this is being presented or has been presented now abortion was legalized in 1973 that was the Roe vs. Wade Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision Which, by the way, was totally unconstitutional. Because all 50 states had their own laws regulating abortion. Some states it was a little easier to get an abortion, most states it was very, very difficult to get an abortion. And Roe versus Wade, you're not supposed to legislate from the bench. You're not supposed to make laws from the bench. We often hear Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land. Well, if it's the law of the land, then the Supreme Court wasn't doing its job. And the Supreme Court should have looked at the Constitution, that's their job, and they should have said, hey, the Constitution doesn't say anything about abortion, this is a state's issue. state sovereignty. Each of the states should make their own decision. And by the way, all 50 states, I believe their abortion laws were much more conservative than what the Supreme Court ruled. The Supreme Court said we don't even know when life starts, so we'll just assume that it doesn't start while the baby's in the womb. They act like that's a religious issue. when human life starts. And technically, Roe v. Wade doesn't allow abortion for all nine months of the pregnancy. But all the lady has to say is that her health or well-being is at stake, which then gives her green light for all nine months. So they don't even ask now. If a lady wants to have an abortion and it's one week before the baby's due, so be it. So, we had Christian thinkers like Francis Schaeffer arguing that we should not move in that direction before it even came down. The Roman Catholic Church was a lot more vocal on this issue than the Protestant church, and that's really sad. The Roman Catholic church also is opposed to contraceptives that prevent conception. So they were playing this game along a lot earlier than the Protestants were. Protestants would say, A contraceptive that prevents conception, there's no human being that's killed. But at the moment of conception, when the egg is fertilized, you have a new human being. And we're going to see that on a scientific level, when it comes to medical science, that's not even in debate. Human life starts at conception. So, and we're going to read, Quite a few quotes to confirm this. Human life starts at conception. This is a medical fact, scientific fact. So really the debate is not is the unborn human The real debate is human life sacred, another way of saying it, to all innocent humans. have the right to life. Now, technically, no human is innocent. We're all fallen. But what I mean by innocent here is any human being who hasn't committed a crime worthy of forfeiting their right to life. Do all humans who are innocent in that regard have the right to life? Founding fathers, they talked about all human beings having inalienable rights, rights that God instituted human government to protect, rights that cannot be taken away from us, and of these rights are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And John Locke actually wrote it out as life, liberty, and property, that's what the founding fathers meant, that you have the right to property, But they were concerned that maybe Americans might misunderstand that and think that the government owes them land. And so let's just call it their right to pursue happiness. You get to choose what you want to do for a living when you grow up. You get to choose if you want to spend all your money or if you want to invest it. And if you want to own property, you can do that. And so these are God-given rights. If you're human, you automatically have them. So keep in mind what the debate is not and what the real debate is. Having said that, if I got a phone call tonight asking me what I was going to say next week, I'm going to be gone for the next couple of weeks. If I got a phone call tonight asking me a month from now to debate the leader of the local chapter of Planned Parenthood and I take that debate and a month from now you show up and you find that I'm arguing that the unborn human is a human being and my opponent is arguing that no, the unborn is just tissue. He doesn't become a human being until birth. That doesn't undo anything I'm saying here. All that means is I'm debating either an anti-intellectual who hasn't studied the world's leading philosophical ethicists who are pro-abortion. They all acknowledge human life starts at conception. It's a medical fact. They're ignoring the medical experts, so they're either very uninformed on the topic or they're just lying through their teeth. And that's the same question we've got to ask about politicians today. Does this socialist politician who wants to destroy our country and impoverish us all, is that what they're intending to do? Are they evil? Or are they just so dumb they think socialism actually works? So, whatever the case, you're a next-door neighbor, you might have to argue that human life starts at conception. That, unfortunately, though, is a no-brainer. in the scientific and philosophical arena. We'll see when I bring up quotes on that. But if the unborn is human, shouldn't the unborn human's life be protected? You can see how old these notes are. It says over 30 million unborn babies have been murdered since 1973. That number is closer to about 55 million right now. So this is where America You know, we think we've got the right to topple Assad, which I think would be a dumb idea in Syria. I'm sure the guys probably got, you know, cold-blooded killed some people, innocent people in the past, but I think he's probably better than ISIS. They're the leading candidate who's going to take over. Plus, if we topple Assad, their leading ally is Russia. But we constantly have this idea that America has the moral high ground. and we've got the right to go abroad and knock off, bump off dictators. Our forefathers didn't think so. John Quincy Adams said that America seeks not monsters abroad to destroy, lest we lose freedom within our borders. He knew that war has to be a last resort, otherwise you're going to lose freedom there. But that moral high ground, when we topple the Saddam Husseins of this world, how many unborn babies do we have to kill in America? before we acknowledge, you know what, maybe we're as bad or worse than them. And so, and you know, somebody could say, well abortion is legal. Well, legal murder, Stalin committed, all the murders that Stalin committed were legal because he was the law. So we've got to be really careful about this, but America's got its own holocaust that if you're just going by a body count, we make Hitler's holocaust. it pales in comparison to it. Now, people who believe the unborn is merely part of the woman's body, it's true that abortion would be similar to having your tonsils removed, appendix removed, no crime would be committed, but we're going to show that that is not the case. We're going to see that leading pro-abortionists acknowledge that human life starts at conception. I'm going to give a decent amount of quotes from Peter Singer to show that the bioethicist, the philosophical ethicist out of Princeton, and I'm going to read quotes from his Practical Ethics standard college textbook in non-christian schools. We're going to look at some of his posts. We're going to look at Dr. Jerome, the late Dr. Jerome Lejeune and some of his testimony on court. You had all these frozen embryos and this couple was getting a divorce and one didn't want to pay for the storage anymore and learned them all killed. And the other one, the other parent didn't. And so Dr. Jerome Lejeune argued that those are human beings. And so we'll also talk, get three quotes, one from Dr. Lejeune from the, it's right in your textbook, from the 1981, I believe, congressional hearings on the issue. So, we need to look at the whole issue of pro-abortion, pro-abortion position, and then the anti-abortion position. The anti-abortion position we like to call ourselves pro-life okay and I think that's accurate we're pro-life and believe in the sanctity of human life but the pro-abortionists like to call themselves pro-choice and I don't think that's honest at all because the Supreme Court, when it ruled on Roe versus Wade, it overturned the choice of the people in 50 states. And so, I mean, you know, when George W. Bush At some point, I think in his first term, he had control of both houses of Congress. And he could have done, if the Republicans were as pro-life as he claims, as Republicans claim, he actually could have made a move that would have made Roe versus Wade null and void during his eight-year term. He could have done what Thomas Jefferson did and what Andrew Jackson did. Anytime that they saw a ruling of the Supreme Court that they thought was unconstitutional, they just made a public pronouncement that they weren't going to enforce it. The executive branch wasn't going to enforce it. So then they make fun of the guys wearing robes and say, you know, they don't have guns. What are they going to do about it, you know? I think the crazy thing is George W. Bush claims to be pro-life, could have called himself the pro-choice president. He said, I'm for choice. I don't want the federal government forcing its will on everybody. I want to return choice to the 50 states. So as far as I'm concerned, Roe versus Wade is null and void as long as I'm in charge. I'm not going to enforce it. So in case you don't know what I mean, all 50 states, you come up with your own abortion laws. If it gets challenged at the Supreme Court, no matter what the Supreme Court rules, if they uphold Roe versus Wade, I'm going to ignore it. So as long as I'm the sheriff in town, Roe versus, Roe v. Wade is null and void. Now a lot of people tell me when I say that, yeah, but then you would have gotten impeached. By whom? The Republican House and Senate that have been telling us for decades how pro-life they are? So this is where politicians will often tell us These are my priorities. And then we look and we say, wow, their priorities are exactly the same as mine. But I should speak louder than words. Once they get to power, we start finding out what they called a priority when they were running for office. Once they get to office, sometimes isn't a priority anymore. By the way, I would be proud to be the president known for being impeached. for standing against Roe vs. Wade. So whatever the case, let me say this though too. In the debate, in many of these political debates, political correctness, the idea that there's some ideas that are politically correct, and if you disagree with us, the debate's over, we don't have to argue our position, we can just laugh at you, or we can scream at you, or we can pound you, you know, the media's telling us how, I'm not even a Trump fan, the media's telling us how evil Donald Trump is, how violent, and all this other stuff, yet, Look at all the far leftist protesters and how violent they are and they get a clean... Every time the media talks about them, it's like the media always represents their cause. And it's really sad when minorities riot. They're often destroying minority businesses in their own community. And instead of the media standing up for those law-abiding citizens, who dedicated their lives to building that business, they stand up for the protesters who ought to be, you know, behind bars. But whatever the case, it used to be whoever controlled the soundbite, the 20-second soundbite, was going to win the election. because the average American can only handle a 20-second soundbite. That's our attention span now. We've been so dumbed down. Now it's even worse. Now you don't have to worry about the soundbite. Now you've just got to control the titles. As long as you call pro-abortionists pro-choice, what American would be opposed to choice? Right? That sounds so American. We're pro-choice. We just want to give people a choice. It makes them sound so nice. But The media doesn't want to call pro-lifers pro-life because, you know, what American would be opposed to a title like that? So they call us anti-abortionists. And you know what? Americans do not, surveys show Americans do not like the word abortion. And they certainly don't like the prefix anti. We don't like to be told you can't do this or you can't do that. So whatever the case, that's the mess we're in right now. So let's look at some of the pro-abortion, pro-choice arguments. And the first one I want to look at is that abortion is a woman's legal right. So the argument that abortion is a woman's legal right. What did somebody say? This was actually supposed to be an intelligent person, probably graduated from an Ivy League school. Most of the pundits we see Fox News, let alone CNN and ABC. They're mostly Ivy League grads. They're supposed to be smart. And this one lady said about abortion, debating abortion, get used to it. It's the law of the land. The Supreme Court has decided. And so it was like, it was as if there's no higher authority than the Supreme Court. We Christians believe in God. And it was like, she believes whatever the Supreme Court says, that's the way it goes. Well, my question for her would be, the day before, was it January 22nd, 1973? The day before Roe v. Wade's Supreme Court decision, does that mean she was pro-life? because the Supreme Court hadn't ruled on it yet. So this idea that once the Supreme Court rules, that's just the way it is. Listen, we wouldn't bring anything to the Supreme Court if we didn't think that the Supreme Court could change its view on something at some time anyway. Of course, we Christians believe in a higher authority than that, but we'll talk about that. Let's list these first. Secondly, Self-consciousness is necessary to being human. This is now switched. Now they admit that even the unborn baby, if it isn't self-conscious, if it isn't conscious of its own existence, it's still a human being. So now they're saying, is self-consciousness necessary to being a person. And they would say, yes, it is. And since the baby is not conscious of its own existence, it doesn't have a right to life. We're going to see Peter Singer uses that argument. Here's a real outdated argument. Embryo It's just an extension of the mother. Legalized abortion saves lives. A real big pro-abortion argument. Legalized abortions prevent child abuse of unwanted children. Prevents child abuse of unwanted children. Here's a disgusting one. Deformed babies should be aborted. Anybody know? Probably the most famous unhealthy baby that the doctors strongly advised the mother to abort a very unhealthy, sickly baby. Tim Tebow? Tim Tebow, yeah. I think the baby got healthy, but even if he didn't, Tim Tebow would be the first to say, if he came into this world being unhealthy or deformed, so be it. God still has a purpose for him. And that is the right to privacy. So a woman has the right to do with her body what she chooses. Abortion must be allowed in cases of rape and incest. And that abortion is very close to this one. So I'll just group it with this one. Abortion is a woman's legal right. And it's strictly a woman's rights issue. Now with that recent Supreme Court decision upholding some lower federal court that said that if you're a pharmacist, you have to be willing to provide contraceptives. And some of the contraceptives prevent birth by after conception. But let's say they're Roman Catholic and they don't believe in contraception at all. And so the Supreme Court said, no, if you start your own pharmacy, start your own business, you got a degree, doctorate degree in pharmacy, you start your own pharmacy, you're going to have to sell, according to the Supreme Court. Now the way it's, I think the way it applies here in Washington State, is if you don't want to sign the prescription or if you don't want to actually conduct a sale, that's fine, but somebody in your pharmacy has to. So it's kind of like, you know, whatever happened to private business? So all of a sudden a Christian who had a private business It's like you belong to the state, and the state has deemed that this is a part of a woman's reproductive rights. But that's the whole way that this has been celebrated. This is a great victory for a woman's reproductive rights. So they acted like this was all about This is all about a woman's legal right to do what her body chooses. It's strictly a woman's rights issue. Rush Limbaugh, I'm not even a big Rush Limbaugh fan, but he's the conservative talk show host, and for decades he's been referring to some radical woman's livers as feminazis. And he explained that once. He said a feminazi is not a feminist, is not just somebody who's for women's rights, but a feminazi is the most radical of women's livers, those who consider every aborted baby without the consent of the father as a victory for the women's rights movement. and I was shocked to hear that like 20 years ago. I didn't realize that there were, you know, there are women's livers that just want women to be treated equally with men in certain areas and stuff, you know, equal pay, free court, or whatever. Which, by the way, Hillary Clinton is fighting for that, you know, equal pay for equal work. You're in violation of the federal law. It's already on the books. She's campaigning, promising to deliver something that was already delivered, what, over a decade ago? And the only disparity between the pay that a woman receives and the pay that a man receives for the same job is that apparently ladies don't try to go over promotions quite as often as the guys do. Ladies take off when they get pregnant. And sometimes when the kids are sick, the lady tends to volunteer to stay home rather than the husband. And so that's just the way it is. The lady has the same job as the man and gets to stay home. equal pay for equal work, but it turns out she's not putting in for the promotions as much as the guys are, and she's taking off more than the guys are, and not spending as much time on that career as the guys are, and that's just her choice. What does Hillary Clinton want to do? Force the ladies to work longer than they want? But as long as you can frame the debate in the way that you want, you can go a long way to making your side look right. So let's take a look at these. So abortion is a woman's legal right, and we'll add to it strictly a woman's rights issue. But that first way of spelling it, abortion is a woman's legal right, it's kind of like, look, the Supreme Court has ruled it's the law of the land, get used to it. Well, the Supreme Court has had numerous decisions which were later on overturned, and as we look back in history, we consider those decisions in the past as being wrong. Dred Scott's Supreme Court decision, slavery was allowed, 1857 was before the Civil War. Blacks were not considered U.S. citizens, denied the full humanity of blacks. Now, we'll say this though, too. We get so much revisionist history. Blacks were declared, in Southern states, blacks were declared to be, was it three-fifths of a vote? Three-fifths compromised. Okay, three-fifths compromised. Okay, now, That sounds horrible when you have one human being, a black, being considered only 60% not of the human, but of a kind of a person that needs to be represented. But you have to understand the pro-slavery South This is not, this is what CNN, I'm giving you this for free, this is not what CNN is telling you, okay? Pro-slavery South wanted the blacks to count, each black to count as one person who needed to be represented. The anti-slavery North wanted the blacks in the South to count as zero. Frederick Douglass agreed with these guys. He thought three-fifths was too much. This was not about the humanity of the blacks. What it was was a Southern representative. The Senate, you only get two members from each state. So that doesn't even come into play here. But the House of Representatives, it's all dependent upon how many persons in your district. So these blacks weren't even allowed to vote. But if you counted all the blacks, it gave the southern states more representatives, and it made it less likely that slavery would be abolished through legislation, through Congress. So Frederick Douglass, who was a former black slave, he was arguing that they should not be counted at all, they're not allowed to vote, you're not really representing them, you're enslaving them. And if we count them as a vote, you're going to get more representatives. So the compromise still enabled them to get more representatives than the North wanted them to have, but not as many as they could have had. So in other words, by counting them as zero, we would have been at least a step closer to abolishing slavery without having to go to war. And so we present things black and white, we just twist it, we turn it around, and so just keep in mind that we're not getting a true scoop on that, and the list goes on and on there, but whatever the case, if the Supreme Court could be wrong in the past, it could be wrong now. Just because the Supreme Court ruled does not mean the issue is over. In fact, that's one of the big debates about this coming election, whoever gets elected is probably going to be able to replace a couple, if not more, Supreme Court justices. Okay, then the, well we can take it as a woman's, strictly a woman's right issue, but what about the unborn's right? About half of the unborn babies are women, in fact it's more than half. We're starting to find, we're coming up with, I think, legislation and court rulings trying to prevent people from doing sex selection. There are some people who say, we want to have a little girl. We want to have one child, we want to have a little girl. But apparently there's more parents who say, we want to have one child, we want it to be a boy. As a big problem for China, that's why China dropped this one child for family policy. Now it's two children for family. One of the big problems was if you're poorer in China, your only hope at getting a retirement is having a son who outlives you, who can take care of you. And so I believe it was at the rate, I think China right now is about 1.2 males to every female. It's amazing how balanced God has it. If you don't believe in God, I guess you have to say, it's amazing how well designed and balanced evolution randomly got it. But 1.2 to 1 doesn't sound that bad. but let's face it guys, you know, some of us aren't the best looking guys in the world, but there's usually a lady out there we can convince to marry us and once she says I do, she's stuck with us. But when all of a sudden there's 1.2 males to every one female, now it becomes just that much harder. I mean, if you just keep trying to keep going down that path, you could actually make a case for going to war just to steal brides. By the way, if the Chinese army makes up a significant portion of the kings of the east, and the battle armageddon, there's going to be a lot of sexually frustrated males. And in ancient times, it was not uncommon for when the victor gets the spoils, that meant raping the woman of some of these pagan nations. But these guys might end up being out of pure sexual frustration. We're throwing out a balance that God built into nature, and we're going to suffer the consequences of that. But over half of the babies that are being aborted are women. What about the unborn woman's rights? And the abortion does not further the cause of a woman's rights. You have a man and a woman get together and have sexual relations. This is how babies are made. Yet the woman alone goes to the abortion clinic. Believe me, I've done enough protesting outside of abortion clinics to know very rarely do I ever see a guy. A guy might drop off a lady. and then stay in the car. Guys don't have a say. What? You don't have a say whatsoever. Yeah, that's another... We can't assume that this is just a bunch of guys. Yeah, yeah, that's true there, that the guys definitely don't have a say. There have been guys who've actually tried to take it to court to save the life of their baby. But basically what I'm getting at here is if this is a woman's rights issue, there are an awful lot of teenage gals I could probably, I wouldn't, but I could probably name a dozen of young ladies that my wife and I have had to counsel, who when they got pregnant in their teens, their boyfriend's basic response and the parents of the boyfriend was, you know, abort the baby, I'm going to leave you if you don't abort the baby. Sometimes the promise of getting married if you abort the baby, things of that sort. Whatever the case, abortion does not further the cause of women's rights. Now it does further the cause of the feminazis, the ladies who want to attack men at every cost. By the way, what country was it? Did you tell me that? I don't know if it was Sweden. There's a European country that since the man doesn't have any say whether the baby could be aborted or not, they give him like something like six, they wanted to pass a law, it didn't get passed though, where the guy would have like six months to decide if he would want the baby aborted. That was actually proposed in some states here. In some states here, wow. It was shot down because Well, only women should have the right to decide whether or not they want to murder someone. Yeah, and the thing is too, if the guy decided he wanted the baby aborted, the lady could still say no, I'm going to bring the baby to term, but then the guy would lose all parental, would be removed of all parental obligations. But whatever the case, abortion is not a big step forward for women's rights. And so abortion frees the man to exploit the woman without facing responsibility for his actions. Blake did mention, though, there are also cases where a guy wants the baby, and he has no say in the process. And I'm telling you, where you'll see this, if you remember, there was a protest outside an abortion clinic, peaceful protest, by a Christian pastor and people from the churches out there and they had a formaldehyde jar the corpse of a Aborted fetus and I Know what they were trying to do. I'm not sure if I would have done that myself but you know People do need to be reminded what we're doing here. But whatever the case, the footage from CNN, this was in probably the early 1990s, you just had these ladies just screaming, they looked like they were in a demonic rage, screaming at the protesters, and then one of them just slapped the jar and knocked it to the ground and it cracked. And the first question that the female CNN reporter asked the pastor was, don't you think that what you're doing borders on terrorism? And he just pulled back and closed his eyes and just shook his head like he just could not believe it. But it's Isaiah 520, what are those who call evil good and good evil, to where all of a sudden, protesting in defense of the lives, innocent lives of unborn babies is tantamount to terrorism and screaming like a bunch of demon-possessed people and slapping the formaldehyde jar with the baby's body into the ground, I guess that's just perfectly normal. Okay, then self-consciousness necessary to be in human response. People aren't self-conscious during dreamless sleep, comas. Some would say the first year and a half of life. I question that. There is a point where the baby reaches object permanence, something like that, where if you If you held up, you know, some toy or something and the kid's trying to grab it, a little baby, and then you put a sheet of paper in front of it, they totally lose interest and go somewhere else. Then there's a certain age, right about 18 months, where you're doing that and you put the piece of paper there and they grab the piece of paper and move it out of the way. And so there's a point in time when they stop being an idealist and they realize just because I don't observe it doesn't mean it's not there. So they realize objects don't just appear and disappear and stuff like that. But I think my grandson was way earlier than that. was, I didn't even think, before his first year, so I don't know how many kids they tested in the psychology textbook, but whatever the case, supposedly during the first year and a half, the kids aren't fully conscious of their existence. To me, babies cry because they're conscious of their existence, you know? And if you always give them what they want when they're crying for it, then you're teaching them, all I gotta do is cry and you'll give me what I want. But whatever the case, now that it's been established, and we'll talk about that when we get to the medical arguments against abortion, now that it's been established that the baby is a human being from the moment of conception, beings that reproduce sexually When the, at the moment of conception, when the egg fertilizes, when the sperm fertilizes the egg, you have a new being. If the parents are human, you have a new human being. Okay? It's, that's where babies come from. The story that we heard when we were little, that wasn't true. Okay? So, write that down. Make sure you get that in your notes. There you go. And, but, But now this argument is being used, self-consciousness is necessary to being a person. And we're going to see in the writings of Peter Singer, Peter Singer acknowledges that Christians and conservatives are correct, human life starts at the moment of conception, there is no debate about that medically, philosophically, from the moment of conception. There's no magic wand, nothing special happens. It's just basically growth. And he says, Singer even says, it doesn't matter whether the baby's in the womb or outside the womb, a change of location doesn't make a non-human a human. So it's human from the moment of conception. He actually doesn't realize it. He actually agrees with the Gospel of Luke on that. I think it's brephos, the Greek word for infant. It's the same word whether the infant is in the womb, the child in the womb, or after the child is born. So the only thing that changes is the location. So now what they're doing is they're saying, well, because they don't believe in God, There's no basis anymore for human life being sacred, so now it's all about personhood. Do they have, does an unborn baby have the level of self-consciousness necessary for us to consider it a person? So the humanity of the baby is no longer in question in scholarly circles. We might have to educate our next door neighbors, You might have to educate a young teenage girl who's being lied to by our culture and our media, but you're not going to get the world's leading philosophers or genetic experts arguing that an unborn baby is not human. But now the argument is going to be on do you have to have a certain level of self-consciousness necessary to be a human, to be a person. I will say this, I agree with Peter saying it. You take God out of the picture and wherever you draw the line between personhood and non-personhood, persons having the right to life, non-persons not having the right to life wherever you draw that line is automatically going to be arbitrary and it's going to be a pragmatic practical decision if you take God out of the equation God's in the equation God vested in us worth So that just by being human, human life is sacred. You take God out of the picture and I think anything goes. And I think Peter Singer, we're going to see some really interesting stuff with Peter Singer. Okay, the idea that the embryo is just an extension of the mother. We know that that's not true. The embryos have their own sex from the moment of conception. We might not be able to detect what it is, but if we were able to take the embryo out, we could find from the genetic code and things of that sort. The full genetic code is there from the moment of conception. It's a distinct genetic code from the mother, so it's not part of the mother's tissue. As time passes, the embryo becomes less dependent on their mother. But the embryo is not an extension of the mother. You're going to see a lot of these arguments used, outdated, refuted arguments, because people don't care about truth anymore. So if they think you're uninformed enough, they might bring up some of these arguments. Or they might bring up some of these arguments because they're that uninformed. OK, legalized abortion saves lives. Well, first off, the first thing we've got to understand is that every successful abortion kills at least one child. In other words, having twins or triplets and it kills two or three. But the idea, if we're in the business of saving lives, we're not going to be pro-abortion. Now, these would say, look, illegal abortions have killed thousands of women. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who was a former pro-abortion leader and an atheist, he admitted the statistics were exaggerated, that there were only 45 deaths in 1973, according to the US Bureau of Vital Statistics. And I don't even think he means 45 deaths in that year, only 45 deaths that they had known of, that they were able to document before abortion was legalized. Only one out of 10,000 mothers died giving birth But every successful abortion kills at least one child, and abortions often injure and kill the mother. The rate is higher than the rate of mothers just giving birth. But believe me, as far as, you know, when you really look into these statistics, if you want to check it out, I have a book listed earlier in this Pro-life answers to pro-choice arguments by Randy Alcorn. He gives some really good statistics there and all, but cases of depression, suicide, cancer, The list goes on and on of a fact that there used to be an organization called WIVA, Women Exploited by Abortion. That's not up to date. What's that? You got ran a poll about 9 out of 10 women that have abortions say that they feel a feeling of relief after killing their child. Yeah, I can look. But I'd be willing to contest that. We're looking at the long term. We're not talking if a lady has an abortion today and she's depressed tomorrow, the less possible. We're talking about counseling the ladies 20 years after they've had an abortion. What an awful lot of ladies are counseled to do is to actually name each child that she aborted. For some reason it gives the ladies some sense of, my baby at least had a name, and stuff like that. But the suicide rate of ladies who had abortions were high. Cervical cancer, ladies who've had hysterectomies, It's off the charts, the percentages with abortion. What we've got to understand is that abortion is really probably not much more sanitary than Nazi clinics. where they were exterminating deformed people. I mean, it's a multi-billion dollar business. I was not surprised, and I don't think anybody should have been surprised, when some abortion clinics were selling baby body parts. And then even there's some evidence that was uncovered that sometimes you try to keep the baby alive until you harvest the body part. So harvesting the body part probably would end up killing them, because then that body part, that organ is much fresher. And so there's a lot of money to be made in that. This is what Bernard Atkinson, now Bernard Atkinson was an atheist, he was the one who came up with the silent scream, where you could see at the point of aborting a child through a certain method, that the baby would look like it was screaming. And now we've gone, their technology has gone much further than that, to where we can see even clearer, but that caused them to be an anti-abortionist, a pro-lifer, yet he was still an atheist. I can remember him being interviewed on shows against abortion and he didn't even like sitting down next to Jerry Falwell. And Jerry Falwell always asking him, have you considered the Lord? I said, no, I'm an agnostic and blah, blah, blah. Eventually, though, he did befriend Chuck Colson and eventually trusted in He became a Christian. It's like Chuck Colson said, I wish he became a Baptist, but he got baptized as a Roman Catholic. But that connection between belief in God and the sanctity of human life is a real connection. And you can have atheists who or pro-life, there are some, but that's very inconsistent with their atheistic, evolutionary, survival of the fittest ideology. So the idea of legalized abortion saves lives. By the way, and I'm going to close this lecture with this point, too, on this. back alley abortions. That expression really makes... There are some people that are pro-abortion just because of that expression, back alley abortion. They don't want the back alley abortion anymore. Well, we now found out what the expression, where the back alley abortions came from. It wasn't a lady going into an alleyway and some unsanitary, unclean guy pulls out a hanger and for $50 performs an abortion right in the alleyway. That's what they want you to think it is. What it was, was there were doctors who made a lot of money performing abortions before it was legal. And so what they would do is they say, don't come in through the front door. Wait till right after closing hours tonight and come in through the back alley. I'll open up My doctor's office from the back door so that nobody sees you come in perform the abortion You can pay me under the table and then leave through the alleyway so so they like making this sound like there are tens of thousands of ladies before rovers is waiting in back alleys with having these horrible things done to them to have abortions when in reality it was just unethical doctors trying to make some decent money on the side and they didn't want to get caught. So let's take a break now until about 16 after and then we'll pick it up from there.