{"id":164778,"date":"2017-04-10T17:51:13","date_gmt":"2017-04-10T21:51:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=164778"},"modified":"2017-04-11T12:23:58","modified_gmt":"2017-04-11T16:23:58","slug":"swede-midwife-shortage-pro-life-you-might-be-turned-away","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/swede-midwife-shortage-pro-life-you-might-be-turned-away\/","title":{"rendered":"Sweden has a midwife shortage — but if you’re pro-life, you might be turned away"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Sweden is facing a midwife shortage — so much so that some parts of the country offer a monthly stipend\u00a0to those training to be midwives. But apparently there’s not enough<\/em> of a shortage to allow anyone\u00a0espousing pro-life values to remain employed as a midwife\u00a0in the country.<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal reports<\/a> today on the case of Ellinor Grimmark, a Christian midwife from Sweden who was blacklisted<\/a> from doing the job she was trained to do, simply because she asked that her conscience rights be upheld. Grimmark refused to directly participate in abortions, and because of this, was eventually forced to relocate — not to another hospital, but to another country<\/em> to practice midwifery.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The WSJ notes that while “Sweden’s 1974 abortion law\u00a0protects freedom of conscience,” a court ruled against Grimmark in 2015, and she has appealed to higher courts. It is possible that the case could advance to the European Court of Human Rights, which typically affirms “freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.”<\/p>\n

It is frightening that abortion has become so cemented as “healthcare”\u00a0in Sweden that a person who refuses to assist in the killing of preborn children is\u00a0unable to find work in the healthcare industry there, under the guise of “putting women first,” according to Grimmark. The WSJ gives a good example of how embedded the pro-abortion mindset really is:<\/p>\n

[Grimmark]\u00a0received a furious call from one manager. \u201cHow could you even think of becoming a midwife with these opinions?\u201d Ms. Grimmark recalls the manager screaming. \u201cWhat would you do if a patient who\u2019d had an abortion came to you bleeding?\u201d Ms. Grimmark tried to answer that she would help a woman in that condition, but the voice on the phone kept screaming. Ms. Grimmark was told she wasn\u2019t welcome. A few days later a text message informed her that her stipend would be cut off.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Why do\u00a0abortion advocates prop up this straw man? In doing so, they fundamentally misunderstand the pro-life ethic.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

It is not<\/em> reasonable to assume that\u00a0a pro-life medical professional would refuse to help a woman after she had already had an abortion. Pro-lifers object to\u00a0the direct, intentional taking of human life in abortion,\u00a0and to the harm that abortion can do to women. Giving medical aid to a woman bleeding after her abortion is not\u00a0taking a\u00a0human life. In fact, it is the opposite. It\u00a0is providing care to assure that another life is not needlessly lost.<\/p>\n

The pro-life ethic asserts that both mother and child must be treated as valuable human beings.\u00a0Yes, how dare<\/em> Ms. Grimmark become a midwife while holding such values!<\/p>\n

For this kind of ethic, Grimmark and other pro-lifers are subjected to slander:<\/p>\n

Speaking at a panel on Islamist extremism in 2015, Mona Sahlin, a prominent politician and former government antiterror coordinator, argued that \u201cthose who refuse to perform abortions are in my opinion extreme religious practitioners\u201d not unlike jihadists.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Such is the warped\u00a0logic of the pro-abortion mind. Somehow, a person who refuses to kill children in the womb is like a jihadist — you know, someone who wages war on innocent people and takes as many human lives as possible<\/em>.<\/p>\n

No, sorry…\u00a0I don’t see the connection. How is it “extreme” to refuse<\/em> to kill another human being because you believe in nonviolent solutions and regard every life as valuable? The\u00a0“jihadist” comparison is a complete and utter failure.<\/p>\n

And of course, just as in America<\/a>, Sweden’s pro-lifers are subject to mockery:<\/p>\n

In January a TV segment<\/a> framed Ms. Grimmark as part of \u201ca global wave of oppression against women.\u201d On another TV panel the same month, feminist writer Cissi Wallin mused, \u201cThose who are against abortion now, can\u2019t we abort them\u2014retroactively?<\/a>\u201d Another panelist replied, \u201cYes, a really great idea!\u201d The others chuckled.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Ah, yes. Another “feminist writer” who doesn’t actually believe women should be allowed have opinions or thoughts of their own. Heck no! Death should be their punishment for daring to have thoughts that don’t agree with a specific ideology!\u00a0(Is it just me, or does that sound just a wee bit like what some oppressive regimes think of women? Hmm.)<\/p>\n

Besides this, the irony here is rich. Basically, this “feminist writer,” in suggesting ‘retroactive abortion,’ is admitting that abortion is killing. She is admitting that she knows abortion\u00a0eliminates… you know… actual people<\/em> from existence.\u00a0And I can’t really think of a more extreme form of oppression than\u00a0killing someone.<\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n