Big Science: Not Just Pro-Abortion, but Anti-Life

Scientists are aghast that more babies were born
than before an abortion restriction was passed

 

— Once in awhile, a statement is made that puts the horror of a twisted worldview into perspective. —

Ideas have consequences, we all know. Here is the background for today’s horror: Big Science is ruled by materialists, who overwhelmingly believe in Darwinian evolution. Darwinian evolutionists, not subjecting themselves to the authority of God or the Bible by definition, overwhelmingly tend to be political leftists. Political leftists overwhelmingly favor abortion with no restrictions, rationalizing the killing of innocent unborn babies as a “women’s health” issue. None of these statements are controversial; the ideas are readily expressed by Darwinians and leftists all the time in the mainstream media.

In summary, here are Darwinian ideas before we look at the consequences:

• There is no God.
• There are no eternal values communicated to humanity by God.
• No one is accountable to a “God” who is not there.
• Selfishness is the nature of things in biology.
• Humans are evolved apes.
• One’s own personal peace, freedom and pleasure is the highest good.
• There will be no consequences for selfishness other than those decided by those in power.

Now, look at one of the consequences of these ideas in the matter of abortion, expressed in news articles given the imprimatur of Big Science and Big Science Media (institutions who report on “science” while censoring any views not embraced by Darwinists).

A Spike in Births and Other Potential Impacts of Texas’ Abortion Restrictions (Johns Hopkins University, 31 Aug 2023). One might think it a cause for celebration that “9,800 additional births in Texas” were counted over a previous period after new abortion restrictions were put in place. Think about this: almost ten thousand children escaped suction, burning, and stabbing and will now be allowed to live out their lives. Hallelujah! Right? No. “Scientists” were horrified.

In September 2021, Texas lawmakers passed a more stringent abortion ban, from 22 weeks down to 5 weeks after the last menstrual cycle. “Demographic researcher” Suzanne Bell, lead author of a study with two other colleagues at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, set out to count new births due to the new abortion restrictions.

Other research has shown that abortion bans and restrictions have led to reductions in facility-based abortions and increases in requests for medication abortion pills from online vendors.

What we didn’t know: whether or to what extent abortion bans would influence the number of births. Our study was the first to look at this question in relation to Texas’ 2021 ban on abortion in early pregnancy, known as Senate Bill 8, or SB8, which was the most severe abortion ban at the time.

Bell and her team were not happy campers to learn that so many babies entered the land of the living. They are distressed that the mothers lost the opportunity to dispose the inconvenient children in medical waste cans.

We observed nearly 9,800 births above expectation in Texas—equivalent to a 3% increase in births during this nine-month period.

These findings suggest that many pregnant people in Texas were unable to overcome barriers to accessing abortion services and instead were forced to continue an unwanted or unsafe pregnancy to term. These results were specific to Texas only. We did not observe a similar pattern in monthly live births during this period and other states.

Noted in passing: “pregnant people” instead of “women.” Bias alert!

Let’s consider the spin in this statement. What forced women to carry a pregnancy? Answer: Biology. The union of gametes, achieved by sexual intercourse, “forces” a pregnancy to begin. It does put an unequal burden on the female of any mammal to nurture the embryo until it can live independently. Intrusive as human pregnancy is, requiring 9 months, most women consider this one of the most meaningful and cherished aspects of their lives. Her body develops in response to the baby, which is a separate person with its own sex, genome and needs. Many pregnant women carry on their lives and jobs with few interruptions up to the final week or two. After birth, the mother manufactures the perfect food (milk) to nourish the baby till it is weaned. Fathers are needed throughout the process, too, to protect and care for the mother and to help care for and train the young, while being the chief provider of resources for the family. This is how each one of us got here — all of us who will fight as adults for our own life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. And so Texas did not “force” these pregnancies. The facts of life did.

Consider Bell’s words “unwanted” and “unsafe.” The world’s worst atrocities began by calling certain people “unwanted,” but America began its journey of freedom and prosperity with its declaration that “All men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” In the Judeo-Christian tradition, there is no such thing as an unwanted human being. Christ followers celebrate the love of God that was so vast that He gave His life for us (Romans 5:8). That was for every human in every tribe, tongue, nation and sex. Jesus blessed the little children that came to Him and said “of such are the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:14).

As for “unsafe” pregnancies, does Big Science and Big Media consider abortion “safe”? This is like telling an innocent man that he has three choices for his impending demise: (1) being sucked into a clean vacuum chamber, (2) being cut up with sterile knives, or (3) being skinned alive with 100% pure caustic chemicals from a certified manufacturer. ‘Take your pick; we’re more honorable people than to subject you to germs and dirty implements.’ The perpetrators, of course, will be perfectly safe as they do this to him. It’s OK, they rationalize; the victim was ‘unwanted.’ So were the victims of all the genocides in history.

Responsible pro-lifers should step in and help women with the natural burdens and lifestyle changes that pregnancy brings—and they do. Pregnancy centers offer free services, information, gifts and helps to those choosing life instead of abortion. They do it all through donations and volunteer help, in contrast to the abortion mills that leftists subsidize through government handouts whenever they can. Many states will accept baby drop-offs, no questions asked. But Suzanne Bell and her colleagues feign morality by worrying about the poor women denied access to the easy way out of their inconvenience.

We know that the majority of people who seek abortions live below or close to the poverty line, so it’s likely that many of these birthing people and their families in Texas were struggling financially even before the recent birth.

Compounding this problem: States that banned or restricted abortion access following the Dobbs decision and following SB8 in Texas have not implemented corresponding programs to improve maternal and child health or to support families in need. These states have among the worst indicators of well-being for women and children.

Whenever reading these tear-jerking accounts, always ask what the alternative is. ‘So is the solution to kill the innocent party?’ Watch the Prager U video again about how good Americans have it compared to previous generations. Even the poorest family in Texas lives like royalty compared to people in ancient times who struggled to eke out a living in squalid, unsanitary habitats. This is not to minimize poverty. But there are better ways of helping poor women than making it easy for them to kill the unborn. Why not strengthen the ability of churches and other institutions whose mission is to help mothers, the disabled, and the outcasts? Read about how Christians are helping the “Untouchables” in India (World News) find joy and purpose after centuries of a discriminatory caste system. Talk about “unwanted” people in “unsafe” conditions. Their joy and success when given hope in Christ illustrates the intrinsic value of each human life.

The Anti-Life View Is Common in Leftist Media

Abortion laws are driving academics out of some U.S. states—and keeping others from coming (Science Magazine, 11 July 2023). Women in science feel like they are losing their ‘reproductive autonomy’ in states with more abortion restrictions. This is so sad. They’ll have to travel farther to kill their children.

Medication for abortion or miscarriage management unavailable at most Hamilton pharmacies, survey finds (McMaster University, 21 July 2023). What are women supposed to do if they can’t find over-the-counter baby-killing drugs at their local pharmacy?

Journal’s refusal to retract paper used to restrict abortion in US sparks independence row (British Medical Journal, 20 July 2023). A researcher at a state university published a peer-reviewed paper that alleged that women who aborted their babies “experienced an 81% increased risk of mental health problems, and nearly 10% of the incidence of mental health problems was shown to be attributable to abortion.” Leftists were outraged. They demanded the paper be retracted. They thought it was used to justify abortion restrictions in the USA. That’s the real reason for the outrage. They rationalized it by claiming that the paper had “significant methodological flaws that invalidated its conclusions.”

Without analyzing the details of those claims and who’s right, think about this: are the pro-abortion “researchers” who ganged up to demand the retraction just as outraged when pro-Darwin papers have “significant methodological flaws” that invalidate their conclusions? Are they ever outraged at the rioters who bomb pregnancy centers? Are they outraged at the protestors who harassed US Supreme Court justices before and after the Dobbs decision? Are they being hypocritical, when most European countries have even more restrictions on abortion than the USA does?

You can tell a lot about a person based on their reaction to this issue. I don’t know of any rational citizen who doesn’t empathize with poor women inconvenienced by an unintended pregnancy. They care about women who became pregnant due to rape or incest, and want justice to be done to the men who commit such crimes. So why not point them to life solutions: the pregnancy centers and churches and Christian missions that can come alongside and help? My church right now is distributing baby bottles to members as little piggy-banks families can use to collect coins, dollars and checks for our local Pregnancy Center.

Let’s teach young people about the risks of sex and make sure they don’t become sexually active until able to care for a child in marriage. The solution is to exalt the value of sex the way our Maker intended it, and teach responsibility and unselfish love as prerequisites for enjoying the gift of reproduction within the bounds of marriage. Bounds give freedom. Look how far you can travel in a car if you stay in the lanes. But if you venture outside, you can’t blame others for the consequences. Let’s honor motherhood. Never look down on a pregnant women or one breastfeeding in public. Mothers should be cherished and honored by a righteous society. This goes for fatherhood, too; men are being disdained when their greatest fulfillment is to have a family. What’s more beautiful than seeing a father and mother with children in tow? The crisis of fatherlessness in cities is well known as a contributor to crime, poverty and purposelessness in young men. Girls need a father, too.

Proclaiming the message that certain human beings are “unwanted” or “inconvenient” is treading on dangerous ground. History’s worst nightmares often began that way. Darwinists have a long, bloody history of that kind of thinking; study Dr Bergman’s articles about eugenics here at CEH. Big Science and Big Media should be ashamed to continue propagating that dastardly message.

The problem is not too many babies being born. America and many other countries have the opposite problem: too few babies! Fertility rates in men have been declining at an alarming rate, and the birth rate among young couples has been below the replacement rate of the population for years now. Politicians worry about declining numbers of working young people needed to fund the social security programs for aging populations. We need more babies! —but responsible ones, growing up in two-parent families with parents who love them and teach them Christian values essential to a free society. American founding father John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”