On Wednesday, April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court determined:
"No more partial birth abortions."
Hillary Clinton, 59: "Erosion of our constitutional rights..."
John Edwards, 53: "I could not disagree more strongly..."
Rudy Giuliani, 63: "I agree with it..."
John McCain, 71: I'm very happy..."
Barack Obama, 45: "I strongly disagree..."
Mitt Romney, 60: "A step Forward..."
The Notmilkman, 55: "This is an intellectual argument that
all people must come to terms with. Abuse of any defenseless
creature is a crime against all that is humane."
"Animal Rights and Abortion Dilemmas..."
Abortion has again become a defining litmus test issue for
political candidates as it does every four years. Liberal
democrats shift one way while Conservative republicans lean
"Compassion is the basis of morality."
As an animal rights activist, can I cry for the rat or
mouse that is about to be the subject of an experiment in
which surgery is followed by pain which is followed by death
while ignoring sensory pain cells in the human model?
Many animal activists have spent days or months or years
in jail after passionately defending the rights of
defenseless animals who have no voice. Many of those
same passionate individuals misplace their compassion
when it comes to defenseless unborn humans. Is there a
Each year, one thousand or more animal rights supporters
gather near Washington, D.C. for their annual convention.
The majority of these activists are women. As a matter of
fact, there would be no animal rights movement without the
gentler sex, who seem to possess a spirituality and wisdom
that their male counterparts lack.
Animal rights activists protest pain to laboratory rats, but
support a woman's right to bring pain to her unborn fetus. Some
vegan activists demand that meat eaters acknowledge the horrors
of slaughterhouse films, or vivisection, or bullfighting. Yet,
they turn a deaf ear and firmly shut a blind eye to the conscious
being who grows within the mammalian human mother.
Most of these passionate animal rightists also support the
decision of a woman to cause pain to her fetus, as if it is
their right to decide pain or no pain decisions regarding the
living creature within a human body. Where is the compassion
for the human animal that is destined to suffer? More than
one female animal rights author has paralleled the abuse and
struggles of animals to the sexual politics and multiple i
ndignities suffered by women at the hands of a male-oriented
Is abortion murder? Of course it is. It is more than just
murder. It is death without compassion, for the living
creature, not yet named, possesses pain receptors and is
aware of his or her own suffering.
In defense of their ignorance, some animal rights activists
argue that the fetus feels no pain, much the same way that
animal abusers which animal rightists protest use the very
same argument to defend vivisection, sport, or the consumption
of sentient farm animals.
As an animal rights activist, I am faced with an enormous
dilemma. Do I call abortion anything other than torture or
murder? I cannot rationalize the willful delivery of pain
to a rat, cat, dog, rabbit, calf, pig, circus elephant,
or unborn humans when alternatives exist.
I cry for the cow and the calf, and the bull in the
bullring, and the dog who is euthanized, and the rat
who is burned in the name of science, and the squirrel
shot by the young boy in the name of sport, and the
coyote who is anally electrocuted so that her fur can
adorn a parka.
Many people do not recognize the unborn child as possessing
the same rights as the rest of us, yet, a study published in
the May, 2003 issue of Psychological Science (2003;14:220- 224)
reveals that a fetal infant is able to recognize the voice of
her own mother.
Scientific studies have demonstrated that the growing human
fetus feels pain and learns about the external environment
while within. The fetus recognizes songs and voices. The
brain works, the heart beats, pain receptors feel. How much
compassion do animal rights activists emote for sentient
human infants, not yet born?
Supporting animal research is a transgression of the laws of
nature and an insult to the respect of life. This is why
Animal Rights activists are so right in the things they protest.
Supporting pain and death for even one of the 4,700 species of
mammals is a contradiction in terms against all of the good that
animal rights activists do.
There are anti-abortion people who show no compassion to
other living things. They eat animals and wear furs and
hunt and support animal research. There are also pro-abortion
people who are vegans and protest animal research and animal
abuse of any sort.
One must be true to a universal truth. Abuse of any living
creature is a crime against Universal Wisdom. One cannot act
passionately against one form of abuse while supporting another
and defend that action by rationalizing with an excuse of
Is the killing of an animal against the law? Is murder against
the law? People kill animals for food. As a vegan, I am offended
by the process, but have never suggested that the killing be
made illegal. I have urged that people take responsibility for
their actions, and call the act what it is, murder, and recognize
that their action of eating meat leads to the painful death of
a sentient being. In that same sense, I am horrified by every single
act of abortion. I feel the pain of every woman who feels that she
has no alternative, and must make that life or death decision. It
is a decision that she lives with for the rest of her life, and
nothing can be more painful than to kill a part of oneself. Abortion
is murder. It must always be called murder. Although it immediately
ends a pregnancy, it must not be called a pregnancy termination. It
must be called what it is, and if that change in nomenclature occurs
throughout our society, it might become a less common act than it is.
In the same sense that I would not prosecute a person who kills a
living creature for food, I would not prosecute a woman who makes
such a choice. Nor would I prosecute a physician who performs that
terrible, terrible act of murder, just as I would not prosecute the
butcher of a slaughterhouse or the owner of such an operation.
I support every woman's right to murder her fetus, and wish that
no woman would ever do such a thing, but she must have the right,
just as an individual must have the right to eat a chicken
or a duck or a rabbit or a lamb or a veal calf.
As a society, we get into trouble by placing veils over
controversial issues. We must look life and death squarely
in the face and recognize each act for what it is and then take
full responsibility for the things we do. If that ever happens,
we will all live in a better world.