{"id":211358,"date":"2019-09-24T17:13:21","date_gmt":"2019-09-24T22:13:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=211358"},"modified":"2019-09-24T17:34:40","modified_gmt":"2019-09-24T22:34:40","slug":"letter-pro-life-obgyn-medically-justifiable-abortion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/letter-pro-life-obgyn-medically-justifiable-abortion\/","title":{"rendered":"Letter from a pro-life OBGYN: ‘There is absolutely no medically justifiable reason for abortion’"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

By now you\u2019ve heard that a little over two weeks ago, Facebook restricted Live Action<\/a> because two of their videos were labeled as “False News\u201d by two independent pro-choice abortion experts.<\/span><\/p>\n

In these two videos, both Lila Rose<\/a> and Dr. Kendra Kolb<\/a> truthfully stated that abortion is never medically necessary. However, the pro-choice experts, Drs. Daniel Grossman and Robyn Schickler, both incorrectly held that abortion was frequently required for certain maternal or fetal medical conditions.<\/span><\/p>\n

If there is a clear moral line that divides those of us who are pro-life and those who are pro-choice, why is there so much confusion and disagreement on what should otherwise be clear and straightforward science, and why are they at odds in certain areas with recently published ACOG materials? (For example, <\/span>this ACOG document<\/span><\/a> states there is no increase in the rate of birth defects with pregnancies that survive an attempted mifepristone medication abortion — yet Grossman and others claim birth defects are a reason abortion pill reversal should not be attempted with progesterone.)<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Omar Hamada, MD (Screenshot, Fox News)<\/p><\/div>\n

To better understand this we must address and clarify three issues: the language and meaning of the term \u201cabortion\u201d; the two worldviews and their political agendas including morality\/ethics and individual rights; and the issues of when life begins, is considered viable, and its sanctity or lack thereof.<\/span><\/p>\n

First, and very importantly – with regard to language and meaning – in our contentious society today, words no longer mean what they actually mean, they mean whatever people want them to mean; they no longer reflect actual meaning, they reflect intended meaning. The problem worsens when a group intentionally confabulates the actual and intended meanings in order to confuse the issues and invalidate their opponents. In the abortion debate, <\/span>abortion supporters<\/span> intentionally do this to deflect, redefine, and constantly move the goalposts.<\/span><\/p>\n

For example – what does the term \u201cabortion\u201d actually mean? The medical definition is \u201cany premature ending of pregnancy that results in the death of the fetus\/baby\/child (more disputed terms) whether elective\/intentional or spontaneous\/unintended.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n