A Response to “Beware of ‘Pro-Life’ Politicians”

25 06 2008

Dr. Robert O. Uppgaard wrote an opinion piece in PineandLakes.com that cautioned us to be wary of politicians who say they are pro-life but then want to de-fund programs that “improve life”.

They say government should stay out of our lives, but want to force women to carry a clump of dividing cells to term, regardless if they can care for a child without abuse or neglect.

When the fetal alcohol, meth and crack babies reach school age, the politicians can then blame the public schools for failing to teach advanced algebra to the brain damaged children under No Child Left Behind.

Where to begin? First, Uppgaard uses the classic tactic of referring to a living human as a “clump of dividing cells”. This is just his way of de-humanizing the baby in order to rationalize the decidedly inhumane treatment that he advocates using on it.

Then he uses the phrase “regardless if they can care for a child without abuse or neglect”. Only his prior statement of de-humanization allows him to follow with this phrase. Otherwise, he would have to logically support killing already-born children who happen to be the victims of abuse or neglect. I dare say (although don’t guarantee) that Dr. Uppgaard would not support that.

Then he refers to crack and meth babies. I suppose that these are the babies he wishes would have been aborted. Yes, these babies are brought into the world at a disadvantage not of their making, but there are plenty of loving families who would be more than willing to provide care for them. Dr. Uppgaard only sees them as a burden on society because (I assume) he sees the government as the only institution that can provide care for them. And since we, the public, pay for the government programs, we are the ones who are burdened.

The rest of his opinion piece is about economics of big government and higher taxes. I just wanted to challenge his assertions relating to abortion.

Advertisements