Democrats have long accused the Republican Party of carrying on a war against women.  They proudly beat their chest and declare, “We are the party of women!  We care about women’s rights!”  But do they really?  If so, why have so very many prominent Democrats, both politicians and other notables, been accused by multiple women of sexual harassment and even forced sex?  How does that demonstrate respect for the women of America?

And this Democratic “war on women” deliberately ignores science, though the party also coins itself the “party of science.” Everyone who has ever watched a television police drama such as FBI or NCIS knows that when an unmoving, obviously injured individual is discovered, the first thing anyone does it to feel for a pulse. Why? Well, because the absence of a pulse means the heart is not beating, and if the heart is not beating, the individual is dead. So what then is the indication of life? A beating heart. And what happens when a beating heart is stopped? A living person becomes dead.

Democrats ignore this simple science, however, because the most radical of their followers want women to be able to rid themselves of pesky live babies whenever they wish, whenever it is convenient for them. They call this “caring about women’s health.” They rabidly support abortion, even into the third trimester, assuring the nervous mother seeking an abortion that what is growing in her womb is just a clump of cells, sort of like a cancer, that she is better rid of.  Yet science tells us that upon conception, that “clump of cells” has already gained its own, unique DNA, distinct from that of both its mother and father.  Science also tells us that that baby’s heart starts beating between 5 and a half to 6 weeks after conception and that by 20 weeks the baby’s nerves are developed to the point that he/she feels pain.  Thus, science teaches us that this unwanted bit of tissue is actually a growing, developing human baby, with its own DNA and a beating heart within 6 weeks. 

Democrats also ignore the negative side of abortion.  If we set aside for the moment the fact that to abort a baby with a beating heart is to kill it, we can consider the ramifications for the mother. Mothers die during abortions just as they do during childbirth, though the number is low.  But the psychological ramifications can be long lasting and debilitating. According to the American Pregnancy Association, common negative feelings after an abortion include:

  • anger
  • shame
  • remorse or regret
  • loss of self-esteem or self-confidence
  • feelings of isolation and loneliness
  • sleep problems and bad dreams
  • relationship problems
  • thoughts of suicide
  • guilt

In addition, some people may experience grief, stress or a sense of loss and may feel less able to cope. Suicidal thoughts could also occur.  Why would those who claim to take the part of women want to put them through this, and through the pain of abortion, without offering them a realistic view of both the option of adoption and the emotions they may feel after going ahead with an abortion? Why would they continue to claim that abortion is a “reproductive right” of the mother, when in fact science, the very science they claim to uphold, tells us that abortion is about the killing of an individual quite separate from the mother in whose body it is residing?

Planned Parenthood, the most lucrative abortion provider in the country, very carefully avoids discussing any possible choices except abortion and, though they do an ultrasound to determine how far along the pregnancy is and how much to charge the mother, they adamantly refuse to show the ultrasound to the mother.  They know there exists too great a risk that a mother who sees a picture of the baby within her womb will not go ahead with the abortion.

So, while Democrats decry the necessary separation of families at the border until it can be verified that especially men are the actual fathers of the children they are escorting, and wail about the idea of actually deporting children who are here illegally, they are perfectly comfortable with the idea of murdering babies that have not yet been born, or even letting those who have been born unwanted, simply die without care.  How have they become so blind to real science?  How have they become so immoral?  If we as a nation do not concern ourselves with the wellbeing of the weakest, most vulnerable among us, if we can dismiss the murder of a defenseless unborn child as “the reproductive choice” of the mother, how much greater a leap will it be to rid our society of the crippled, the special needs children, the elderly who demand care rather than contribute to society?  It was not much of a leap for Nazi Germany.