The Chinese say that a picture is worth a thousand words. When it comes to the subject of abortion, a picture is worth hundreds of thousands of words from the most eloquent speaker, the most gifted writer, the most persuasive salesman, or the most skilled lawyer.
Anyone who looks at a picture of the victim of an abortion recognizes it instantly as a baby. It is not just a lump of tissue like a tumor. It will not grow into a cyst or a plant. It is a tiny human being whom if death does not intervene, will grow into an infant, then a child, and finally an adult.
The conviction of Dr. Kenneth Edelin for manslaughter in the Boston abortion case represents the triumph of common sense over the out-of-touch-with-reality world of the U.S. Supreme Court. The jurors confirmed that what clinched their decision was the picture of the 13-inch-long healthy black baby boy who was killed by the actions of Dr. Edelin.
In its January 22, 1973 split decisions which approved the killing of unborn babies, the U.S. Supreme Court cited ancient beliefs as to when life begins, but did not cite one modern medical book for its conclusion that life does not begin until the unborn can exist outside of its mother.
The Supreme Court refused to hear the massive medical evidence that an unborn baby has a heart beating at three weeks, has hands and feet with unique fingerprints at eight to ten weeks, and has a functioning brain that gives off detectable brain waves at ten weeks. The baby Dr. Edelin killed was nearly 24 weeks. In order to justify the killing of unborn babies, the Supreme Court invented a new right of privacy, which the Court said is superior to the baby’s right to life because, according to the Court majority, the baby is not a human person.
Now the worrisome question is this: does this new right of privacy include the right to kill old people? Many old people are unwanted and interfere with the right of privacy of the relatives with whom they are living. Old people add to the alleged overpopulation problem. Old people often cause emotional distress to their families, just as the Supreme Court said about the unwanted child.
Although many of the same arguments are made for euthanasia that the Supreme Court accepted for abortion, I doubt that euthanasia will be approved by the Court. For one thing, our eyes tell us clearly that senior citizens are persons under the Constitution.
Secondly, it is interesting that ‘the two youngest Supreme Court justices voted against abortion. The age of the Supreme Court justices voting for abortion makes the legalized killing of old people much more of a personal matter to them than the legalized killing of somebody else’s babies.
