–Has “Pro-life” become “Pro-death”?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
•Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.
•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
•The single most important problem in economics is
the Gap between rich and poor.
•Austerity is the government’s method for widening
the Gap between rich and poor.
•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..


Which is more important to you: The living or the dead?

The answer is not so obvious as some might think.

Recently, the right-wing Washington Times published an article titled: “New Hampshire defunds Planned Parenthood facilities”

The New Hampshire vote, coming over the objections of Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan, comes as the latest example of the backlash against Planned Parenthood following the release of five undercover videos raising alarm over the organization’s involvement in the trade of fetal organs from abortions.

The Republican-controlled New Hampshire Executive Council denied state funding by turning down a $639,000 contract with Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.

The executive council’s decision came after Ms. Hassan refused calls to look into the group’s practices regarding fetal tissue.

The governor has said there is no evidence of illegality at the state clinics, which reportedly do not handle fetal tissue donations, adding, “We do not launch investigations in the state of New Hampshire on rumor.”

The nationwide discussion about Planned Parenthood has to do with a video (I’ve not seen it) that purports to show a negotiation over cadaver parts.

The readers of the Washington post were outraged. Here are representative examples of their comments:

“Women will find other clinics and facilities that don’t rip babies apart for lucre. They’ll be fine. Planned Death will suffer. That’s a good thing.”

“This may be the way around this Democratic Party supported slaughtering of the innocent, states one by one defunding them. Redirect those funds to health clinics that are not in the business of dissecting babies and money laundering for the Democratic Party.”

“The original undercover videos of PP going back over a year, revealed these murderers admitting they can easily finance their own black market organ factory without forced participation by unsuspecting taxpayers.”

“Why is it so important to kill babies up to birth?”

As you can see, there is a misleading overlap between abortion and vivisection. Logically, you can be opposed to the former while still understanding the need for the latter.

Some consider abortion to be “murder,” and virtually everyone is opposed to murder. But doctors and researchers have been using cadavers for more than a century — for research and practice — and seldom are these good people labeled, “murderers.”

Three facts:
–It is far better for a doctor to practice and to learn on a cadaver than on a live patient.
–Surgical researchers have no satisfactory alternatives to cadavers.
–Without cadavers, medicine still would be in the dark ages.

Cadavers have been the basis for countless medical discoveries, that have saved and extended the lives of millions — including millions of babies.

In order to learn from a cadaver, the doctor or researcher must dissect it (Medical research is not for the squeamish).

A doctor or a researcher is willing to pay for body parts, not because he is an insane “Freddy Krueger ” monster, but because he is trying to learn and to save current and future lives.

The U.S. Supreme Court has legalized certain abortions. That being the case, I submitted a question to the Washington Times readers. It was a very simple but important question, that had not been addressed:

“Abortion is legal. For months or years it will remain legal. So, for months or years, there will be many thousands of legal abortions. Additionally, there will be many thousands of natural abortions and still-borns.

“What do you suggest doing with all those dead fetuses?”

Mostly, there were no answers, but the few answers that were given, resembled these:

“They’re not ‘fetuses,’ they’re children.”

“Murder children and then use their body parts to save other “children,” a ruse liberals have been playing on an unsuspecting public in lock step with their godless messiah, Margaret Sanger.”

“The Liberal war on Children.”

“Liberals such as yourself, are devoid of ANY moral compass, when you design laws that encourage a woman to murder her child, and then slaughter that baby when it is born ALIVE for profit without her knowledge.”

The back and forth, conflating abortion with vivisection of cadavers, repeatedly avoided the question, leading me to write:

Before you set your hair on fire with uber-religious holiness, let me remind you of several facts:

1. The vast (and I mean VAST) majority of abortions are requested by pregnant women, who are thinking neither liberal nor conservative, but rather have a variety of reasons for not giving birth to a baby.

The nation agrees with them re. abortion, as does the Supreme Court. So if you want to argue the merits of abortion, don’t come to me. The law is settled, and if you disagree, try to change the law.

2. Until the law is changed (and surely after), there will be many thousands of aborted fetuses every year, in America. Some will be aborted by doctors, some will be aborted by non-doctors, and many will be aborted by nature in the form of still-borns and incomplete pregnancies.

3. My question then — the question I repeatedly have asked and never have had answered is: “What do you suggest doing with all those thousands upon many thousands of legally aborted fetuses” (or if you prefer, “unborn children.”)?

Why do you refuse to answer?

Then, after being cursed as a heartless, soulless liberal who favors killing children, I wrote:

I merely asked a simple question, which you studiously have avoided answering: “What do you suggest doing with all those thousands of legally aborted fetuses?”

Instead, you avoid the question by going into long-winded, hyper-dramatic arguments against abortion and liberals. But, you’re preaching to yourself, for I am not arguing in favor of abortion or liberals.

Let’s say that abortion and liberals are the worst things ever created and SCOTUS was completely wrong, as are the majority of Americans, all of whom will be punished in the non-existent afterlife.

Now. Today. Dead fetuses exist. What should be done with them?

Garbage or research? Choose.

Of course, the insults continued, and of course, there were no answers. Trying to get past the emotion, especially the religious emotion, that prevents rational discourse, I suppose one might make the case that selling body parts could lead to murder and abortion.

As for murder, I’m not aware of many murders that have taken place in order to obtain and sell cadavers. Perhaps it has happened in the past, but the incidence today must be vanishingly rare.

And as for Planned Parenthood having a profit motive that leads to abortion, I don’t understand how that would work. Planned Parenthood itself does not do abortions. So how would the profit motive lead to more abortions?

     Planned Parenthood: “We need to sell more baby cadavers.”
     Doctor: “O.K., I’ll do some unnecessary abortions.”

     Doctor: “I could use your baby for experimentation.”
     Mother: “O.K., in that case, I’ll have an unnecessary abortion.”

Perhaps that too has happened. Doubtful, but if so, surely it too must be quite rare.

So where does that leave us? The notion that somehow Planned Parenthood increases the number of abortions so they can make a profit, defies imagination.

But what doesn’t defy imagination is the absolute fact that medical research has saved and extended millions, perhaps billions, of lives.

Unfortunately, though we can point to lives saved by research, it is near impossible to point to lives lost because of lack of research.

How many people did President Bush kill or maim, and how many lives were shortened and will be shortened, because of his rulings against stem cell research?

No one knows.

But we do know that if medical research benefits billions, the lack of medical research must harm billions.

I won’t explore the motives of those who are more concerned about the fate of already dead fetuses than about the fate of living children and children yet to be born.

At best, these “pro-life” (actually, “pro-dead”) advocates are misguided and have the wrong priorities. At worst they are evil.

That is my opinion.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

Ten Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
8. Tax the very rich (.1%) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)

10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

The Ten Steps will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
1. A growing economy requires a growing supply of dollars (GDP=Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)
2. All deficit spending grows the supply of dollars
3. The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.
4. The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

Monetary Sovereignty

Recessions come after the blue line drops below zero.

Monetary Sovereignty

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.


12 thoughts on “–Has “Pro-life” become “Pro-death”?

  1. “At worst they are evil”

    Unfortunately many people on both sides can not have a mature discussion on this issue without reverting to childish name calling. My gut feeling is that we should not trade fetal organs from abortions. But I could have a debate on this without reverting to name calling like calling one side “evil” or the other side “devoid of ANY moral compass”.

    There might be no right or wrong answer on this topic just viewpoints.


  2. The problem is if the selling of these dead children aids in the finances of an organization that kills more children. The greater of the problems is if abortion is murder we don’t want murderers to increase their financial resources available to do more murder.

    Problem of financing murder > Problem of cadavers for medical study


    1. The post addressed that issue and came to the conclusion it isn’t real.

      Do you know of any evidence whatsoever that Planned Parenthood has urged women to have abortions, for the purpose of selling cadavers?

      Or is this really just a made-up problem invented by those who don’t like women to have a choice over their bodies?


      1. It could (and maybe would) happen though. Especially when times are very tough if the price was high enough.

        But I would like to see your “three facts” above challenged without the name calling or labeling. Like murderers or pro death etc. Although this is unlikely. People strongly believe abortion is killing a life (and evidence could be given to back this) verse a woman’s rights over their body. Both are of course emotional subjects.


        1. “Could”? “Maybe would”? “When”? “If”?
          Lots of caveats.

          But not “is.”

          Challenge away; the ball is in your court.

          Change your “People strongly believe . . . ” to “Some people strongly believe . . . ” Polls show that most Americans do not believe abortion is murder.

          Anyway, you want to argue against abortion, just like the readers of the Washinton times did. In short, you and they wish to change the subject.

          The point of the post is not to argue the morals of abortion. The point is to say: Hundreds of thousands of fetuses exist and will exist in the future.

          So what is to be done with them? Garbage or medical research? Religious philosophy or save future lives?

          Answer that question.


          1. But even saying garbage or medical research. Maybe just reword to medical research or not allowed if you want a serious debate. As by using this term (garbage) it just suggests you have no regard for a potential life. And are more interested in provoking than debating. Also this “religious philosophy or save future lives”.

            And regarding abortion. I said it’s inevitable that this debate will be emotional. I didn’t say I support or do not support abortion. It’s largely irrelevant to this debate except maybe that it might encourage woman to become pregnant and have abortions if the money was high enough.


  3. Anti abortion people like to use powerful words like ‘children and babies’ to push their point across. The fetus or embryo isn’t independent and therefore not a child or baby. As cold as this may seem, a fetus/embryo is technically only a parasite. It is not human, but only potentially so.

    The life and future of the unarguably human woman and her decision to terminate an unwanted pregnancy trumps the arguably human life within HER womb, HER body, HER life, HER future.


  4. RJ, you use the word “murder” to describe abortion, then object to “garbage” as a description of what actually does happen to fetuses.

    And then you falsely claim you are neutral regarding abortion, while suggesting I have no concern for a “potential life.”

    And then you invent far-fetched scenarios like women intentionally becoming pregnant so as to make money from abortions.

    And then we should have a “serious debate”??

    The question remains: What should be done with the hundreds of thousands of fetuses?

    Merely toss them away or use them for research to save future lives? What is your suggestion?


    1. I clearly referred to other people using these terms. Quote “But I would like to see your “three facts” above challenged without the name calling or labeling. Like murderers or pro death etc.”

      But this is the big issue with this topic. People are just too emotional about this subject and can’t help themselves. On both sides. Its impossible to have a mature sensible discussion on it.

      this question

      “The question remains: What should be done with the hundreds of thousands of fetuses?”

      just triggers too many emotions in people. It’s involves religion and the meaning of life. So extreme sensitivity is needed whenever a topic like this is debated. As a society we just are not mature enough yet.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s