The abortion debate: Ultrasound technology changed everything

For those of us of a certain age who were brought up in non-religious or nominally religious homes, abortion was, when we were young, something no one spoke about.  By the 1960s, we may have heard about high school friends who went to Mexico for abortions that were illegal here.  Such gossip was hushed, and few of us knew what an abortion entailed or had any sense of the gravity of the procedure.  Our contemporaries who had been raised in religious homes never talked about such things, so if they had an opinion on the topic, they did not share it.

By the time we reached adulthood, we were "pro-choice" because that was the thing to be.  Wasn't everyone pro-choice?  What did that mean?  It meant ending an unwanted pregnancy the moment it was realized.  No one then ever considered the possibility or option of waiting many months to make such a decision.  It never entered anyone's mind that what are now called late-term abortions were even possible.

If one was still young in 1973, apolitical, and not a regular church-goer, we did not give too much thought to the gravity of the Roe v. Wade decision.  Again, no one then could have conceived of the idea of late-term or post-birth abortion.  Then we began having our own children, unconcerned that we would not know the sex of the baby until the birth.  The main "technology" was still the fetoscope that could discern the heartbeat of the fetus.  We lived for and worried about that at every prenatal visit to our OBs.  A fast heartbeat meant a boy, slower a girl — so the theory went.  Maybe it was the other way around.  The doctors generally told you one thing and wrote the other in your file just to be safe.  They had no way of knowing, either. 

Fast-forward a generation.  Now those of us who always thought of ourselves as pro-choice and never knew that second- and third-trimester abortions occurred are, if fortunate, invited to our daughters' visits (and those of our daughters-in-law) to their OBs when pregnant.  Suddenly, like magic, we are able to see our grandchildren on a black and white screen in real time, blurry but actual.  We see the tiny heart beating from almost moment one.  As the pregnancy advances, we see the fetus grow, move about, constantly change positions to get comfortable.  By the early 2000s, pregnant women could get a fetal video set to music of their growing baby.  This had to be done by about fourteen weeks, when the fetus was still small enough to be captured in his entirety on film.  We could watch the baby comfortably move about his fetal environment with what seemed like a distinct personality.  This entire process is even more enlightening with a set of twins; they cuddle, hold hands, and push each other about in their fight for space.

In short, from the first ultrasound, everything changed for us life-long pro-choicers.  Embryos are human beings; fetuses are babies.  The shock of this truth is undeniable to anyone who has seen a baby in utero.

It is a mystery as to why every Democrat running for the presidency refuses to acknowledge this fact.  Yet every member of the Democratic Party is committed to not just third-trimester abortion, but post-birth infanticide.  Not one of them will admit to the glaring immorality of this policy.  Not one.  What does this tell us?  It tells us that the Democratic Party is now so radical, so far left, that it has virtually aligned itself with the Nazis!  Kill the undesirable humans.  Simple as that.  Pregnancies are unwanted, and children are a blight; this is now a foundational part of the Democrat platform.

It is astonishing that the Left so reveres Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.  She embraced eugenics, including against black Americans whom she considered inferior.  To this day, it is black babies who are aborted in numbers far beyond any other racial or ethnic group, at a percentage much greater than their proportion of American citizenry.  Sanger is celebrated by Democrats because they are in fact the racists and always have been.  For progressives, pregnancy is a disease, something to be cured by abortion

People young enough to take ultrasound technology for granted can perhaps be forgiven; they've grown up looking at moving images on small digital screens and may not think much about the living versus the imaginary.  But for those of us old enough to be awed by the miracle of what we began seeing for the first time in just the last twenty years, seeing a human baby grow in utero was at first beyond belief.  Now it is a miraculous reality to which the Left is impervious.  Why are leftists so anxious to see unborn babies aborted?  Why do they not mind Planned Parenthood cutting up aborted fetuses and selling their parts?  What evil cancer has infected the brains of the Left that they are so indifferent to life? 

The Democrats' fervent dedication to the culture of unrestricted abortion is a sign of their abject amorality.  That not one of the presidential candidates has the courage to buck the party's embrace of what amounts to a genocide is an ominous warning of who and what they have become.  They may think they are winning the hearts and minds of the American people, but millions of parents and grandparents have now seen ultrasounds of their own children and grandchildren, from the embryonic stage to birth.  They know that what they have seen is the hand of God.

For those of us of a certain age who were brought up in non-religious or nominally religious homes, abortion was, when we were young, something no one spoke about.  By the 1960s, we may have heard about high school friends who went to Mexico for abortions that were illegal here.  Such gossip was hushed, and few of us knew what an abortion entailed or had any sense of the gravity of the procedure.  Our contemporaries who had been raised in religious homes never talked about such things, so if they had an opinion on the topic, they did not share it.

By the time we reached adulthood, we were "pro-choice" because that was the thing to be.  Wasn't everyone pro-choice?  What did that mean?  It meant ending an unwanted pregnancy the moment it was realized.  No one then ever considered the possibility or option of waiting many months to make such a decision.  It never entered anyone's mind that what are now called late-term abortions were even possible.

If one was still young in 1973, apolitical, and not a regular church-goer, we did not give too much thought to the gravity of the Roe v. Wade decision.  Again, no one then could have conceived of the idea of late-term or post-birth abortion.  Then we began having our own children, unconcerned that we would not know the sex of the baby until the birth.  The main "technology" was still the fetoscope that could discern the heartbeat of the fetus.  We lived for and worried about that at every prenatal visit to our OBs.  A fast heartbeat meant a boy, slower a girl — so the theory went.  Maybe it was the other way around.  The doctors generally told you one thing and wrote the other in your file just to be safe.  They had no way of knowing, either. 

Fast-forward a generation.  Now those of us who always thought of ourselves as pro-choice and never knew that second- and third-trimester abortions occurred are, if fortunate, invited to our daughters' visits (and those of our daughters-in-law) to their OBs when pregnant.  Suddenly, like magic, we are able to see our grandchildren on a black and white screen in real time, blurry but actual.  We see the tiny heart beating from almost moment one.  As the pregnancy advances, we see the fetus grow, move about, constantly change positions to get comfortable.  By the early 2000s, pregnant women could get a fetal video set to music of their growing baby.  This had to be done by about fourteen weeks, when the fetus was still small enough to be captured in his entirety on film.  We could watch the baby comfortably move about his fetal environment with what seemed like a distinct personality.  This entire process is even more enlightening with a set of twins; they cuddle, hold hands, and push each other about in their fight for space.

In short, from the first ultrasound, everything changed for us life-long pro-choicers.  Embryos are human beings; fetuses are babies.  The shock of this truth is undeniable to anyone who has seen a baby in utero.

It is a mystery as to why every Democrat running for the presidency refuses to acknowledge this fact.  Yet every member of the Democratic Party is committed to not just third-trimester abortion, but post-birth infanticide.  Not one of them will admit to the glaring immorality of this policy.  Not one.  What does this tell us?  It tells us that the Democratic Party is now so radical, so far left, that it has virtually aligned itself with the Nazis!  Kill the undesirable humans.  Simple as that.  Pregnancies are unwanted, and children are a blight; this is now a foundational part of the Democrat platform.

It is astonishing that the Left so reveres Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.  She embraced eugenics, including against black Americans whom she considered inferior.  To this day, it is black babies who are aborted in numbers far beyond any other racial or ethnic group, at a percentage much greater than their proportion of American citizenry.  Sanger is celebrated by Democrats because they are in fact the racists and always have been.  For progressives, pregnancy is a disease, something to be cured by abortion

People young enough to take ultrasound technology for granted can perhaps be forgiven; they've grown up looking at moving images on small digital screens and may not think much about the living versus the imaginary.  But for those of us old enough to be awed by the miracle of what we began seeing for the first time in just the last twenty years, seeing a human baby grow in utero was at first beyond belief.  Now it is a miraculous reality to which the Left is impervious.  Why are leftists so anxious to see unborn babies aborted?  Why do they not mind Planned Parenthood cutting up aborted fetuses and selling their parts?  What evil cancer has infected the brains of the Left that they are so indifferent to life? 

The Democrats' fervent dedication to the culture of unrestricted abortion is a sign of their abject amorality.  That not one of the presidential candidates has the courage to buck the party's embrace of what amounts to a genocide is an ominous warning of who and what they have become.  They may think they are winning the hearts and minds of the American people, but millions of parents and grandparents have now seen ultrasounds of their own children and grandchildren, from the embryonic stage to birth.  They know that what they have seen is the hand of God.