{"id":210622,"date":"2019-09-17T12:00:11","date_gmt":"2019-09-17T17:00:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=210622"},"modified":"2024-09-20T12:40:10","modified_gmt":"2024-09-20T17:40:10","slug":"abortion-isnt-ending-pregnancy-intentional-killing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/abortion-isnt-ending-pregnancy-intentional-killing\/","title":{"rendered":"Let\u2019s be clear: Abortion isn’t just ending a pregnancy. It’s intentional killing."},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Facebook’s latest attempt<\/a> to silence Live Action’s pro-life message seems to be fueled by a completely erroneous notion of what exactly is<\/em> and isn’t<\/em> an abortion. Historically, “abortion” has meant the ending of a pregnancy, with the term “spontaneous abortion” used to signify a miscarriage. However, today’s usage of the word “abortion” is commonly understood to mean the deliberate, intentional,<\/em>\u00a0and often elective ending of a human life during pregnancy. With that in mind, it becomes quite clear what an abortion is and what it isn’t — and reinforces the idea that it is, in fact, never medically<\/em> necessary<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Facebook “fact-checkers” — in this case, two abortionists listed on the original fact check (which has since been altered<\/a>) — say that Live Action and Lila Rose are misleading people by stating that abortion is never medically necessary. These abortionists claim that there are cases in which the preborn child must be intentionally and deliberately killed in order to save the mother’s life. But\u00a0thousands<\/a> of doctors have attested that this is false. In fact, 2,500<\/a> pro-life doctors belonging to the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) agree that it is never medically necessary, and over 1,000 other physicians signed the Dublin Declaration<\/a> attesting to the same.<\/p>\n

“The intent of an abortion was made very clear at the Supreme Court hearings over the Partial Birth Abortion Ban,” explained Dr. Donna Harrison, executive director of AAPLOG, in a statement<\/a>. “The abortionists argued that the product the abortionist is paid to produce is a dead baby, and that is what distinguishes a delivery from an abortion. The intent of a delivery is to produce, if possible, both a live baby and a live mom. The intent of an abortion is to produce a dead baby.”<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Let’s examine whether these commonly listed cases below are (or aren’t) abortions:<\/p>\n

Ectopic Pregnancy<\/strong><\/p>\n

Abortion advocates sometimes fall back on ectopic pregnancy as an example of when abortion is medically necessary; other people simply tend to question whether it actually qualifies as one. It is not an abortion<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\"ectopic

A preborn child removed during an ectopic pregnancy.<\/p><\/div>\n

An ectopic pregnancy<\/a> is one that occurs when after fertilization the preborn child implants and begins to grow outside of the uterus, almost always in the fallopian tube. While there have been cases in which a child in an ectopic pregnancy has survived, this is extremely rare. In nearly all cases, an ectopic pregnancy is a risk to the mother’s health and will lead to the death of the baby and possibly the mother as well. If the pregnancy is left to continue, both are highly likely to die.<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Why miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and early delivery are not abortions<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

To resolve an ectopic pregnancy, the preborn child must be removed, but not with an act meant to kill <\/em>the child (abortion), but rather by an incision in the fallopian tube or potentially the complete removal of the tube. The child will die of natural causes and the mother’s life will be saved.<\/p>\n

“When the life of the mother is truly threatened by her pregnancy, if both lives cannot simultaneously be saved, then saving the life of the mother is the primary aim,” said<\/a>\u00a0AAPLOG. “If through our careful treatment of the mother’s illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical and is consistent with the pro-life ethics.”<\/p>\n

Outlawing abortion will not end the practice of removing a child in an ectopic pregnancy.<\/p>\n

D&C or Induction Medication after Miscarriage<\/strong><\/p>\n

When a mother has experienced an early miscarriage, sometimes the miscarriage doesn’t complete right away. In these cases, doctors will sometimes do a D&C or give the mother medication to expel the deceased child from the uterus. Since the child has already died, there is no intent to kill involved.\u00a0Removing a deceased preborn child by D&C\u00a0is not an abortion<\/strong>.\u00a0The practice of removing a deceased preborn child would not<\/em> be outlawed if abortion were outlawed.<\/p>\n

If an abortion pill is given to the mother while her child is still alive in the womb<\/em>, the intent is to end the life of the growing child. The abortion pill (the effects of which can potentially be reversed<\/a> through use of progesterone supplementation) starves the child to death, as explained in the video below by former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino.<\/p>\n