The Unborn

I write this on behalf of children – all children – born, and unborn.

A famous woman, who was expectant with child, was once greeted by her cousin who was herself six months pregnant. She said the following;
“As the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leapt for joy.”

The woman she was speaking to had fallen pregnant unexpectedly – in the most unusual way. She was engaged to be married, but had not yet had sexual relations with her husband to be. She now had to tell her betrothed that she was pregnant. Under the laws of that ancient society she would be judged guilty of the crime of adultery, and could face severe consequences. What would she do? Surely - abortion would have crossed her mind?

That woman was Mary, who went on to marry Joseph, and the child she gave birth to was none other than Jesus Christ – a man who has changed history, and has given hope and peace to generations.

My own sister also found herself unexpectedly pregnant, at a young age. She was in a relationship with a man that was abusive and violent. She faced an uncertain future – even without a child. Those around her – including my mother and father – urged her to abort the baby. She agonised over her dilemma for many days, before deciding that she could not do that to her unborn child – even though she was only a few weeks pregnant. She went on to have a son, and his name is Paul. Today, Paul - my nephew – is one of the kindest, hard-working men you could ever meet. He is a family man with children of his own, and he is well respected in the community, and loved by many, including me. I cannot imagine a world without Paul, and neither could his mother. I have often told her how proud I am of her for making that life-changing decision which led to Paul's life.

Mothers
The causes for pregnancy-related deaths include “abortion, which alone is responsible for 200,000 of the 500,000 maternal deaths that occur worldwide each year,” noted “Choices.”

The term - “Safe Abortion” is an oxymoron, and very deceptive because it is not safe for either the unborn child, or the mother. The fact that almost all women who undergo an abortion suffer thereafter from severe psychological disturbances is often kept hidden from the public, claims Professor P. Petersen of the Hannover, Germany, gynecological hospital. Aftereffects include “severe feelings of guilt; depression; apathy or irritability; hatred for partner, doctor, or for men in general; frigidity; [and] terrible nightmares.” According to the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Petersen pointed out that the doctors who make abortions possible must also bear “a share of the responsibility for killing humans.” This has already taken a heavy psychological toll on many doctors.

In contrast to my sister - who refused to abort her child, then went on to have her son - my other sisters did not fare so well. One of them had three abortions, and has had a traumatic life, with constant illness, alcohol dependency, and broken relationships. My other sister, under pressure from her parents, and the medical authorities, had an abortion, which she later deeply regretted. She has suffered from severe depression and anxiety all her life, and she often thinks about her children that were born after her abortion, and how it might have affected their lives. My former daughter-in-law once had an abortion, which she then regretted, and actually wrote a poem dedicated to the lost child. She too has suffered mental illness and guilt all her young life.

This article is not about judging innocent women, or causing unnecessary guilt to those who are forced to make difficult choices in life. I know that many women find themselves in tragic circumstances – through no fault of their own, where they are pregnant – either by violence, men's selfishness, poverty, lack of awareness, or just plain bad luck. My heart goes out to such women, and it is difficult to imagine the dilemma they must face – often all alone. They need sympathy, support, and understanding, along with practical help – should they choose to have their child. But, fortunately, such situations are not the typical ones for those who turn to abortion. Consider the following statistics

Number of women taking contraceptives – 50% in UK and USA.

Number of pregnancies from rape – 5%.

From 70,000,000 to 80,000,000 (seventy to eighty million) unborn babies perish each year by abortion. That is equivalent to the entire population of the Hawaiian Islands. Half a million of these are done after the recognised 20 weeks limit. Exact figures are difficult to gather because most governments do not keep careful records of abortions. And where abortion is restricted or illegal, experts can only hazard a guess. But the global abortion profile looks something like this:

In the United States, abortion is the second most common surgical procedure, next to tonsillectomy. Annually, over 1.5 million abortions are performed. The clear majority of the women are unmarried—4 out of 5. Single women terminated their pregnancies twice as often as they gave birth, while, on an average, married women gave birth ten times as often as they had an abortion.

In Central and South America—largely Catholic—abortion laws are the most restrictive in the world. Nevertheless, illegal abortion abounds. Brazilian women, for example, underwent about four million abortions last year. Upwards of 400,000 of them had to seek medical treatment due to complications. In Latin America about one fourth of all pregnancies are terminated.

In the western world particularly, the main reason given for abortion are not rape, poverty, lack of knowledge or other unfortunate factors, but are more linked to women opting to pursue careers. In Britain, exclusive data provided by “Pregnant then Screwed” found six in 10 women who have had an abortion said the cost of childcare in the UK put them off pregnancy. Note that – it didn't stop them from getting pregnant in the first place. The disgraceful fact is that millions of women – particularly in the Western world, terminated their pregnancies twice as often as they gave birth. So - for many - abortion is not a health choice, or a last resort, but a convenient tissue to wipe away the life they so flippantly created. Furthermore, most women are not “compelled” to seek abortion. The rights of women to make a choice are applicable at the point that they make the deliberate decision to engage in sexual activities, knowing the possible outcome of such. With such a variety of choices, such as male and female contraceptives, “Coitus Interruptus” and simple refraining from sex, there is hardly ever any excuse to fall pregnant, other than failure of contraception, or rape. In other words – there is rarely such a thing as “unexpected” pregnancy.

Methods of Abortion
Most abortions are performed in the first 12 weeks of life. By this stage the tiny fetus practices breathing and swallowing, and its heart is beating. It can curl its tiny toes, make a fist, turn flips in its watery world—and feel pain.

Many fetuses are wrenched from the womb and sucked into a jar by a vacuum tube with a sharp edge. The procedure is called vacuum aspiration. The powerful suction (29 times the power of a home vacuum cleaner) tears the tiny body apart. Other babies are aborted by dilation and curettage, a loop-shaped knife scraping the lining of the womb, slicing the infant to pieces.

Fetuses older than 16 weeks may die by the saline abortion, or salt poisoning, method. A long needle pierces the bag of waters, withdraws some of the amniotic fluid, and replaces it with a concentrated salt solution. As the baby swallows and breathes, filling its delicate lungs with the toxic solution, it struggles and convulses. The caustic effect of the poison burns away the top layer of skin, leaving it raw and shrivelled. Its brain may begin to haemorrhage. A painful death may come in hours, though occasionally when labour begins a day or so later, a live but dying baby is delivered.

If the baby is too developed to be killed by these or similar methods, one option remains—hysterotomy, a caesarean section with a twist, ending life instead of saving it. The mother’s abdomen is opened surgically, and almost always a live baby is pulled out. It may even cry. But it must be left to die. Some are deliberately killed by smothering, drowning, and in other ways.

Life?
But those who support abortion often object to the use of the word - “life” to describe an unborn child – particularly in the early pregnancy. They use terms such a “Zygot” to depict the fetus as nothing more than a bunch of cells. So what does science say on this important subject? Is a fetus – a “Zygot” - an embryo, scientifically classed as “life”, and is it human?

“Overall, 95% of all biologists affirmed the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization” - SSRN (The Social Science Research Network).

“The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins.”
It concludes - “The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that corroborates that a unique human life starts when the sperm and egg bind to each other in a process of fusion of their respective membranes and a single hybrid cell called a zygote, or one-cell embryo, is created.”

“As physicians dedicated both to scientific truth and to the Hippocratic tradition, the College values all human lives equally from the moment of conception (fertilization) until natural death. Consistent with its mission to “enable all children to reach their optimal physical and emotional health and well-being,” the College, therefore, opposes active measures that would prematurely end the life of any child at any stage of development from conception to natural death.”
- American College of Pediatricians – March 2017

“The term and concept of "pre-embryo" has never been accepted by Congress, the National Institutes of Health's Human Embryo Research Panel, or the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, and is rejected by contemporary textbooks on embryology. I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
- Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31.

"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we non-medical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo". [Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39.

A baby's heart starts beating at 16 days. Twelve to fifteen weeks of pregnancy, swallowing, stretching, and yawning activities appear. In addition to these activities, it is now feasible to study by 4D ultrasound a full range of facial expression including smiling, crying and eyelid movement.

“The human being is fully programmed for human growth and development for his or her entire life at the one cell age,” reported Dr. David Fu-Chi Mark, a celebrated molecular biologist. He concluded: “There can no longer be any doubt that each human being is totally unique from the very beginning of his or her life at fertilization.”

“At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
- Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943] – Princeton University.

The following excerpts are from the “Journal of The Association of Basic Medical Sciences – in the National Library of medicine.”

“In the present scientific scene especially with the progress of ultrasound technologies, prenatal psychology and therapeutics opened a window into prenatal-life of embryo and foetus confirming the evidence that the embryo/foetus is a true subject itself.”

“There is no doubt that the embryo and foetus in utero are human individuals prior to birth. The child that is born is the same developing human individual that was in the mother’s womb. Birth alone cannot confer natural personhood or human individuality. This is confirmed by preterm deliveries of babies who are as truly human and almost as viable as those whose gestation goes to full term. All the known evidence support the human foetus being a true ontological human individual and consequently a human person in fact if not in law.”

“A foetus or child with severe open spina bifida is none the less a human being. The same should be said for the live an encephalic foetus or infant with only brain stem functions. It is a human individual even if it lacks a complete brain and usually survives birth by only a few hours or a day. Human society created several standards in defining “person”, “human being” based on what is familiar and easy recognizable. For example: a human speaks, understands, and laughs. Absence of these characteristics (mutism, autism, and stoicism) does not disqualify. To the contrary, conclusion is that the characteristics we have come to associate with being a person may not be applicable to each individual person.”

“Being a patient does not require that one possesses independent moral status. Being a patient means that one can benefit from the application of the clinical skills of the physician. Put more precisely, a human being without independent moral status is properly regarded as a patient when the following conditions are met: that a human being is presented to the physician for the purpose of applying clinical interventions that are reliably expected to be efficacious, in that they are reliably expected to result in a greater balance of goods over harms in the future of the human being in question. In other words, an individual is considered a patient when a physician has beneficence-based ethical obligations to that individual.”

“In all countries (except Ireland and Liechtenstein) juridical considerations are based on Roman law. Roman civil law says that the foetus has right when it is born or if it is born-nasciterus.”

“Thus, even in the absence of legal rights, there is no denying that the embryo constitutes the beginning of human life, a member of the human family. Therefore, whatever the attitude, every country has to examine which practices are compatible with the respect of that dignity and the security of human genetic material.”

“By this account, the zygote is an actual human individual and not simple a potential one in much the same way as an infant is on actual human person with potential to develop to maturity and not just a potential person.”

“The embryo, therefore, from the time of gametes fuse, is a real human individual, not a potential human individual. It was even added that recent findings of human biological science recognize that in zygote resulting from fertilization the biological identity of a new human individual is already constituted.” - Third Assembly of the pontifical Academy for life – 1997. The Vatican is recognised as an independent state, and a member of the United Nations.

“Earlier than we had before assumed, the senses of the unborn begin displaying themselves; and much earlier than recently believed, fine structures and abilities of the brain begin developing” - “Life Before Birth” 1984 Federal Republic of Germany – Ministry For Youth, Family and Health. The publication speaks of unborn life as being life in its “frailest form,” pointing out that “the child’s first bonds to its parents are already formed in the womb.” They say that although many scientists formerly believed that unborn life goes through an evolutionary process, developing from a cell into a fish and then into an amphibian before becoming human, this theory has now been rejected because “science has made advances.” They concede that ‘no one seriously contends anymore that unborn life is not personal human life. A human does not become a human first at birth.’

Charles C. Camosy - Professor of medical humanities at the Creighton University School of Medicine, wrote the following;
“It is those defending pro-choice orthodoxy who regularly distort science about pre-natal development to comfort themselves and pregnant women about the moral implications of abortion.”

The earliest born baby survived at 21 weeks, 5 months.

History's Testimony
Has the human race always practised abortion, and if so, how did it view the unborn? We can learn a lot from the past – especially since we today consider ourselves modern, civilized, no longer barbaric and superstitious.

Abortion was also popular in the ancient cultures, particularly the Roman empire. For what reasons? Historian William Durant writes: “Women wished to be sexually rather than maternally beautiful; in general the desire for individual freedom seemed to be running counter to the needs of the race... Of those who married, a majority seemed to have limited their families by abortion, infanticide, coitus interruptus, and contraception.” Is not the increase in abortions in our time for similar reasons?

The Early Christian View
Christianity – true Christianity – not the plastic hybrid version practised by many of the official religions of the world today - has always stood apart from the rest of the world, as an example of tolerance, love and genuine humanity – inspired by the teachings of Jesus. In sharp contrast to the ancient nations they lived among, early Christians took a firm stand against abortions. Historian Durant adds: “Abortion and infanticide, which were decimating pagan society, were forbidden to Christians as the equivalents of murder.” So while family limitation became an outstanding social phenomenon of both the Greek and the Roman eras, the Christian community stood firmly on a strict moral code that built respect for the sanctity of life. As in ancient Israel, children were considered a mark of the Creator’s blessing. The psalmist wrote: “Look! Sons are an inheritance from Jehovah; the fruitage of the belly is a reward.”—Psalm 127:3.

Consider what other early Christian teachers wrote;

“Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born.” - The Letter of Barnabas, chapter 19:5 (c.100-132C.E.)

“This is the Way of Life: ... You shall not kill the child in the womb or murder a new-born infant.” - The Didache, or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (c.150 C.E.)

“But with us murder is forbidden once and for all. We are not permitted to destroy even the foetus in the womb, as long as blood is still being drawn to form a human being. To prevent the birth of a child is anticipated murder. It makes no difference whether one destroys a life already born or interferes with its coming to birth. One who will be a man is already one.” - Tertullian: Apology, chapter 9:8 (c.197 C.E.)

“She who has deliberately destroyed a foetus has to pay the penalty of murder. And any hair-splitting distinction as to whether the foetus was formed or unformed is inadmissible to us.” - Basil: Letter to Amphilochius (347 C.E.)

Hippocrates – the famous Greek physician, considered the “Father of Medicine,” included abortion in the “Hippocratic Oath”, that all medical professionals eventually adopted. He wrote -
“With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best diet, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage. Nor shall any man’s entreaty prevail upon me to administer poison to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so. Moreover, I will give no sort of medicine to any pregnant woman, with a view to destroy the child. Further, I will comport myself and use my knowledge in a godly manner.” Today, most professionals have deleted this part of the oath, even though doing so would be against the wishes of it's author, and is illegal plagiarism.

So - many ancient people – usually considered backward and barbaric - actually treated their unborn children with more love and respect than modern – so-called “civilized” societies.

Rights and the Law
Many who support abortion do so based on the idea that international law upholds and defends the rights and choices of women. We are led to believe that there is a common, universal, legal and ethical agreement internationally, that supports this position. Is that really true?

The US supreme Court ruled in 2022 that Abortion is not a legal right. 21 US states today have ruled that abortion is illegal. The USA is a founder member of the United Nations.

The “Council of Europe” in The “Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine” - 2003 (the Oviedo Convention), passed laws which protect the rights of human embryos. These laws are not applied to abortion issues, by member states. Nonetheless, it is technically illegal to harm a human embryo.

Worldwide, there are over 120 United Nations member states in which abortion is either illegal, restricted, or only permitted to save the mother's life. These include Japan, Israel, India, Brazil, Poland, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, and Vatican City.

September the 21st, 1989, was an unusual day for the Fifth Judicial District of the State of Tennessee, U.S.A. On that day the circuit court handed down an opinion on a custody dispute over seven frozen human embryos. The court had to decide which of the divorcing parents was entitled to custody. However, first another issue cried out for settlement: Are the embryos to be considered property or human beings?

Professor Jerome Lejeune of Paris - world-famous geneticist, testified before the court that each human has a unique beginning, which occurs at the moment of conception and that “as soon as he has been conceived, a man is a man.” In other words, beginning at the three-cell stage (zygote), the embryos are, as he told the court, “tiny human beings”! - (Italics mine).

When asked if he was testifying that the zygote should be treated with the same rights as an adult, Dr. Lejeune answered: “I’m not telling you that because I’m not in a position of knowing that. I’m telling you, he is a human being, and then it is a Justice who will tell whether this human being has the same rights as the others. ... But as a geneticist you ask me whether this human being is a human, and I would tell you that because he is a being and being human, he is a human being.”

Based primarily on Dr. Lejeune’s un-rebutted testimony, three of the courts salient conclusions are:
“From fertilization, the cells of a human embryo are differentiated, unique and specialized to the highest degree of distinction.”
“Human embryos are not property.”
“Human life begins at conception.”

Renowned research professor of fetology A.W.Liley explains: “Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the foetus is a mere appendage of the mother. Genetically, mother and baby are separate individuals from conception.”

Therefore, to make the claim that unborn children have no legal rights, is simply not true.

Many abortion supporters argue that a fetus isn't fully formed, is dependent on it's mother's body to live, cannot survive outside the womb, and is not capable of reasoning or expressing itself. Are these arguments ethically, biologically, or legally valid?

It is not commonly known that, the human brain isn't fully formed until 25 years old. This would account for the naivety, impulsiveness, and high emotional states of youngsters and teenagers. Furthermore, a baby is completely dependent on it's mother and father (and society) for the first few years of it's life. In fact, pregnant women are actually more free to function with their unborn child than their newborn one. Additionally, if dependence, and inability to express oneself were the criteria for the termination of life, then we would also have to consider terminating many mentally disabled people, people with Dementia, MS, Cerebral Palsy, and other medical conditions. Yet, most people in society would be horrified by such drastic, repulsive ideas.

Seriously injured, or diseased people are often kept alive on ventilators and intravenous drips, despite there being no working lungs, or other organs. Some people have been kept alive artificially for years, because the state considers them alive, and forbids the severing of life support. Fetuses are in a similar condition, but are set to gain full consciousness and mobility. They require no machines, or expensive therapy to continue living, yet they can be terminated by an abortion.

“My body, my choice.”

MEDICAL doctors P. M. A. Nicholls and Carlos del Campo of Halifax, Nova Scotia, wrote a revealing letter to the Canadian Medical Association Journal on the matter of whose rights are involved in abortion. They noted first that others have said that “The decision whether to have an abortion rests primarily with the woman,” and that “many women seeking an abortion and most pro-abortion groups believe that the woman has the right to decide the fate of her own ‘body’ and that abortion is permissible on these grounds.” However, the following observations these doctors made give a person reason to pause and consider;

“Although it should be obvious to all physicians, the following is not usually considered and should be stressed. Following fertilization the haploid cells fuse into a diploid cell. From this point onward the fetus exists as an entity genetically distinct from the mother; that is, it contains unique, organized chromosomal information. Irrefutable proof of this lies in the fact that were it not for the placental barrier acute rejection would occur. How is it, then, that we treat abortion as we do the removal of an appendix, a gallbladder or some other organ? (Of course, we are aware of the greater psychologic consequences of abortion.) Ironically, it is much easier to have an obstetrician remove a viable fetus than to have a surgeon agree to remove a healthy gallbladder. Yet, unlike the fetus, that organ is undoubtedly a part of the patient. Can we accept the common pro-abortion ‘my body’ attitude and agree that the decision to terminate fetal life rests between a woman and her physician? Again, if we examine this logically it is not, in fact, the woman’s body at issue but an undeniably separate life with an independent genetic code.”

In conclusion these doctors cautioned: “When confronted with this issue it is easier to disregard what we know to be true for the sake of convenience or ‘compassion.’ Nevertheless, it is the duty of every physician to avoid succumbing to, or hiding behind the opinion and beliefs of an increasingly permissive society.”

And what of the rights of fathers, husbands, grandparents, siblings, and the Creator of all life - God? Often overlooked in all of this is the pain and frustration of men who desperately yearn to be a father, but have their child terminated against their will – often because their partner did not inform them that they risked becoming pregnant.

Even where a woman has genuinely been caught out, by rape, deception, or other means, does it mean that the unborn child must pay the penalty for that crime? Aren't they as much a victim as the mother? Furthermore, contrary to the assumption that the child will be a part of the rapist – with his evil tendencies – aren't children independent personalities – capable of being completely different from their parents? Besides – more than 50% of babies will be girls, and women are not normally rapists. Couldn't that child become a loving part of that woman's life, instead of a reminder of a horrendous crime? Isn't that the perfect way to turn an act of evil into a positive joy in a person's life?

Contradictions and Hypocrisy
While unborn children are conveniently dismissed as non-life for the purposes of abortion, the same life carried in a womb is considered precious and joyous by millions of women who suffer miscarriage, and stillbirth. Many Women who support abortion have a completely different reaction when they lose their unborn child through accident, miscarriage, or stillbirth.

The “Miscarriage Association” has an article entitled;

“What the loss of your baby means to you.”

UCL Experience told of one of it's patients who wrote;
“They told us the baby had passed away at ten and a half weeks.”

The World Health Organisation – which actually defends and encourages abortions, publishes the following statement;
“Losing a baby in pregnancy, through miscarriage or Stillbirth is still a taboo subject worldwide, linked to stigma and shame. Many women still do not receive appropriate and respectful care when their baby dies during pregnancy or childbirth. Here, we share some of your stories from around the globe.” -

One of the experiences they quote said the following;
“But when we went in for the 12-week scan in our local hospital in the South-East of England, I was told I had a missed miscarriage, also called a silent miscarriage, which meant the baby died.”

All of the above organizations – which encourage and support abortion, refer to the unborn as a “Baby,” and state that the baby can “die.”

On the “National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Children” UK webpage under - "NSPCC Learning - Pregnancy in mind", it reads;

"Stress chemicals produced by women suffering from depression or anxiety can affect their unborn child’s development. Anxiety and depression during pregnancy can also increase the risk of postnatal depression, making it harder for parents to provide warm and responsive care after the baby is born."

It then lists the following;

"Parents’ relationship with the unborn baby".

Note that the NSPCC also refers to the unborn "child" and "baby", yet, has no policy to protect them, and actually encourages abortion. It seems then then that the NSPCC is inconsistent, and hypocritical when it comes to abortion v miscarriage.


Famous Defenders of children's right to life
Contrary to the impression given on the media that people are generally in favour of abortion, many famous people are firmly against abortion. Consider just a few.

Andrea Bocelli, the world-renowned Italian singer shared back in 2011 how his mother was pressured to get an abortion while pregnant with him. She refused. Although Bocelli is blind, he has opened the eyes of the world to his incredible talent and passion for music. Had his mother succumbed to pressure to kill him in the womb, the world would never have experienced his wonderful talent, which lifts the human spirit, and has brought joy to billions.

Patricia Heaton, the famous Award-winning American actress who starred in “Everybody Loves Raymond” and “The Middle” is a vocal and impassioned advocate for life. During the summer, she spoke out against Iceland’s genocide of pre-born children with Down syndrome. Patricia Heaton hit CBS with some unfiltered truth about the meaning of the word "eliminate" in the context in which it was used. Heaton hit the nail directly on the head with her tweet from August 15th which reads, ‘Iceland isn’t actually eliminating Down Syndrome. They’re just killing everybody that has it. Big difference.’

Kathy Ireland, world-renowned supermodel, has appeared on the covers of major magazines, such as Vogue, Cosmopolitan, and the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue. As a notable actress, businesswoman, and pro-life speaker, Ireland is not afraid to stand up for the unborn child in the womb. She has advocated for the defunding of Planned Parenthood, spoken at a whole host of pro-life events, and fearlessly defended life on national television. She said “I always have and I will continue to fight for women’s rights,” going on to describe her former pro-choice perspective: “even though maybe I wouldn’t have [an abortion] myself, who am I to impose my beliefs on someone else. It’s a woman’s body, it’s her choice after all.” It wasn’t until years later that Ireland says she really decided to look into the science surrounding the issue of abortion. “What I learned is at the moment of conception, a new life comes into being, the DNA, the genetic blueprint is there, the sex is determined, the blood type is determined, the unique set of fingerprints is there.”

God
What does our Creator - Almighty God, have to say on this profound issue? Does he approve of terminating the miracle of life before it is allowed to be born? Let the Bible answer;
“You yourself produced my kidneys;
You kept me screened off in the belly of my mother
I shall laud you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made
Your works are wonderful, As my soul is very well aware
My bones were not hidden from you, When I was made in secret
When I was woven in the lowest parts of the earth.
Your eyes saw even the embryo of me,
And in your book all its parts were down in writing
As regards the days when they were formed
And there was not yet one among them.”
- King David's prayer to God - (Psalm 139.13-16).

“And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him; and he must give it through the justices. But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul” - Exodus 21.22-25.

“Before I was forming you in the belly I knew you, and before you proceeded to come forth from the womb.” - Jeremiah 1.5.

"Look! All the souls—to me they belong. As the soul of the father so likewise the soul of the son—to me they belong” - Ezekiel 17.4

“He will be filled with holy spirit even from before birth.” -

“Elizabeth your relative has also conceived a son.” -
Note that upon conception, God considers the embryo a son or daughter.

“As the sound of your (Mary's) greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leapt for joy.” -

Elizabeth was only 6 months pregnant, with John the Baptist.

Can we really claim to be a “civilized” society, or “Christians”, or "free" when we ritually, and dismissively end the lives of our unborn children – despite the scientific evidence that they are alive, despite the legal evidence that they have rights, despite the contradictions of organizations and people in the way that we treat unwanted pregnancies compared to miscarriages, and finally - despite the fact that the giver of all life – Jehovah – Almighty God – forbids such actions?

Each of us will have to decide if our conscience will allow us to support such dark practices, and each of us will answer to our creator for our actions.

I invite you to join with me, and billions of other compassionate people – and take responsibility for our actions, and end this atrocity in our world – once and for all.