World Views

Abortion Opponents Hear a ‘Heartbeat.’ Most Experts Hear Something Else.

The Health Section of the New York Times published an article ironically on Valentines Day by Health Reporter, Roni Rabin, entitled," Abortion Opponents Hear a 'Heartbeat.' Experts Hear Something Else." The article stated that  during  the very early stage of a pregnancy (six weeks), the embryo is the size of a pomegranate seed and has only a primitive tube of cardiac cells that emit electric pulses and pump blood. The fact that a fetal heart at this stage of development does not make the typical "lub dub" sound we hear from a fully mature heart we are  somehow deceiving  women who seek abortions in states like Texas that have Heartbeat laws, states Rabin. "The consensus among most medical experts is that the electrical activity picked up on an ultrasound at six weeks is not the sound of a heart beating and does not guarantee a live birth. The sound expectant mothers hear during a scan is created by the machine itself, which translates the waves of electrical activity into something audible." Uh huh, since when do we make scientific conclusions by majority rules? Is that fake science? No matter, the fact is that a clump of tubal cardiac cells emitting  electrical activity and pumping blood tells me, it's a heart. The article goes on to try to debunk the pamphlets given to women regarding the risks of an abortion. Some  "facts" that Rabin gives us is that an abortion is no more risky than having your tonsils out and a study showed that the most common emotional response of women from  having an abortion  is relief. I kept looking for some conclusion or point to this article but was hard pressed to find one. There will always be an argument about where to draw the line on abortion where abortions are legalized. In my opinion one is as bad as the other. Life begins at conception. If you understand that then you don't have to worry about heartbeats and cognition. Once conceived, a human life has been made in the image and likeness of God and is due all the dignity and respect for its right to life, even if it is only the size of a pomegranate seed.

Link to NYT Article

The Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization

On Wednesday, 2nd, December 2021, the SCOTUS heard oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization. Pro-abortion activists brought suit against the State of Mississippi for passing legislation that would ban abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy, but much more is at stake here. Mississippi's law is in direct contradiction to the 1973 Roe v Wade and its successor decision 20 years later, Casey. This is the case that pro-life advocates have been waiting for, the case that should overturn two birds with one stone. Scott G. Stewart Attorney General for the State of Mississippi opening address to the court was nothing short of masterful. "Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood  v. Casey haunt our country. They have no basis in the constitution. They have no home in our history or traditions. They've damaged the democratic process. They poison the law. They've choked off compromise. For 50 years, they've kept this court at the center of a political battle that it can never resolve. And 50 years on they stand alone. No where else does this Court recognize a right to end a human life." The response by the Left was weak and very predictable. They are relying on 50 years of precedent, fairness (It's not fair to overturn Roe because for 50 years women have depended on it being there for them.) and this would be a step back from modernity and that is unthinkable!

Precedent alone is not a good enough reason to overturn any decision by the Court. Take for instance the 1896 decision, Plessy v. Ferguson, the court ruled that racial segregation was legal and did not violate the U.S. Constitution. It was overturned in 1952 in the case of Brown v. Board of Education.  Plessy was precedent for over 50 years, did that make it immutable law.? No, it was morally wrong and an unconstitutional decision that was correctly overturned. Roe and Casey likewise are unconstitutional, morally wrong and need to be overturned.

If Dobbs overturns Roe and Casey that will be a milestone victory for pro-lifers, but we can't sit on our laurels. The states will decide abortion laws for their own state separate from the others, therefore  we will be divided into pro-life states and pro-abortion states. We can not rest until abortion is gone from all 50 states. We must keep pressing on.

University of Pittsburgh A Fetal Tissue Hub

Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress have received 252 pages of documents from the Department of Health and Human Services, obtained by a lawsuit filed  by Judicial Watch on behalf of The Center for Medical Progress under the FOIA. The documents reveal that HHS funded the University of Pittsburgh to the tune of approximately 3 million dollars for the University's ongoing efforts to become a "tissue hub" for human fetal tissue. The purpose of this "tissue hub" is to create a pipeline for the acquisition, quality control and distribution of human fetal organs for the GUDMAP (GenitoUrinary Development Molecular Anatomy Project) Study. In the proposal Pitt notes that they have been collecting  fetal tissue for over 10 years, including, livers, hearts,  gonads, brains , kidneys , ureters, bladders and legs. Pitt boasts strong working connections  with UPMC facilities including a lab  with a "Butcher Boy" band saw for sectioning bone and a frozen section lab with digital feeds to surgeons and for show and tell.   The tissues are collected through a collaborative process including Family Planning, Obstetrics and Pathology departments. (Pitt's tissue bank is imbedded  in UPMC's Department of Pathology) In the proposal Pitt records "the warm ischemic time" on samples to ensure the highest quality specimens. Warm ischemic time is defined as the amount of time an organ remains at body temperature after blood supply has been cut off.  "These documents show taxpayer money being used to turn the University of Pittsburgh into a one-stop human fetal tissue shop- from procuring the tissue from elective abortion. 'subdividing' the human remains, to distributing and shipping the harvested tissue," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Fox news reported, 9/30/2021 that multiple Physicians reported to them that Pitt's previous statement alluded to the possibility that organs were extracted from live fetuses. Last week nearly 100 federal lawmakers sent letters to the Biden Administration suggesting Pitt's federally funded research might have utilized tissue from illegal abortions. Pitt has denied all allegations and has hired a D.C. Law firm to investigate and will release its' findings in 18 months.

The Law firm Pitt hired to investigate has Pitt alumni on its investigatory team and has limited the scope of the investigation to the University and not UPMC. The possibility of a conflict of interest here has been raised to the Board of Trustees President Thomas E. Richards. Richards responded that this was without merit.

There are several things that do not pass the smell test here. Why does it take 18 months to  do an investigation? Why does the University hire a Pitt friendly law firm to conduct the investigation? If the charges are true there are human fetuses being butchered alive for their body parts, surely this calls for an emergent investigation.If Pitt wants to be transparent and has nothing to hide, they should make the effort to reconvene The Federal Tissue Advisory Board that contains credentialed scientists grounded in medical ethics to review the research. (Biden recently disbanded it).  An alumni stacked  law firm smacks of a cover up. This will all be swept under the rug. Our state and federal government not to mention the national news media are all radically pro-abortion and will be complicit  along with Pitt in its coverup.