Friday, February 29, 2008

The Unintended Consequences of a Being a Pain-Free People

You may consider much of the secular news to be a pain in the posterior, but it’s the subject of pain itself that has been making recent headlines.

Veteran Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently drew the ire of court observers and editorial-page writers when he spoke in favor of using pain to interrogate terror suspects. The “big pain news of the month award” however, has to go to The New York Times Magazine. The weekly recently published a remarkably obtuse piece of journalism “revealing” that babies, at 20 weeks of gestation, may in fact be able to feel pain inflicted by abortionists’ surgical instruments. We offer, in response, a sincere and pointed “DUH!”

After generations of Americans endured and accepted as “simply part of life” the pain associated with everything from childbirth to corporal punishment, from broken bones to policemen’s blackjack whacks, we have now “evolved” as a people who endeavor to be pain-free. Perhaps the point is best illustrated by four words: thank God for epidurals! Further, many children today enjoy the comforts of pain-free, albeit monotonous, timeouts.

Doctors are often eager to provide potentially addictive narcotics to ease the discomfort of most any ailment. A case currently before the US Supreme Court argues that prisoners experiencing execution should simply be allowed to peacefully die in an induced sleep — pain free. Even animals raised for human consumption are protected by law from having to experience pain. While by no means are we pain advocates (after all, pain hurts!), it does strike us as disgustingly ironic that when The New York Times Magazine finally publishes a story suggesting anything negative about abortion, the article doesn’t focus on the fact that an innocent human life is being extinguished, but rather that the baby may experience some pain in-utero as he or she is torn apart by surgical instruments. The story was apparently co-written by Captain Obvious.

As evidence that pre-born babies can experience pain, the article notes a researcher who “selected 45 fetuses that required a potentially painful blood transfusion, giving one-third of them an injection of the potent painkiller Fentanyl…the results were striking: in fetuses that received the analgesic, the production of stress hormones was halved, and the pattern of blood flow remained normal.” In other words, less pain.

So while the research is quickly headed toward producing a consensus that a fetus at 20 weeks can feel pain (something pro-life advocates have maintained for years), the only holdouts, insisting the “pain switch” isn’t turned on until later in life, are those individuals who make their living promoting and performing abortions. How convenient!

Why does it matter?

The consequences of such research are potentially a matter of life and death. If as a people, we come to agree that unborn babies can feel pain, such knowledge gives them a consideration too often reserved only for supposedly higher levels of humanity. If they are, in fact, like us and do experience pain, then how can we in good conscience continue to murder them in the womb? After all, even cattle headed for the butcher shop shouldn’t have to endure pain. Right?

Full New York Times Magazine article.

Michael Clancy, the photographer who took the picture and who owns the copyright to it says, however, that out of the corner of his eye he saw the uterus shake and the baby’s hand pop out of the surgical opening on its own. Clancy says that when the doctor put his finger into the baby’s hand, the baby squeezed the finger and held on. You can read Clancy’s description of the experience and more about the picture at his website at


Acme Data said...

So, would I be able to claim a 20 week old fetus as a dependent on my taxes?

apackof2 said...

At first was not going to publish the comments of AcmeData because they are flippant, ignorant and callousness. However, I decided that other people should see inside the liberal "mind"

Now I am not saying that all liberals would write such a thing but that a good many of them would. This person cares more about Co2 emissions than the pain of a human being, a baby. The same person who has been spamming this blog with nasty comments and " I really don't need to provide any proof"

Of course nasty and insulting comments are typical of his/her ilk. I expect them

However the fact that this person used the clinical term "fetus" helps him/her dehumanize a living baby. Who even uses the term fetus? When a woman is pregnant does she ever say 'I am having a fetus? Ever get an invitation to a "Fetus shower"?

Make no mistake the term medical term fetus was introduced to the public by abortionist and their liberal supporters as a mean of dehumanizing a baby. The same technique was used by the Nazis in their campaign to dehumanize the Jews so the general populace would look the other way when their neighbors were being deported to the death camps.

In addition assuming that this person gets their information from the "usual suspects", by tuning in to Katie Couric reading the New York Times or logging into DU I am posting pictures for educational purposes of liberals, of what an 20 week old BABY does look like.