| 
|
|
|
Described as a modern Holocaust, abortion world-wide has reached such proportians that it beggars belief.
This page is dedicated to those nameless millions..... |
| In Memorium |
|
In 2004 (figures for England & Wales only) the total number of unborn children who were killed in the womb was 185,400 compared with 181,600 in 2003, a rise of 2.1% [Dept of Health]. This figure rises to 194,200 if you add in abortions carried out on non-residents. The age-standardised abortion rate was 17.8 per 1,000 resident women aged 15-44. The abortion rate was highest, at 31.9 per 1000, for women in the 18-19 and 20-24 age groups. There have now been some 4.9 million abortions on women in England and Wales between 1968 - when it was legalised - and 2004. All this despite, or perhaps because of, freely available contraceptives. Indeed, research is now showing that, rather than reduce unwanted teenage pregnancies, the wide availability of contraceptives is actually increasing the figures. Dr. David Paton, of Nottingham University Business School, has studied the figures from 1988 and states, "My research casts doubts on current Government policy. We have had a massive expansion in family planning services for young people, yet there is no evidence that this has reduced either under-age pregnancies or abortion rates. Although family planning may make sexually active teenagers less likely to get pregnant, it seems that it also encourages others to start having sex".
Nor do they include the embryos created and then discarded under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) have released figures (to March 1998) showing that 763,499 embryos (i.e. human beings) have been created, but that only 36,317 were born alive. This means that 727,182 were 'flushed down the pan'. The first UK statistics for 1998 show a 3.8% rise in abortion levels, hardly surprising when such organisations as the Marie Stopes Clinic offer 15 minutes, "lunch-time" abortions. Recently, in the UK, a cross-party group of Members of Parliament, and Peers, led by Baroness Gould, supported the launch of a new campaign to change the law on abortion. The 'Voice For Choice Campaign' wants:
In March 2000, The Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists issued new guidelines which directed doctors that they, 'must respect of woman's right to choose', and that abortion, 'is a basic health care need'. In October 2000, Ann Furedi of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, speaking at a conference on abortion law, stated, "It may be time to understand that, for women, abortion is an essential method of family planning and accept it as such". God save us from ever believing this! However the British Government believe it .... In December 2000, the UK Government, in a blinding bit of parliamentary quick-stepping, made the 'morning-after' pill available over the counter. Avoiding both the Green and White paper stages of normal parlimentary democratic procedure, it simply went ahead and did it following secret trials in Manchester. monitored by sympathetic MPs. Make no mistake, this is not a contraceptive pill, but an abortificant. It works by flooding the women's body with very high levels of progesterone, causing the womb to shed its lining thus preventing embryonic implantation. The embryo dies. Putting it bluntly, the 'morning after' pill causes abortion in the womb. It is clear that the baby killers are still on the prowl! In the United States of America the situation is even more serious. The Rev. Benjamin E. Sheldon (Director, National Pro-Life Religious Council) writes, "It doesn't require much imagination to recognize that we are living in a time when "holy innocents" are being slaughtered every day here in our own United States of America. With over 4,000 unborn babies being aborted daily, by means just as cruel and calculated as Herod ever dreamed of, is it not reasonable to call every day in the U.S. "Holy Innocents Day?" (taken from "Holy Innocents" of Today? by Rev. Sheldon). Discover the amazing development of the baby in the womb The situation in other countries is equally appalling, and in China the situation can barely be described. Abortion thrives on fear and ignorance. The abortionists consistantly refuse to acknowledge the basic genetic truth that a fertilised human egg is human. What else could it be? Why do they do this? Is it hatred of all things human? But these people are often Doctors pledged to preserve life. Remember the Hippocratic Oath? "I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgement, but never with a view to injure and wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly, I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion." Is it that the abandonment of a basic Christian ethic, and adoption of a humanist standpoint, has so distorted their perception and thought processes that they no longer see the evil of their deeds? Very likely. Or is it that there is a vast financial bounty in the destruction of the unborn? This is also a likely motivation for many. How has this happened? In the UK the abortion laws were forever altered by the introduction of the Abortion Act of 1967. This most evil piece of legislation, sponsored by the British Member of Parliament, David Steele MP (now Lord Steele, who says crime doesn't pay?) laid open the floodgates to what is now effectively, abortion on demand. But there was a lot more going on in the 60's. The wholesale abandonment of the Judeo-Christian ethic, which had steered the UK for generations, can be seen to have been the catalyst for enormous social change. For instance, changes regarding homosexual practise; censorship; education; the role of the state. The adoption of this humanistic philosophy was relentlessly applied to every area of British society. As a result practises which had previously lent towards one set of ethics, now lent towards another, more 'liberal', 'enlightened' set. Human life was now seen as merely a random felicitous collection of compatible chemicals and electromagnetic stimuli following the course of evolutionary process. Suddenly the very 'humanness' of the human race was pushed to one side. If we were only animals, nothing more than chemical blobs ("sacks of water", as an alien entity on Star Trek once described its human contacts), and this life was all there was, with no eternal accounting for how we lived, then it didn't matter what we did. Anything was acceptable within the framework of what was acceptable to others around you. Morality became situational rather than absolute and the medical profession, largely, fell into the situational ethic morass, out of which abyss rose the beast of abortion. One of the arguments constantly put forwards by abortionist, is that every abortion is necessary and a woman's right. This view was recently upheld by a UK Court of Appeal considering whether a pregnant woman could be forced to have a Caesarean even if the baby's life was a stake. Their Lordships ruled as follows: A mother's right to chose how she is treated outweighs the rights of her unborn child.
But just consider this case of the 19 year old girl who had 2 abortions. The first was because the father was too short, and the second was because she was afraid the baby might inherit the father's slanty eyes. Her GP refused her a 3rd abortion, requested because the father's mouth was too big. (Daily Mail 1st June 1998)
Does this sound like a legitimate reason to destroy two babies?
Perhaps a more legitimate reason for the abortions would be that the babies may have inherited their mothers intelligence and moral strength. If you find the current UK abortion situation unacceptable, and want to know more in-depth news and facts, you can contact:
For other Pro-Life resources contact:
If you need help and counselling after having an abortion, then 'British Victims of Abortion' (Charity Reg No. 326138) can be reached on:
And finally, here's a quote which summarises much of modern society's view on the sanctitiy of life and importance of sexual fidelity. It comes from a female American reporter who has admitted she was ready to be 'ravished' aboard the presidential jet. Nina Burleigh, commenting on the 'Clinton effect', said, "(I) would have been happy to commit a sex act with him, just to thank him for keeping abortion legal". (Daily Mail 8th July 98). Just about says it all really doesn't it? |
|
||
| 
| 
|
|
|
||
All original material ©2000 The Curious? Web Site
These figures do not include the untold thousands of terminations caused by mechanical and chemical devices such as, "emergency contraceptives", which in fact do not prevent new life beginning, but destroy a life already begun.