Scientists in New York recently discovered that fish can recognize themselves. They did their experiment on ten fish, where they tagged the fish under their bellies. Those that were tagged kept scratching that side as if trying to remove it. The article concluded with the question, “What does this mean?” Indeed, what does this mean? My question is, “Why are we putting money into research like this, instead of putting it in more important research like a cure for cancer, or maybe feed a small nation with the money?”
The research comes from New York, a state which has been under plenty of attention when it became the first state to allow abortions up until the minute of birth. This mean means that if the mother decides not to have the baby while on the delivery table, the doctors can kill the baby before if gets out, because, according to the US law (and Hillary Clinton), an unborn child is not a person yet and has no legal rights. According to the new law, women who undergo mental and physical anguish during birth has a right to stop the birthing process as part of their pro-choice right.
What mother giving birth does not undergo mental and physical anguish? All of us do! There is not one mother who gave birth to her children who will not admit to such distress. And there is also post-partum depression as well, and mothers who go through it seek professional health so that they can be better mothers and better people.
This calls to mind an anecdote that I read about a doctor who was being asked by his patient to get rid of her current pregnancy because she just gave birth the previous year to the child she was holding in her arms, and they won’t be able to afford or handle another one. The doctor surmised and told the woman, if that was the case, then they should just kill the one she was holding in her arms so that she won’t have difficulties and complications brought about by an abortion, and that she should keep the one in her womb instead. The woman was appalled and told the doctor that that would be murder, and the doctor said, “But wouldn’t killing the one inside be murder, too?”
So, “aborting” a child about to be born is not murder, according to New York. Virginia is soon to agree. Canada doesn’t have a law, and may as well be killing babies before they are born, too. There have been twelve states who introduced the “Fetal Heartbeat Bill” in legislation, but they have all “died” by getting vetoed. Although it still isn’t a fool-proof law, as life begins at conception, the bill is a start. It seems that no one wants to defend the human unborn child, and we are talking about the future generation. When we legislate and put into law measures that kill rather than preserve life, we can no longer be called a “civilized” society. When did we become a world of haters of babies? When did we become a murderous society by giving a legal reason to kill the innocent, and still have the gall the call ourselves a “civilized” society?
US President Donald Trump’s State of the Nation address scored well with the Christian voters when he made a call against late-term abortions. Nancy Pelosi, a big supporter of abortion, put on her best smile during his address, but was obviously not pleased. Whether Trump is using this as a campaign initiative is irrelevant. The fact that people are starting to speak up and are defending the unborn is what is relevant. The same thing is happening in Canada, with Conservatives like Doug Ford and Jason Kenny are not afraid to say that they are pro-life, one thing that any Liberal can never admit to because of the party’s pro-choice policies.
When a dog or cat is hurt or mistreated, everyone screams, “Foul!” and we start putting up GoFundMe collections to protect the animal, but when a baby, nameless, unknown, unable to speak or to defend himself/herself and ask to be spared his/her life, and apparently “not human yet” is aborted, no one flinches. We spend so much money on protecting a species of animal by protecting their offspring while in vitro (such as the panda and the orca), but a human child doesn’t get the same protection. There are many circumstances that affect a call to saving the life of the mother in potentially difficult pregnancies, and even then, there are many steps taken to ensure that that is the only solution to the medical issue, but I believe the right to chose to abort an innocent life is not one of them, as sometimes we are given a chance to chose before we do get pregnant.
When we put money and effort into studying whether fish can recognize themselves and self-assess, rather than saving the life of the unborn or put money into the medical care of people who cannot afford the medicines they need not covered by medical insurance, then we know our hard-earned tax money has gone to the sewers. The worst part of it is that we are more concerned about what a fish thinks than saving the life of another. Sad.
