Recently there have been several articles in pro-life publications about abortionists’ Guttmacher’s latest statistical breakdown of the abortion holocaust, indicating a decline in the national abortion rate.
One such publication began its editorial about report with the stunning statement: “It was news that made pro-lifers rejoice.”
Of course we all rejoice when any human being is rescued from the deadly intent of an abortoinist.
But rejoice at the national abortion rate? Which continues, according to that same report, to result in the brutal deaths of 21% of human beings conceived today? Amid a continuing bloodbath that has taken the lives of 57 million innocent human beings and counting?Hardly.
And add to that the untold numbers of human beings killed by the abortifacient “backup” mechanism of contraception: whose plight the abortionists who wrote this report did not even acknowledge, and clearly we remain in the midst of a holocaust of unequaled proportions.
How is it possible some are said to rejoice?
I think the answer lies deeper, in the language of the editorial. Abortionists are referred to as “providers”. Attacking a human being in the womb with RU 486, Plan B, Ella, and/or the IUD is described as “providing (a) service.” The editorial states that abortions are “perform(ed).” And describes what an abortionists does to a human being as “a procedure“.
To quote Gianna Jessen (survivor of an abortionist’s attempt on her life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOWMmx6eBjU#t=497 ): “Awww! The horror that fills my life!”
Imagine telling Gianna that the abortionist who utilized chemical warfare in an attempt to kill her was “providing a service.”
Those who should know better using the language of the oppressors!
But anyone who read this editorial and did not catch the horror of the language used likely have plenty of company.
But that company, praise God, does not include my 6th grade PSR class.
I did an exercise with them.
It began with no mention of abortion or the editorial. Each student listed words they associated with Service, Perform, and Providers.
They came up with thirty-two different word associations. Not surprisingly, not one listed abortions or abortionists.
Next one student read the editorial out loud as the class listened for the three words from our exercise.
They found them.
And voiced disdain that such words were used to describe abortionists and what they do to human beings. They get the fact that such language desensitizes us to the brutal reality of what abortionists do.
For they are survivors of the abortion holocaust.
When asked for more accurate descriptors they agreed that an abortion is committed not “performed.” That it is committed by abortionists not “providers”. And that chemical warfare in the womb is not “a service.” They described what abortionists do as “killing and murder.” And began to brainstorm as to what they could do to stop it.
We could all learn a lot from my PSR class. As survivors of this holocaust they have a voice like no others.
The very least we owe those threatened by abortionists is to not dehumanize and/or sanitize the horror of the abortion holocaust with either our language or our actions. Doing so only serves to further betray the victims of abortionists. It distances us from our responsibility to do something about it.
So we own them one more thing.
To show up.
To rescue those being dragged to the slaughter.
And there’s one other advantage to such an appropriate response: if you join us on the front lines, assume the perspective of the Gianna Jessens of today, it will never, ever, ever even occur to you to use the language of the culture of death in describing what an abortionist does to a human being.
I say 41 years is…..
What say you?