Abortion: we are praying Mr. President

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Encouraging teen pregnancy to stimulate abortion industry.true story


Niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. says President Obama needs change of heart


30,000 in SF March in Protest: Cite Black Genocide    

250,000 protest abortion in D.C. Jan. 22, 2009      Didn’t see or hear about this did you?



In the U.S., two children die every minute from induced abortion, 1,400 African American children killed daily?

Dr. Kagia of KENYA says, “The promotion of and the effort to legalize abortion in Africa is a foreign agenda and a form of recolonization. … I have to ask why Congress wants to fund organizations that work against the will of the majority of the people of democratic countries.”

F.O.C.A. you America

Planned Parenthood Racist: Gets Millions from taxpayers annually

Black genocide?

Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger Racist









The Top Ten

Myths About Abortion


by William l. Saunders, Jr., Cathy Cleaver ruse

& Lucia Papayova


Family Research Council


In order to discuss abortion intelligently, it is a

prerequisite that the facts about it be known. Yet,

the one thing that can be said with certainty is

this: the American people do not understand the

facts surrounding abortion. Instead, their views are

clouded by various “myths.”


In this pamphlet, we separate myth from reality.

From whether abortion is protected under the

Constitution to whether one can truly be “personally

opposed, but pro-choice,” from whether abortion

benefits women to whether it benefits society,

from the frequency of and reasons for abortion to

whether the American people support abortion

“rights” as currently existing, from the question

of an abortion/contraception “link” to the facts

of human development, we look at the important

issues surrounding abortion.


We hope readers will use this pamphlet to educate

themselves and others so they can confidently

enter into the public policy debate and shape a just

resolution of this important issue.




Myth No. 1:


Abortion is legal only during the first 3 months

of pregnancy.




Abortion is legal during all 9 months of



The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade declared

abortion a constitutional right.


The Court divided pregnancy into three trimesters1

but ultimately ruled that women have a right to

abortion any time an abortion doctor deems the

abortion necessary for her “health.”2 The Supreme

Court defined “health” as “all factors—physical,

emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s

age—relevant to the well-being of the patient.”3


This “health” exception gives abortion doctors the

power to nullify any abortion restriction on the

grounds that there are “emotional” reasons for the



myth 1 – footnotes


1 Some Supreme Court cases have also spoken of

“viability” (the point at which the child is able to live

outside the mother’s womb) as a crucial factor in judging

abortion regulations. Two points should be noted

about this. First, the “health exception” (see footnotes

3 & 4 and accompanying text) nullifies any significance

this might have, as an abortion doctor can always claim

to find a particular abortion—even after viability—is

important for the woman’s “health.” Second, though

the Court in Roe thought viability fell between 24 and

28 weeks, children are actually able to survive outside

the womb at earlier ages. See, e.g.: http://www.


html?in_article_id=437236&in_page_id=1774 (child

survived at 22 weeks). Further, the development of the

artificial womb means that, in the future, children may

be able to survive outside the mother’s womb very soon

after the time of conception. Cf., Knight, Jonathan,

“An out of body experience,” Nature Publishing group:

Nature, 12 September, 2002. If “viability” matters,

such developments should entitle unborn children to

legal protection at earlier stages of development.


2 Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-65 (1973).


3 Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 192 (1973). In Planned

Parenthood v. Casey, the Court abandoned the trimester

framework but continued to prohibit laws against

abortion where the abortion doctor deems the abortion

necessary to preserve the mother’s “health.” Planned

Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 879 (1992).


4 After Gonzales v. Carhart, 55 U.S.__ (2007),

laws banning the use of the partial-birth abortion

procedure except in life-threatening circumstances are






Myth No. 2:


Abortion is legal because the Constitution says so.




Legal abortion is the fruit of judicial activism. It

has been imposed upon the country by judges.


The word “abortion” does not appear in the



Nevertheless, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court

ruled that a right to abortion was part of an implied

right to personal privacy emanating from various

constitutional Amendments5 —in other words,

that a right to abortion is an “implied” part of the



It is the chief modern example of judicial activism—

judges imposing their own policy preferences

rather than interpreting the law as written. When

judges act in this manner, they usurp the role of

the legislators, whom the citizens elect to represent

them in deciding disputed, difficult policy issues.

Thus, judicial activism undermines the very basis

of our representative democracy.


This ruling has been sharply criticized by legal

scholars, federal judges, and seven other Supreme

Court justices. Justice Byron White, for example,

said the Court engaged, “not in constitutional

interpretation, but in the unrestrained imposition

of its own, extraconstitutional value preferences.”6

Justice Antonin Scalia said, “the Court should

return this matter to the people—where the

Constitution, by its silence on the subject, left it—

and let them decide.”7


Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an outspoken

proponent of legal abortion, called Roe v. Wade

a “heavy handed judicial intervention” that was

“difficult to justify,”8 and said it was “not the way

courts generally work.”9


myth 2 – footnotes


 5 “The Constitution does not explicitly mention any

right of privacy,” but the Court found “at least the

roots of that right” in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth,

and Fourteenth Amendments, and in the penumbras

of the Bill of Rights. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 152-

153 (1973).


6 Thornburgh v. American Coll. of Obst. & Gyn., 476 U.S.

747, 794 (1986) (White, J., dissenting).


7 Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 956 (2000) (Scalia,

J., dissenting).


8 Ruth Bader Ginsburg, “Some Thoughts on Autonomy

and Equality in Relation to Roe v. Wade,” 63 North

Carolina Law Review 375, 385 (1985).


9 “Comments of Justice Ginsburg to law students at

the University of Kansas,” Associated Press, March




Edward Lazarus, former clerk of Justice Blackmun,

the author of the Roe decision, said, “Roe borders

on the indefensible” because a “constitutional right

to privacy broad enough to include abortion has

no meaningful foundation in constitutional text,

history, or precedent.”10


When the Supreme Court creates a new

constitutional right which has “no meaningful

foundation in constitutional text, history, or

precedent,” it acts beyond the scope of its authority

to interpret the Constitution and thwarts the

will of the American people as expressed in their



Roe v. Wade was an illegitimate decision of judicial

activists. There is no right to abortion in the



11, 2005. Other Supreme Court justices have spoken

against Roe v. Wade. Chief Justice Warren Burger,

who, while voting with the majority in Roe, later called

into question its soundness and pondered whether “we

should reexamine Roe.” Thornburgh v. American Coll.

of Obst. & Gyn., 476 U.S. 747, 785 (1986) (Burger, C.

J., dissenting). Chief Justice Rehnquist, an associate

justice at the time of Roe, filed a dissenting opinion

observing that the Court had to “find…a right that

was apparently completely unknown to the drafters”

in order “[t]o reach its result.” Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S.

113, 174 (1973) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting). Justice

Sandra Day O’Connor said, “the court is not suited to

the expansive role it has claimed for itself in the series

of cases that began with Roe v. Wade.” Thornburgh v.

American Coll. of Obst. & Gyn., 476 U.S.747, 814-815

(1986) (O’Connor, J., dissenting). Justice Clarence

Thomas was more blunt, calling Roe “grievously

wrong.” Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 980 (2000)

(Thomas, J., dissenting).


10 “The Lingering Problems with Roe v. Wade,” FindLaw’s

Writ, Oct. 3, 2002, http://writ.news.findlaw.com/

lazarus/20021003.html Lazarus favors legal abortion.

Prominent law professors who support legal abortion

have also criticized Roe v. Wade. “[B]ehind its own

verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on

which it rests is nowhere to be found.” Prof. Laurence

Tribe, “The Supreme Court, 1972 Term—Foreword:

Toward a Model of Roles in the Due Process of Life

and Law,” 87 Harvard Law Review 1, 7 (1973). Roe

“is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of

an obligation to try to be.” Prof. John Hart Ely, “The

Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade,”

82 Yale Law Journal, 920, 935-937 (1973).






Myth No. 3:


Most Americans agree with current U.S. abortion



Fact :


The vast majority of Americans strongly disagree

with it.


According to various national polls:


• 61% of Americans say abortion should be illegal

after the fetal heartbeat has begun11 — which

occurs in the first month of pregnancy.12


• 72% of Americans say abortion should be

illegal after the first 3 months of pregnancy.13


• 86% of Americans say abortion should be

illegal after the first 6 months of pregnancy.14


• Only 16% of Americans say abortion should

be legal at any time for any reason.15


However, Supreme Court decisions make abortion

legal throughout all 9 months of pregnancy, for

any reason.16


Therefore, abortion law today is completely out of

step with Americans’ views on what it should be.


myth 3 – footnotes


 11 Zogby International Poll, April 15-17, 2004.


12 Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N., The Developing

Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th edition

(Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co., 1998): 77, 350.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, 77% of abortions in the United States

occur after the heart of the fetus has begun to beat.

“Abortion Surveillance—United States, 2000,” 52

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (SS-12) Table

7 (Nov. 28, 2003).


13 The Harris Poll #18, March 3, 2005.


14 Ibid.


15 Zogby International Poll, March 10-14, 2006.


16 Roe v. Wade forbids any law against abortion in the

first and second trimester of pregnancy and even after

“viability” if the abortion doctor deems the abortion

necessary to preserve the mother’s “health.” Roe v.

Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-165 (1973). “Health”

is defined by the Court as “all factors—physical,

emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s

age—relevant to the well-being of the patient.” Doe v.

Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 192 (1973).





Myth No. 4:


Abortion is rare in United States.




The U.S. has the highest abortion rate in the

western world.


There are 1.31 million induced abortions every

year in the United States.17 24.5 percent of

all pregnancies in the United States end in



That means 3,500 children are aborted every day,

145 children are aborted every hour, and 2 children

die every minute due to induced abortion in the



In fact, the U.S. has the highest abortion rate in

the western world, and the third-highest abortion

rate of all developed nations worldwide.19


The U.S. abortion rate is higher than the abortion

rate in Spain, Ireland, Netherlands, Belgium,

Germany, Switzerland, Scotland, Italy, France,

England, Wales, Denmark, Tunisia, Finland,

Uzbekistan, Croatia, Japan, Israel, Hong Kong,

Canada, Norway, Singapore, Azerbaijan, New

Zealand, Sweden, South Korea, Slovak Republic,

Czech Republic, Georgia, Australia, Kyrgyzstan,

and Puerto Rico.20


myth 4 – footnotes


17 L.B. Finer and S.K. Henshaw, “Abortion Incidence

and Services in the United States in 2000,” Perspective

on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35 (Jan/Feb 2003),



18 An Overview of Abortion in United States, Physicians

for Reproductive Choice & Health and The Alan

Guttmacher Institute, May 2006, http://www.



19 The abortion rate is per 1000 women, age 15-44. Sharing

Responsibility: Women, Society and Abortion Worldwide

(New York: The Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1999),

p. 28, http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sharing.pdf


20 Ibid.





Myth No. 5:


Most abortions in the United States are done for

health reasons or because of rape or incest.


Fact :


Most abortions in the United States have nothing

to do with these reasons.


According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute (a pro-

choice organization), 93.5 percent of the abortions

every year are done for reasons other than health,

rape or incest. Their survey shows women have

abortions for the following reasons:21


25 % “not ready for a(nother) child/timing is



23 % “can’t afford a baby now”


19 % “have completed my childbearing/have

other people depending on me/children

are grown”


8 % “don’t want to be a single mother/am

having relationship problems”


7 % “don’t feel mature enough to raise

a(nother) child/feel too young”


4% “would interfere with education or career



>0.5% “husband or partner wants me to have an



>0.5% “parents want me to have an abortion”


>0.5% “don’t want people to know I had sex or

got pregnant”


Less than 8 percent of abortions every year are

done for reasons of health, rape or incest:


4 % “physical problem with my health”


3 % “possible problems affecting the health

of the fetus”


>0.5 % “was a victim of rape”


>0.5 % “became pregnant as a result of incest”22


Yet, under current U.S. abortion law, all of these

abortions are legal.23


myth 5 – footnotes


21 L. B. Finer, L. F. Frohwirth, L. A. Dauphinee, S.

Singh and A. M. Moore, “Reasons U.S. Women Have

Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives,”

Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37

(2005): 113, 114.


22 The survey also categorizes the reasons for 6% of

abortions as “other,” without further explanation.


23 Roe v. Wade forbids any law against abortion in the

first and second trimester of pregnancy and even after

“viability” if the abortion doctor deems the abortion

necessary to preserve the mother’s “health.” Roe

v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-165 (1973). “Health”

is defined by the Court as “all factors—physical,

emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s

age—relevant to the well-being of the patient.” Doe v.

Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 192 (1973).





Myth No. 6:


Abortion is good for women.




Women suffer physically and psychologically

after abortion.


Physical complications


Abortion can cause both short-term and long-

term physical complications, and can significantly

affect a woman’s ability to have healthy future



Though there are no requirements for states to

report abortion data to any federal agency, the

Centers for Disease Prevention and Control have

received reports of the deaths of 386 women from

legal abortion between 1973, when abortion was

legalized, and 2003.24


Physical complications include cervical lacerations

and injury, uterine perforations, bleeding,

hemorrhage, serious infection, pain, and incomplete

abortion. Risks of complications increase with

gestational age and are dependent upon the

abortion procedure.25


Long-term physical consequences of abortion

include future preterm birth and placenta previa

(improper implantation of the placenta) in future

pregnancies. Premature delivery is associated with

higher rates of cerebral palsy, as well as respiratory,

brain, and bowel abnormalities. Pregnancies

complicated by placenta previa result in high rates

of preterm birth, low birth weight, and perinatal



myth 6 – footnotes


For more complete references regarding the research

presented in this “myth,” please see Moira Gaul, “How

Abortion Harms Women’s Health,” In Focus (Family

Research Council), December 12, 2007.


24 See http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/



25 S. Lalitkumar, M. Bydeman, and K. Gemzell-

Danielsson, “Mid-trimester Induced Abortion:

A Review,” Human Reproduction, 13 (2007): 37-

52; National Abortion Federation Clinical Policy

Guidelines. Washington DC: National Abortion

Federation, 2007.


26 J.A. Martius, T. Steck, M.K. Oehler, et al., “Risk

Factors Associated with Preterm (<37 + 0 Weeks) and

Early Preterm Birth (<32 + 0 Weeks): A Univariate

and Multivariate Analysis of 106,345 Singleton Births

from the 1994 Statewide Perinatal Survey of Bavaria,”

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and

Reproductive Biology,” 80 (1998): 183-89.





While the question of whether abortion can

increase the risk of breast cancer is hotly debated,

a number of scientific studies demonstrate that

induced abortion can adversely affect a woman’s

future risk of breast cancer.27


Physical complications from chemical abortion with

the drug RU-486 include hemorrhage, infection,

and missed ectopic pregnancy (a potentially fatal

complication). At least 8 women have died from

RU-486 due to hemorrhage and infection.28


Psychological complications


A “pro-choice” research team in New Zealand,

analyzing data from a 25 year period and controlling

for multiple factors both pre- and post-abortion,

found conclusively that abortion in young women is

associated with increased risks of major depression,

anxiety disorder, suicidal behaviors, and substance

dependence.29 This is the most comprehensive,

long-term study ever conducted on the issue.


Other studies also conclude that there is substantial

evidence of a causal association between induced

abortion and both substance abuse and suicide. 30


A review of over 100 long-term international studies

concluded that induced abortion increases risks for

mood disorders enough to provoke attempts at self

harm.31 Researchers have also identified a pattern

of psychological problems, known collectively as

Post-Abortion Syndrome, in which women may

experience depression, anxiety, anger, flashbacks,

guilt, grief, denial, and relationship problems.32

Post-Abortion Syndrome has been identified

in research as a subset of Post Traumatic Stress



Further, studies analyzing the effects of induced

abortion in adolescents have shown, when

compared to adolescents who give birth, those who

abort reported more frequent problems sleeping,

more frequent marijuana use, and increased need

for psychological counseling.34


27 J.M. Thorp, K.E. Hartmann, and E. Shadigian, “Long-

term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences

of Induced Abortion: Review of the Evidence,”

Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 58 (2002): 67-79.


28 M.M. Gary and D.J. Harrison, “Analysis of Severe

Adverse Events Related to Use of Mifepristone as

an Abortifacient,” The Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 40

(February 2006).


29 D.M. Fergusson, I.J. Horwood, and E.M. Ridder,

“Abortion in Young Women and Subsequent Mental

Health,” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47

(2006): 16-24.


30 M. Gissler, C. Berg, M. Bouvier-Colle et al., “Injury

Deaths, Suicides, and Homicides Associated with

Pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000,” The European Journal

of Public Health, (July 2005).


31 J.M. Thorp, K.E. Hartmann, and E. Shadigian, “Long-

term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences

of Induced Abortion: Review of the Evidence,”

Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 58 (2002): 67-79.


32 A.C. Speckhard and V.M. Rue. “Postabortion

Syndrome: An Emerging Public Health Concern,”

Journal of Social Issues, 48 (1992):95-119.


33 V.M. Rue, P.K. Coleman, J.J. Rue, et al., “Induced

Abortion and Traumatic Stress: A Preliminary

Comparison of American and Russian Women,”

Medical Science Monitor, 10 (2004): SR 5-16.


34 P.K. Coleman, “Resolution of Unwanted Pregnancy

During Adolescence Through Abortion Versus

Childbirth: Individual and Family Predictors and

Psychological Consequences,” Journal of Youth and

Adolescence, (2005): 35(6); 903-911.





Myth No. 7:


Abortion is beneficial to modern society.




Abortion has a negative impact on communities

and society at large.


Despite “pro-choice” predictions to the contrary,

the illegitimacy rate has increased significantly since

Roe. The percent of children born out of wedlock

at the time of Roe was 15.5 percent, but by 2000

that number had increased to 33.2 percent, and by

2004, it increased to 36 percent.35 There is a high

correlation between out-of-wedlock childbearing

and a host of negative social indicators such as

pervasive child poverty.36


Abortion hits minority communities hardest. The

Guttmacher Institute reports that the abortion

rate among black women remains more than twice

the national average, and three times that of white

women.37 The organization Blacks for Life calls

abortion “cooperative genocide.”38


Abortion also has contributed to population

decline and demographic changes. The U.S. birth

rate has dropped to the lowest level since national

data has been available. In 2002 the birth rate fell

to 13.9 per 1,000—down 17 percent since1990.39

This results in a demographic shift to an older

population known as “population ageing” where the

share of the population of working age shrinks and

the labor force grows older.40 This demographic

phenomenon will have negative effects on the

economy, especially as workers reach retirement

age leaving fewer people engaged in productive



myth 7 – footnotes


35 See National Center of Health Statistics, Centers

for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

statab/t001x17.pdf and http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/



36 Rector, Robert E., Johnson, Kirk A., Ph.D., Fagan,

Patrick F., and Noyes, Lauren R., “Increasing Marriage

Would Drastically Reduce Child Poverty,” The

Heritage Foundation, Center for Data Analysis Report

#03-06 http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/



37 An overview of Abortion in United States, Physicians

for Reproductive Choice and Health and Guttmacher

Institute, May 2006. Statistics from the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention for 2003 show that

there were 165 abortions among white women per

1,000 live births while the ratio of abortions to live

births among black women was 491 to 1,000. “Abortion

Surveillance—The United States 2003,” Centers for

Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/



38 Jones, Leon, “Imitating the Enemy,” The American

Feminist (Winter 1994/1995), http://www.



39 “Births—Preliminary Data for 2002,” National Vital

Statistics Reports, Centers for Disease Control, Vol.

54, no. 11.


40 “Developing in an Ageing World,” World Economic

and Social Survey 2007, Department of Economic and

Social Affairs, United Nations, http://www.un.org/







Myth No. 8:


The more that people have access to

contraception, the fewer abortions there will be.




More contraception leads to more sexual

behavior, more unintended pregnancies, and

more abortion.


“Pro-choice” politicians do not want to talk about

abortion; they prefer to promote contraception.

But research here and abroad shows that increasing

access to contraception is not a solution to the

problem of soaring abortion rates. In fact, it makes

the problem worse.


In Sweden, for example, an increase in affordable

access to contraception and the presence of

free contraceptive counseling have resulted in a

substantial increase in the teen abortion rate. The

abortion rate has climbed from 17 abortions per

thousand teens in 1995 to 22.5 abortions per

thousand teens in 2001.41


According to Professor Peter Arcidiacono of

Duke University, increasing teenagers’ access to

contraception “may actually increase long run

pregnancy rates even though short run pregnancy

rates fall. On the other hand, policies that decrease

access to contraception, and hence sexual activity,

are likely to lower pregnancy rates in the long



In the United States, a decrease in contraceptive

use in recent years correlates to a decrease in the

number of abortions. From 1995 to 2002, the rate

of contraceptive use decreased from 64 percent to

62 percent,43 while the number of abortions fell

from 1,359,400 to 1,293,000.44


myth 8 – footnotes


41 Edgardh, K., et al., “Adolescent Sexual Health in

Sweden,” Sexual Transmitted Infections 78 (2002):

352-6, http://sti.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/78/



42 Peter Arcidiacono, et al., “Habit Persistence and Teen

Sex: Could Increased Contraception Have Unintended

Consequences for Teen Pregnancies?” (Oct. 3, 2005),

Working Paper, http://www.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/addicted13.

pdf, p. 29.


43 “Contraceptive Use,” Facts in Brief, The Alan

Guttmacher Institute (March, 2005), http://www.

guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html. These numbers

represent use among all women age 15-44, and

thus, because many women in this age group would not

be sexually active, the rate of use among sexually active

women would be higher.


44 L.B. Finer and S.K. Henshaw, “Estimates of

U.S. Abortion Incidence, 2001-2003,” The Alan




Much has been made of the emergence of the

Morning After Pill, or “emergency contraception.”

Putting aside the fact that this drug can work either

as a contraceptive or as an abortion, research shows

that it has not reduced abortion rates. In Britain,

the abortion rate actually increased from 136,388

abortions in 1984 to 185,400 abortions in 2004

despite increased use of the Morning After Pill.45

Anna Glasier, director of the Lothian Primary Care

NHS Trust in Edinburgh Scotland, acknowledges

that use of the Morning After Pill “is not going

to make a big difference [in] abortion rates.”46

Similarly, a recent study in the San Francisco Bay

area showed no difference in pregnancy rates in

women with greater access to the Morning After

Pill, confirming previous studies showing no

significant differences in pregnancy or abortion

rates among women with greater access.47


Guttmacher Institute (August 3, 2006) http://www.



45 Reinberg, Steven “Emergency Contraception

Doesn’t Lower the Abortion Rate,” HealthDay News

(September 15, 2006).


46 http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_



47 T. Raine, et al., “Direct Access to Emergency

Contraception through Pharmacies and Effect on

Unintended Pregnancy and STIs,” Journal of the

American Medical Association 293 (2005): 54-62. www.






Myth No. 9:


Abortion, particularly early abortion, does not

take the life of a human being.




Every abortion takes the life of a human being.


At the time of fertilization, when a sperm

penetrates the ovum or “egg” cell, a new human

organism comes into existence, with a complete

and unique genetic code.48 This is a scientific fact,

not a religious claim. Those who claim not to know

“when human life begins” are making a political

statement, not a scientific one.


Human beings develop at an astonishingly rapid

pace. The cardio-vascular system is the first major

system to function. The blood is circulating and

the heart begins to beat at 21 or 22 days (3 weeks),

and can be detected on ultrasound.49 By the end of

the eighth week, the unborn child has developed

all its organs and biological systems.50 20 weeks

after fertilization (5 months), unborn children feel



Some try to distinguish among human beings,

arguing that some are worthy of respect (because

they possess certain characteristics), while others

are not. This assertion contradicts the basic premise

of Western law and of our Constitution—the

equality of all human beings. As the Declaration

of Independence says, all human beings are created

equal. It would be perilous to abandon this point

of view and to adopt a philosophy that puts into

the hands of some human beings (the powerful) the

right to decide whether other human beings (the

weak, the unpopular, the defenseless) are to be

counted as members of the human family.


myth 9 – footnotes


48 “Human development is a continuous process that

begins when an oocyte (ovum) from a female is

fertilized by a sperm (or spermatozoon) from a

male,” Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. The

Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology,

6th edition (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co., 1998);

“The Development of a human being begins with

fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized

cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte

from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism,

the zygote,” Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology, 3rd

edition ( Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975): 3;

“The time of fertilization represents the starting point

in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual,”

Carlson, Bruce M. Pattern’s Foundations of Embryology,

6th edition (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996): 3.


49 Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. The Developing

Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th edition

(Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co. 1998): 77, 350.


50 England, Marjorie A., Life Before Birth, 2nd edition

(London: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996).


51 Anand, K. J, “Pain and Its Effects in the Human

Neonate and Fetus,” New England Journal of Medicine

317 (November1987): 1321-9.





Myth No. 10:


I can be “personally opposed, but pro-choice.”




That is impossible.


While it is true that some people claim to be

“personally opposed, but pro-choice,” that position

is, logically, impossible to hold. People who profess

this opinion say that while they would not choose

abortion themselves, they would not deny women

the option to choose it. They appear to think that

what is a wrong choice “for them” might not be

wrong “for someone else.” However, what happens

in an abortion is an objective fact, not a subjective

judgment. During an abortion a human being

who is unborn—and therefore innocent of any

wrong-doing—is killed. Since abortion is, thus,

objectively unjust, anyone who supports the “right”

of others to have abortions necessarily supports

such unjust acts (the killing of innocent, unborn

children). Further, a choice to be “personally

opposed but pro-choice” is necessarily a choice in

favor of the legalization of abortion (so that the

“choice” to abort is available to others). And that

means the person who makes such a choice accepts

that innocent, unborn children will be killed by

abortions, albeit by other people. Thus, while one

can say that one is “personally opposed but pro-

choice,” what one necessarily means is “I support

the right to kill innocent human beings.”





Additional Resources from





Partial-Birth Abortion on Trial


Presenting excerpts from the testimony given

by abortionists in one of the federal trials on

the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, FRC

attorneys Cathy Ruse and Bill Saunders take the

abortionists’ own words and put them together

in this striking pamphlet. It is nothing less than a

collection of admissions by the abortion industry,

under oath, about the reality of abortion.




Politicized Science: The Manipulated Approval of

RU-486 and Its Dangers to Women’s Health BC07A01


RU-486’s ability to bring an end to a human life

developing in the womb is known to all, but the

drug’s considerable harmful effects on women’s

health have been minimized or ignored completely.

Several organizations, including Family Research

Council, have unearthed a vast amount of

information regarding safety concerns about the

drug, as well as evidence documenting the Clinton

Administration’s manipulation of the FDA approval process.

This pamphlet provides an overview of what we now

know about the drug’s approval and the dangers posed by

RU-486 to women’s health.




William l. Saunders, jr. is Senior Fellow and Director

of the Center for Human Life & Bioethics at Family Research

Council. A graduate of the Harvard Law School, he was featured

in its inaugural Guide to Conservative Public Interest

Law in 2004.


Cathy Cleaver ruse is Senior Fellow for Legal Studies

at Family Research Council. She received a law degree from

Georgetown University and was Chief Counsel for the U. S.

House of Representatives Constitution Subcommitee.


Lucia Papayova is an attorney in Slovakia. She served as a

Witherspoon Fellow at Family Research Council in 2007.


The authors wish to thank Michael Fragoso and Moira Gaul

for their help in the production of this pamphlet.


17 Responses to Abortion: we are praying Mr. President

  1. maxd says:

    I don’t understand why any government should legislate against abortion. When a woman becomes pregnant, its not as if the whole community had sex with her. Abortion should remain a personal choice just as sex is a personal choice between two people.

  2. Allan Erickson says:


    Did you read the ten myths? Did you read any of the links? Did you think about the assertion that life in the womb is a human being, and that abortion is therefore murder? Are you against murder? Did you read about how the SCOTUS simply asserted a right to abortion out of thin air? Do you realize that “partial birth” abortion involves killing a full term baby, mosly born, his entire body outside the mother’s, only his head remaining in the vagina canal, while the doctor stabs him in the back of the neck with expansion scissors, then removes his brain by suction. Nice huh? Perfectly legal and only a personal choice?

    But make a known terrorist listen to loud music and it’s crime against humanity.


  3. Allan Erickson:

    Performing an abortion on a terrorist, now that’s torture!

    Hey, if you get to live in your world devoid of facts and reality, I get to live in mine 🙂

  4. Jennifer says:

    This was hilarious. Sometimes you need satire like this to show how ridiculous pro-lifers are. I especially loved the quote about black children being aborted per day – nothing like saying, “think about the poor minorities!” Kudos!

    Oh, wait…you were serious? Oh.

  5. Allan Erickson says:

    tara & Jennifer:

    You don’t bother reading do you?

    And you obviously have no use for thought, factual material, rational debate or serious consideration of life and death issues.

    Down the road, when you are elderly, needing help, and are subject to the power of the state under the terms of national health care, you’ll regret you didn’t take a stand when the orderly withholds food.

    Ever see the movie “Solent Green?”

    Cheapen one life, cheapen all life.

  6. gimmeabreak says:

    While I appreciate that this is a more well thought out pro-life argument than most you will read, it did nothing to sway my opinion. There are too many logical fallacies. For instance, “myth” number 10. I don’t own a handgun, but I support other people’s right to own them. Is that impossible to reconcile? I don’t drink, but I support other’s right to have a drink. Hypocritical? Not at all.

    The methodology of “myth” number 6 is also flawed. First of all, this does nothing to compare those statistics to a similar sample of women who haven’t had abortions. I’m relatively certain that if you were to conduct a study like this, you’d find that an equal % of women who haven’t had abortions suffer from clinical depression, substance abuse and the like. The fact is that abortion isn’t a willy-nilly proposition, and most women who have them agonize over the decision.

    “Myth” number 2 is just stupid. Of course the Constitution does not specifically address abortion. The document was written in 1787 – this was not a hot button issue for James Madison. Interestingly, the Constitution also says nothing about fuel efficiency standards. Who would’ve imagined that?

  7. Allan Erickson says:

    As to Myth 10: speaking of logical fallacies, one can say, ‘I’m personally opposed to murder, but youknow, if that’s somebody else’s gig, who am I to say it’s wrong?’ Islamic honor killing is considered murder in the west. But wait, in Germany and Norway they are actually saying it is arrogant for western prosecutors to charge men with murder for killing their daughters under Sharia.

    Myth 6: Studies prove abortion hurts women in various ways at higher rates than simple existence and the difficulties of life. Simply asserting otherwise speculatively doesn’t dispel the evidence or contradict the argument because the premise is so strong.

    Myth 2: ProLifers claim a Constitutional right to privacy as the foundational legal argument supporting Roe v. Wade, hence, they claim a Constitutional right to abortion. Many legal authories and constitutional experts, including liberal jurists, say the decision, and the claim to constitutional right, are stupid.

  8. gimmeabreak says:

    ‘Myth’ # 8 confuses causation vs. correlation. I’ll let the good folks at stats.org do the heavy lifting for me: “One of the most common errors we find in the press is the confusion between correlation and causation in scientific and health-related studies. In theory, these are easy to distinguish — an action or occurrence can cause another (such as smoking causes lung cancer), or it can correlate with another (such as smoking is correlated with alcoholism). If one action causes another, then they are most certainly correlated. But just because two things occur together does not mean that one caused the other, even if it seems to make sense.”

    The basis of ‘myth’ # 7 exposes the hypocrisy of the pro-life movement in general. Most traditional conservatives will argue that the ills of modern society can be attributed to the breakdown of the traditional nuclear family. Yet these same people are pro-life by a wide majority. As this ‘study’ proposes, there is a correlation between children being born out of wedlock and a host of negative social indicators. Well removing a woman’s right to choose is only going to make that problem worse, now isn’t it?

    ‘Myth’ # 9 is an ideological disagreement that people will *never* agree on so I’m not going to bother.

    Back to #6, it seems that fewer than 0.3% of women who have abortions suffer complications which lead to hospitalization. Just sayin’.

    And #4 is bullhooey. Or if I’m feeling generous I would say it’s using old statistics. Saying there are ‘1.31 million abortions performed per year’ is an absolutely loaded way of presenting data. How about if I said, in the year 2005, there were 1.21 million abortions performed, down from 1.31 million in 2000? In fact abortion rates have been declining steadily each year (although curiously at a slower rate during the Bush 43 years). That would seem to refute ‘myth’ number 8.

    Have fun: http://www.alanguttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

  9. Allan Erickson says:

    #8 Correlation is studies is all they have to “prove” cigarettes cause cancer. No one says contraception causes abortion. Common sense, and serious studies, demonstrate that free contraception encourages promiscuity especially among youth, and obviously that often translates to more unwanted pregnancies, and increased demand for abortion.

    #7 You might have an argument unless you consider that sexual promiscuity and abortion are indeed destructive to the nuclear family, plus, there are literally hundreds of thousands of families who want to adopt. The solution is not death, but life. You cannot justify murder by claiming a higher social good. Otherwise, Hitler was right.

    #9 Did you know the God of the Bible says, “Before you were conceived in your mother’s womb, I knew you.” How is that for a mind-bender: life begins before conception!

    #6 Let’s see. .3% x 50,000,000 = 150,000 women hospitalized. Many more suffer serious emotional, and psychological damage, many, lifelong. Millions of women deeply wounded, for what? To promote the sexual revolution? The height of selfishness and indulgence.


    #4 50,000,000 abortions since 1973. Murder, on an unimagineable scale. So much for the superiority of liberal compassion. Guttmacher Study also reveals highest rates of abortion are in the Hispanic and Black communities, and Planned Parenthood targets these, and poor women. (Gotta have those subsidies!) There is a distinct racist overtone to all this. Margaret Sanger is getting her way!


    Sanger was a proponent of eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Methods of social intervention (targeted at those seen as “genetically unfit”) advocated by eugenicists have included selective breeding, sterilization and euthanasia. In “A Plan for Peace” (1932), for example, Sanger argued for:

    A stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.[21]

    Her first pamphlet read:

    It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization. For upon the foundation of an enlightened and voluntary motherhood shall a future civilization emerge.[22]

    TRANSLATION: Shove off God. We’ll handle all this life stuff. After all, we are the masters of our fate, the captains of civilization!

    Trouble is innocent people get murdered en masse in the process.

    PS: How much PROFIT does Planned Parenthood make yearly?

  10. Allan Erickson says:


    In Her Own Words

    “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
    Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race
    (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

    Margaret Sanger (1883-1966)
    On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
    “…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

    On sterilization & racial purification:
    Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial “purification,” couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.

    On the right of married couples to bear children:
    Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her “Plan for Peace.” Birth Control Review, April 1932

    On the purpose of birth control:
    The purpose in promoting birth control was “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)

    On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:
    “More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

    On the extermination of blacks:
    “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” she said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

    On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
    In her “Plan for Peace,” Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed “feebleminded.” Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107

  11. gimmeabreak says:

    I know I said I’m not going to bother with #9, but since you brought it up I figured I’d mention that 2/3 of the world’s population is not Christian, so scripture doesn’t really apply. As the law is interpreted, life begins at birth. If you believe otherwise, that’s fine. I’m an open minded sort, so I’m not going to get bent out of shape about it.

    I’m hoping you give me enough credit and realize point #7 had zero to do with “Hitler being right”. A systematic, state sponsored genocide is something quite different than a woman in southwest Detroit choosing to terminate a pregnancy.

    I think you got to the real center of the debate by using the phrase “the height of selfisness and indulgence”. Is this really how you view abortion? Of course there are going to be some cases where pregnancy is terminated for “selfish” reasons. For better or worse, human beings *are* selfish. What you fail to realize is that by throwing everyone under the same umbrella, so to speak, you are completely ignoring that there are *many* women who agonize over this decision. Many women even (gasp) pray for guidance in making their choice. It’s not as carefree and thoughtless as you paint it to be.

    Anyway, I don’t mean to come off as mean-spirited about this whole thing. I think it’s important to have an honest discussion on a divisive issue in our society. I thank you for allowing a platform for just that.

  12. gimmeabreak:

    You know what, I’m grateful for you, and appreciate your courtesy. I too believe we must have honest conversations about this terribly difficult issue. I started talking about it on talk radio way back in 1980, and had to take a break for a long while, especially after my girlfriend aborted our baby in 1983. Until the day I sat in that waiting room, I was Mr. Pro-Choice. I know people agonize over this.

    We are a selfish lot. We Jesus freaks call it the Fall of Man, the sin disease. Or better stated, that is what the God of our understanding calls it.

    The trouble we have with state-sponsored abortion, especially when it is combined with nationalized healthcare, is we then give the state power over life and death decisions. That will truly be horrendous, when financial considerations (and dare we say it, global warming considerations) determine if a Down’s Syndrome child lives or dies, or if Gramma gets the lethal injection or not. You may cry “foul!”, that’s so far-fetched. Is it really? Remember Teri Schiavo?

    It may surprise many people to learn that within Christendom there is a huge argument as to whether or not abortion in the case of rape/incest is morally acceptable. I tend to view it as self-defense, that the mother in that instance has the right to terminate the pregnanacy, but at the same time, I have sympathy for the contrary view, that life is life, and taking innocent life without cause is murder. My wife and I continue our debate.

    Finally, Christian or not, Bible believer or not, we know that little person in there is a human being, and that is the center of the issue. How terribly cruel we are to presume a right to massacre that innocent little person. They feel the pain.

  13. gimmeabreak says:

    I guess I’m more sympathetic to the other side of the fence due to a friend of mine who came home to find his mother dead in the bathtub after having tried to perform an abortion on herself. Obviously he’s severely mentally scarred from having lived through that, so there’s 3 lives ruined. My personal belief is that adoption is the absolute best option for an unwanted pregnancy, but that in the end a woman should be in control of her own reproductive rights. I guess I’m one of those #10’s that don’t exist 😉

    Thanks again – it’s good to know that there are pro life folks out there who are rational thinkers and not total nutjobs (you probably feel the same way about us, I imagine).

  14. Allan Erickson says:

    Sorry to hear about your friend. I have a friend whose dad put a bullet in his brain. She found Christ, or should I say, He found her, and a miraculous healing took place.

    Amen! Adoption is the best option!

    All Sarah Palin and many others call for is state’s rights on this thing. If the people of a given state want to allow abortion, ok, but, to force the rest of us to pay for it, a violation of conscience, is totalitarian.

    Can’t see why the feds have to ram F.O.C.A. down our throats, unless of course, there is a larger agenda involved, such as TOTAL CONTROL OF ALL THE LITTLE PEOPLE.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: