Marie Komar (9 Mar 2005)
"The 'Coercive' Truth"

The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 42 Issue: 8 - Tuesday, March 08, 2005

The 'Coercive' Truth
A new imaging technology just developed has pro-abortion forces literally screaming, "No fair!" and calling its use by pro-life advocates 'coercive'.
It is called 4D imaging, and it allows doctors and parents to look inside the womb of a pregnant woman and see the image of a baby in "real-time 4D" rather than the more difficult to read traditional "2D" image.
The clarity of the image resembles a high quality photograph. That's what has the pro-abortion lobby screaming its head off. It is now possible to 'see' the baby in the womb. It isn't a case of simply interpreting fuzzy images on a screen that resembles a 1980s video game anymore.
The 4D images show a picture of the baby itself. The baby's facial expressions are clear to the untrained eye; the baby can be seen smiling, sucking its thumb, and expressing emotions like surprise or fear. The parents can watch the baby move and kick and stretch and yawn -- and suddenly, it isn't a blob of amorphous tissue anymore.
It's a baby.
According to the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins." It referred to the unborn child as "potential life" that is unworthy of legal protection until the moment of birth.
That all changes when a woman views a 4D ultrasound image of her child. Ultrasound technology shows the child as fully human and unique. A British ultrasonographer has collected images of unborn children from the 12th week walking, leaping, stretching and kicking in the womb.
Susanne Martinez, vice president of public policy at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told The New York Times that the use of such images by pregnancy centers "is coercive."
In an unintentionally candid statement, Martinez accidently let her slip show.
"From the time they walk into these centers, they are inundated with information that is propaganda and that has one goal in mind. And that is to have women continue with their pregnancies."
Got it? From Martinez' perspective, when women are persuaded to continue with their pregnancies and not to seek abortions, it is a bad thing.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America -- formerly the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League said that ultrasounds have medical legitimacy, but "shouldn't be misused to badger or coerce women by these so-called crisis pregnancy centers."
The sonogram cannot 'badger or coerce' anyone. It is a picture. It may be a picture of a living being, but it is, itself, a picture, an inanimate thing, incapable of doing anything more than transmit accurate information. An eyewitness account, so to speak.
Accurate information has no agenda, it simply is. What scares the pro-death crowd is the fact that once women see the baby living in their womb, abortion is revealed for what it is -- the murder of a living human being.
Assessment:
Since virtually every woman who has seen the 4D sonogram has expressed horror at the idea of going ahead with abortion plans, one has to wonder about those who do NOT.
The Nancy Keenans and Susanne Martinez' of this world who know the truth, but refuse to acknowledge it. The kinds of people who, having seen the truth, want to suppress it for fear the truth might be 'coercive'.
Stop right there for a second and think that statement through with me.
Consider the state of doublespeak that exists when such a statement can be uttered by a national figure without comment.
Nobody is alleging the 4D photos are NOT accurate representations of the baby. The accuracy is unchallenged. They are 'coercive' because they are TOO accurate.
In a nutshell, 4D sonogram imaging exposes the abortion lobby for what it is.
It still stuns me, even after more than thirty years, that there can BE a pro-abortion lobby. As a father, I never questioned what was in the womb -- it was a baby from the second the doctor announced the funeral arrangements for the rabbit.
When the baby kicked, I used to try and picture it turning, rolling over; I couldn't imagine how anybody could doubt that life begins at conception.
But more than that, I was once a baby, and before that, I did my time in the womb. If my mother had been in an automobile accident, for example, and her 'fetus' sustained injury, would my body not bear those scars a half-century later?
How could anyone argue that there was a time when they existed in the womb, but then argue they weren't them, yet? It makes one's head swim.
The abortion fight is nasty beyond comprehension, because the fight is over a practice so hideous that I've never heard it described in public -- by either side. No national news network would carry it for the same reason they wouldn't broadcast a video tape of an actual suicide or murder.
In the 21st century, the 'truth' isn't what's true. It is what people want to BELIEVE is true. Because the pro-death lobby WANTS to believe they are acting in the best interests of women's rights, no amount of evidence can convince them to the contrary. No 'women's-rights' group of which I am aware has ever openly said what women demand the right TO.
We hear all the time about a 'woman's right to choose' but NEVER in the context of whether or not to choose to do the deed that creates pregnancy. A woman's 'right to choose' involves the right to kill the product of the act of choice that created it in the first place.
The New York Times reported on the new technology:
"A survey by the Heidi Group, a Christian evangelical nonprofit organization that advises such centers on fund-raising and administration, found that those using counseling alone reported persuading 70 percent of women considering abortion to abandon the idea. In centers with ultrasound machines, that number jumped to 90 percent, said Carol Everett, the group's chief executive."
The pro-abortion lobby is terrified of the new 4D sonogram technology because it will afford women the right to make an INFORMED choice -- so much for the 'pro-choice' label.
There is only one 'choice' they support. And if there is only one acceptable 'choice' -- is that not the equivalent to no choice at all?
Consider this gem of doublespeak, also from the New York Times article:
""Many of the groups that oppose abortion also oppose the birth control pill and most forms of contraception, except maybe rhythm method," said Ms. Martinez of Planned Parenthood."We're very concerned about what they do. It's part of the constant battle to keep the facts out in the public."
Note that this comment comes from one of the most vocal opponents of allowing prospective abortion clients from learning any facts about the baby they are about to kill.
We live in an age of double-speak that would have surprised even George Orwell. In his landmark book, "1984", one of Orwell's characters tells another;
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought crime, literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. . . Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?"
In this generation, it is a crime to speak out against homosexuality. Christianity is hateful, and the Bible is 'hate-speech'.
Abortion is 'progressive' and is enshrined as a human 'right' while the human against which this 'right' is being exercised is hidden behind a veil in the name of "the fight to keep the facts out in the public," to quote Planned Parenthood. (How's that again?)
The label, 'Fundamentalist Christian' is a pejorative euphemism for 'fanatic'. 'Truth' is 'coercive' while admitted deception is characterized as an effort to preserve 'facts'.
And the people who favor an alternative to abortion are pasted with the negative label of 'anti-abortion' while those who favor no choice at all enjoy the label, 'pro-choice'.
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come," writes the Apostle Paul.
Indeed. In this generation, the only thing as perilous as being in the womb is being too helpless to plead for your own life.
Ask Terri Schiavo.
"These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and HANDS THAT SHED INNOCENT BLOOD . ." (Proverbs 7:16-17)
Archives of past issues of The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest plus many other Omega Letter member features can be found at: www.omegaletter.com


The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest Vol: 42 Issue: 8 - Tuesday, March 08, 2005
The 'Coercive' Truth A new imaging technology just developed has pro-abortion forces literally screaming, "No fair!" and calling its use by pro-life advocates 'coercive'. It is called 4D imaging, and it allows doctors and parents to look inside the womb of a pregnant woman and see the image of a baby in "real-time 4D" rather than the more difficult to read traditional "2D" image. The clarity of the image resembles a high quality photograph. That's what has the pro-abortion lobby screaming its head off. It is now possible to 'see' the baby in the womb. It isn't a case of simply interpreting fuzzy images on a screen that resembles a 1980s video game anymore. The 4D images show a picture of the baby itself. The baby's facial expressions are clear to the untrained eye; the baby can be seen smiling, sucking its thumb, and expressing emotions like surprise or fear. The parents can watch the baby move and kick and stretch and yawn -- and suddenly, it isn't a blob of amorphous tissue anymore. It's a baby. According to the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins." It referred to the unborn child as "potential life" that is unworthy of legal protection until the moment of birth. That all changes when a woman views a 4D ultrasound image of her child. Ultrasound technology shows the child as fully human and unique. A British ultrasonographer has collected images of unborn children from the 12th week walking, leaping, stretching and kicking in the womb. Susanne Martinez, vice president of public policy at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told The New York Times that the use of such images by pregnancy centers "is coercive." In an unintentionally candid statement, Martinez accidently let her slip show. "From the time they walk into these centers, they are inundated with information that is propaganda and that has one goal in mind. And that is to have women continue with their pregnancies." Got it? From Martinez' perspective, when women are persuaded to continue with their pregnancies and not to seek abortions, it is a bad thing. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America -- formerly the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League said that ultrasounds have medical legitimacy, but "shouldn't be misused to badger or coerce women by these so-called crisis pregnancy centers." The sonogram cannot 'badger or coerce' anyone. It is a picture. It may be a picture of a living being, but it is, itself, a picture, an inanimate thing, incapable of doing anything more than transmit accurate information. An eyewitness account, so to speak. Accurate information has no agenda, it simply is. What scares the pro-death crowd is the fact that once women see the baby living in their womb, abortion is revealed for what it is -- the murder of a living human being. Assessment: Since virtually every woman who has seen the 4D sonogram has expressed horror at the idea of going ahead with abortion plans, one has to wonder about those who do NOT. The Nancy Keenans and Susanne Martinez' of this world who know the truth, but refuse to acknowledge it. The kinds of people who, having seen the truth, want to suppress it for fear the truth might be 'coercive'. Stop right there for a second and think that statement through with me. Consider the state of doublespeak that exists when such a statement can be uttered by a national figure without comment. Nobody is alleging the 4D photos are NOT accurate representations of the baby. The accuracy is unchallenged. They are 'coercive' because they are TOO accurate. In a nutshell, 4D sonogram imaging exposes the abortion lobby for what it is. It still stuns me, even after more than thirty years, that there can BE a pro-abortion lobby. As a father, I never questioned what was in the womb -- it was a baby from the second the doctor announced the funeral arrangements for the rabbit. When the baby kicked, I used to try and picture it turning, rolling over; I couldn't imagine how anybody could doubt that life begins at conception. But more than that, I was once a baby, and before that, I did my time in the womb. If my mother had been in an automobile accident, for example, and her 'fetus' sustained injury, would my body not bear those scars a half-century later? How could anyone argue that there was a time when they existed in the womb, but then argue they weren't them, yet? It makes one's head swim. The abortion fight is nasty beyond comprehension, because the fight is over a practice so hideous that I've never heard it described in public -- by either side. No national news network would carry it for the same reason they wouldn't broadcast a video tape of an actual suicide or murder. In the 21st century, the 'truth' isn't what's true. It is what people want to BELIEVE is true. Because the pro-death lobby WANTS to believe they are acting in the best interests of women's rights, no amount of evidence can convince them to the contrary. No 'women's-rights' group of which I am aware has ever openly said what women demand the right TO. We hear all the time about a 'woman's right to choose' but NEVER in the context of whether or not to choose to do the deed that creates pregnancy. A woman's 'right to choose' involves the right to kill the product of the act of choice that created it in the first place. The New York Times reported on the new technology: "A survey by the Heidi Group, a Christian evangelical nonprofit organization that advises such centers on fund-raising and administration, found that those using counseling alone reported persuading 70 percent of women considering abortion to abandon the idea. In centers with ultrasound machines, that number jumped to 90 percent, said Carol Everett, the group's chief executive." The pro-abortion lobby is terrified of the new 4D sonogram technology because it will afford women the right to make an INFORMED choice -- so much for the 'pro-choice' label. There is only one 'choice' they support. And if there is only one acceptable 'choice' -- is that not the equivalent to no choice at all? Consider this gem of doublespeak, also from the New York Times article: ""Many of the groups that oppose abortion also oppose the birth control pill and most forms of contraception, except maybe rhythm method," said Ms. Martinez of Planned Parenthood."We're very concerned about what they do. It's part of the constant battle to keep the facts out in the public." Note that this comment comes from one of the most vocal opponents of allowing prospective abortion clients from learning any facts about the baby they are about to kill. We live in an age of double-speak that would have surprised even George Orwell. In his landmark book, "1984", one of Orwell's characters tells another; "Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought crime, literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. . . Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?" In this generation, it is a crime to speak out against homosexuality. Christianity is hateful, and the Bible is 'hate-speech'. Abortion is 'progressive' and is enshrined as a human 'right' while the human against which this 'right' is being exercised is hidden behind a veil in the name of "the fight to keep the facts out in the public," to quote Planned Parenthood. (How's that again?) The label, 'Fundamentalist Christian' is a pejorative euphemism for 'fanatic'. 'Truth' is 'coercive' while admitted deception is characterized as an effort to preserve 'facts'. And the people who favor an alternative to abortion are pasted with the negative label of 'anti-abortion' while those who favor no choice at all enjoy the label, 'pro-choice'. "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come," writes the Apostle Paul. Indeed. In this generation, the only thing as perilous as being in the womb is being too helpless to plead for your own life. Ask Terri Schiavo. "These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and HANDS THAT SHED INNOCENT BLOOD . ." (Proverbs 7:16-17) Archives of past issues of The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest plus many other Omega Letter member features can be found at: www.omegaletter.com