of those questions.  I ask the questions because the young women made it a point to reference that they were Brown University Medical students.

Governor Raimondo’s cabinet was well represented as her Secretary of State, Treasurer, and a spokesperson for her Attorney General  all called for support for the pending House bills. It seems the RI Democratic machine is in line with the National Democratic Party plank of any anti-abortion legislature being “non-negotiable”, but I would caution them as that position could be to their political peril.  Whenever a Governor’s cabinet member spoke their points did not spark a positive reaction from the crowd; these pols couldn’t hear the very loud boo’s that were shouted in the room I was sitting in.  I’m not sure how many of the people who attended the hearing were pro-choice, but I can definitely state that the majority of people in the room I was sitting was decisively pro-life and vocal.

One politician gave testimony with his fiancé and their baby.  His testimony was don’t do as I did, do as I say.  The Mayor of Providence and his partner supported pro-choice in favor of abortion as a way of championing women’s rights, but because of their personal and economic situation they chose life for their baby.  She acknowledged that had her circumstances been different she might not have made the same choice; looking at their beautiful baby and seeing the love they both showed for it,  I found that hard to believe!  

Many pro-choice supporters used anti-Trump rhetoric and fear of a Trump Supreme Court reversal to overthrow Roe v Wadeas the primary reason for codifying RI Abortion Rights Laws.  Attorney Joe Cavanagh called the pending RI legislation “not necessary” at this time. There has been no effort on the US Supreme Court to do anything relative to Roe V Wade that would call for Rhode Island to go forward with these bills.

Many pro-choice supporters offered detailed personal testimony of their own experiences with having an abortion.   I had mixed feelings about these women coming out to give such testimony.  I felt sad that they had such an experience, but I took it as a “MEA CULPA” in asking for forgiveness.  I know the intent of their testimony was to warn of the old days of underground and unsafe abortions, but I could only think of the guilt these women must have carried all these years and I wondered at the emotional toll it has caused.   I left the hearing thinking that their testimony would have been better served on the pro-life side of the abortion issue.  

Conversely, there was testimony by several women who had shared their pro-life decision not to abort when confronted with their unplanned pregnancy  The difference between the testimonies were very telling to me.  These pro-life testimonies were clearly full of life, hope and thankfulness for their having made a pro-life decision.  It was evident by their testimony that choosing life was the right decision that set them free from shame and guilt.  

A women representing the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists gave some compelling pro-life comments.  I took it upon myself to check out this organization and found a wealth of information. Let me close with some additional facts gathered from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists which this women represented. AAPLOG


1.  Overall, women with an abortion history experience an 81% increased risk for mental health problems. The results showed that the level of increased risk associated with abortion varies from 34% to 230% depending on the nature of the outcome. Separate effects were calculated based on the type of mental health outcome with the results revealing the following: the increased risk for anxiety disorders was 34%; for depression it was 37%; for alcohol use/abuse it was 110%, for marijuana use/abuse it was 220%, and for suicide behaviors it was 155%.

2. When compared to unintended pregnancy delivered women had a 55% increased risk of experiencing any mental health problem.

3.  Finally, nearly 10% of the incidence of all mental health problems was shown to be directly attributable to abortion.


139 statistically significant studies spanning 40 years demonstrate a statistically significantly associated increased risk for preterm birth with elective abortion.

  • One abortion increases a woman’s risk of preterm birth by 30%.
  • Two or more abortions increases a woman’s risk of preterm birth by 50-70%.
  • BUT, two or more abortions dramatically increases the risk of VERY PRETERM BIRTH (1500grams, or less than 28 weeks’ gestation) by greater than 200%.


Childbearing history, especially age at completion of a first term pregnancy and exposure to estrogen are established risk factors for breast cancer.

Abortion increases the risk of premenopausal breast cancer by arresting the developing breast tissue in a state susceptible to other environmental carcinogens. Abortion of a first pregnancy with delay in subsequent term pregnancy causes the breast lobular cells to be arrested in a proliferating state, without the subsequent maturation to lactation that occurs at the end of a pregnancy prior to birth. The later in pregnancy the abortion occurs, the higher the risk. The more abortions, the higher the risk.


Mothers dying in childbirth are a tragedy. But that tragedy is being exploited by the proponents of worldwide abortion legalization under the myth of “safe” abortion. Abortion is not “safe” for the mother, regardless of the conditions under which it is performed because it increases the mothers risk of suicide, depression, substance abuse, preterm birth in subsequent pregnancies and can increase her risk of breast cancer. But the terms “safe” and “unsafe” abortion are even more twisted, as they are actually legal not medical terms.

Summing up some facts.

Do we value human life?  If we do not value human life then abortion and murder is a legitimate way to deal with unwanted pregnancies as well as unwanted born human beings.  If we value human life, then how can we justify killing an unborn baby?

Only 4-6 per cent of abortions involve incest, rape and extreme developmental issues.  The remaining 94% of abortions are not for any of those reasons.  

Rather than look to continue providing abortion services why not look for other ways to deal with this issue.  A number of pregnancy health center personal testified to the success they have had with women facing this highly charged and emotional issue of an unplanned pregnancy.  The decision of adoption, motherhood or abortion should not be made with a focus on abortion.  It should be made with the focus on the welfare of the unborn as well as the mother. Perhaps defunding abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood and using the money to expand women’s pregnancy centers like the Mother of Life Centers or Community Health Centers would be a better way to address a life changing event of an unwanted pregnancy that women experience.  The holocaust of 60,000,000 abortions that have occured in the USA must end…and that’s a fact.  I do not support H5125 or H5127...and that's a fact.