Dear Friends for Life,
Think of a little unborn child fighting for life in its mother’s womb. A beautiful scene of God’s creation- the growing process. Then consider the biggest lie to hit the news in this presidential race. Hillary Clinton stating publicly that babies are people but don’t have human rights. What? “The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” she said. Having conceded that pregnant mothers are carrying the life of another person, she did not feel obligated to protect that life.
Hillary is radically pro-abortion, maybe to an extreme, and this clouds her mental ability to comprehend clearly the meaning of “personhood”. She selects one class of persons and denies them the basic human rights which she demands for herself. Sounds like a repetition of the world’s ‘not-so-long-ago dark history’ – the Hitler logic.
My good friend Dr. Dianne E. Irving, Ph.D. comments on the article “Clinton ‘unborn person’ comments anger both pro-choice, pro-life sides” and clarifies very clearly when a new human being begins to exist. Her reasoning is documented and proven to be a scientific fact which seems to elude Hillary and her “pro-choice” friends. I quote Dr. Irving’s position:
[Note: (1) The truth has been so successfully blocked for so long that too many women and girls have now had abortions and therefore don’t want to face the facts (nor do the men who tangoed with them).
(2) All the typical lies of “pro-choice” are provided in the http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/3/hillary-clinton-unborn-person-has-no-constitutiona/. BUT, for those who are still curious, it has long been documented as an objective scientific fact that a new human BEING begins to exist at the beginning of the process of fertilization (sexual reproduction) in the woman’s fallopian tube (not in her uterus or “womb”), or in vitro in petri dishes in IVF/ART research laboratories and “infertility” clinics: See the Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryonic Development, instituted in 1942, updated every year since then by an international nomenclature committee on human embryology consisting of 20-24 Ph.D.’s in human embryology from around the world: http://www.medicalmuseum.mil/index.cfm?p=collections.hdac.anatomy.index; see Stage 1, at: http://www.medicalmuseum.mil/assets/documents/collections/hdac/stage01.pdf documenting that a new HUMAN BEING begins to exist at the beginning of the process of fertilization. For the same objective scientific facts of when a new living human BEING begins to exist, see also The Virtual Human Embryo, at: http://www.ehd.org/virtual-human-embryo/intro.php?stage=1; see the same as an app for iPhones: https://itunes.apple.com/app/embryo/id422337604#; see the same in this DVD: https://www.ehd.org/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=51. NOT NEW, and FULLY AVAILABLE OBJECTIVE SCIENTIFIC FACTS SINCE AT LEAST 1942.
(3) “Personhood” is a philosophical issue. There is no such thing as “delayed personhood”. The human person immediately begins to exist when the human being begins to exist — at the beginning of the process of fertilization in the woman’s fallopian tube (not in her uterus or “womb”) or in petri dishes in vitro in IVF/ART research laboratories and “infertility” clinics. See refutations of all those “delayed personhood” arguments in the mini-version of my 400+ page doctoral dissertation from Georgetown University (Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo, 1991) published as: Irving, “Philosophical and scientific expertise: An evaluation of the arguments on ‘personhood'”, Linacre Quarterly February 1993, 60:1:18-46, at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_04person1.html. See also Irving, “Caution Again: Need to Use Newer URL’s for Carnegie Stages for Issues Concerning the Early Human Embryo”(Jan. 1, 2015), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_226new.url.html; also, Irving, “Why Accurate Human Embryology Is Needed To Evaluate Current Trends In Research Involving Stem Cells, Genetic Engineering, Synthetic Biology and Nanotechnology” (November 20, 2012), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_206accuratehumanembryology1.html; also, Irving, “Any Human Cell – iPS, Direct Programmed, Embryonic, Fetal or Adult – Can Be Genetically Engineered to Asexually Reproduce New Human Embryos for Purposes of Reproduction (‘Infertility’)” (November 2011), at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_194cellasexuallyreproduce1.html.
Maybe someone might pass the above on to Hilary … (Dianne E. Irving, Ph.D) ]
Thank you Dr. Irving for sharing your insights on this very important issue. It is good for our readers to remember that our most basic rights for no other reason are derived from the fact we are human beings, that is, members of the human species. Once any human is legally deprived of any of those rights, including the all-encompassing right-to-life itself, our very own rights are threatened.
Jerry Novotny, OMI