A Fair and Viable Solution to Roe vs Wade

A Fair and Viable Solution to Roe vs Wade

Should a woman be able to abort anytime for any reason, even in the 9th month when giving birth?

Morally, I do not know.

My understanding of Planned Parenthood and other clinics is they use a machine that liquifies the baby in the womb and then vacuums it out. No face, no identity, no useful body parts. Minimal risk to the mother. The process is clinical as possible to avoid emotion.

But in late term, that device cannot be used; the fetus is too mature. I am not 100% sure, but I believe they use a head clamp to pull the fetus out. The head (brain and life) is destroyed with the clamp, but the body parts are preserved. They are supposed to destroy the fetus, but my understanding is there is very poor tracking and verification of that process. Lots of places and times when prime body parts can go missing.

When does a fetus have Human Rights? Some would argue at conception. Others say the baby never has any rights. The mother is paramount.

The fetus / baby should have rights when it becomes valuable to Society; when it becomes a contributing member to the welfare of the Public Good. When the fetus / baby provides value, then Society has the obligation to defend freedom and rights.

Human body parts, adult, child and baby, are BIG business. Donor cards are fine, but they do not meet the worldwide demand for healthy organs – not even close. What would you pay for an organ that saves your life? Would you look really hard at where it came from, or just close your eyes and say thank you. What if it was an organ that would save your baby’s life? How many babies with parental donor cards do you actually think are out there? Yet baby organs do exist and are used.

With an entire network of clinics, black market temptations for baby parts cannot be avoided. There is too much money to be made. Once corrupted, if you already accept the ultimate women’s right to choose at any time, then making the leap from disposing of remains to letting the fetus develop a little more to make the parts more viable is a very small jump, especially if someone is offering you $xxx for hearts and $yyy for lungs, etc. Maybe you get 30% more for a 7-month development vs a 6-month development – you can see the obvious business opportunity and moral corruption this will create. It is unavoidable. That underground corruption absolutely exists. We are told to just ignore it because every woman has the RIGHT to choose. Advising a mother to wait until the 6th or 7th month for ‘medical reasons’ is easy if you are getting paid big bucks to push that program.

I have no proof and make no accusations, but the black market exists. The temptation exists. NOT every clinic is above moral reproach. Not possible, but people turn a blind eye or are persecuted for suggesting clinics are anything but righteous advocates for women’s rights.

We do not need the moral argument at all. The answer is simple.

If baby body parts are not viable (worthless) at 5 months, but are viable and valuable at 6 months, then it is clear the women’s right to choose ends when a baby’s body has monetary value. You could argue that the baby has the right to sell its own parts for profit. You cannot argue that the mother does or the clinic ever does. Killing babies to sell body organs is perhaps the worst form of slavery there is. Do clinics offer compensation to mothers for later and later term abortions? That would be clearly immoral, though it is a very small leap from test tube growth and use of body parts to fetus use of body parts. It is only a matter of thinking of the woman as an ideal test tube – nothing else. It is a small step to say the woman has the ultimate right to choose when she aborts at any time to saying, “If you can wait until 7 months and we can harvest healthy organs, we will pay the young mother $xxx. Wouldn’t $xxx go a long way to helping you get started on your new path in life? If you wait until 8 months, we will pay the mother 40% more. Wait until 9 months, double the money.”

Corruption in the name of morality and woman’s rights. How convenient.

How small a leap is it to understand a woman could be persuaded or even be eager to get pregnant, be a “test tube” for 8 or 9 months, and then walk home with a huge paycheck for supplying a healthy baby heart, lungs, kidneys, gall bladder, spleen and liver? Maybe the “full package” of genetically identical organs is worth more – less chance for rejection if you have to use more than one part – like a kidney and a liver to the baby getting the new organs.

Society has the obligation to protect the fetus / baby when that baby has monetary value. Any decision to abort must be made before the baby has grown enough to be valuable as a donor.

The whole discussion is ugly. It is being ignored. It should not be.