dignitas vitae - News

What The Pro-Life Movement Misses

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 12:48:00 +0000

Something I always thought was the ultimate goal of the pro-life movement was to abolish abortion, meaning criminalizing abortion as it is murder, which all who are against abortion state. But the Holy Spirit has convicted me and shown me something crucial that is missing from the mainstream pro-life movement: treating the crime of murdering an innocent human being in the womb as what it is, a crime. I believe this is a fundamental puzzle piece that the movement misses, which is making the fight against abortion harder.

If it is murder, it is a crime.

What do we do with this?

73 million induced abortions occur worldwide each year, hence around 200,000 abortions per day.

Exodus 23 — ‘’ do not put an innocent or honest person to death’’

‘’We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.’’
— Elizabeth Cady Stanton, an abolitionist

I’m aware that this is a controversial topic in the pro-life movement, but I believe with my heart that the enemy, the father of lies and destroyer of life, has created this quarrel on purpose.

I assume that the majority of my readers will start reading this by disagreeing with me, but we must encourage dialogue with each other. I hope both sides of the conversation will always do that. It is so tempting for us to go into defensive mode, and that most likely won’t produce any fruit.

DO WE WANT TO SEE THE TOTAL END OF ABORTION OR NOT?

I have heard the chants about wanting equal justice under the law for all humans, beginning in the womb; however, the same individuals reject any abolition bill of abortion proposed. This breaks the foundation of being anti-abortion and does not cut to the very root of the problem. (Yes, you can say you are pro-life and be an abolitionist of abortion, but I’m referring to the pro-life movement with my argument.)

There have been compromises.

From the pro-life establishment movement.

Recently, President Donald Trump has called for Republicans to be more flexible with the Hyde deal, which prevents money from being used to nurture the abortion industry. Rightly, the pro-life movement has condemned this and is trying to take action to prevent this. The president of the United States and his administration have approved a cheaper version of the abortion pill and called for lower costs for IVF. And it was discovered that the Trump administration began secretly partially funding Planned Parenthood, stepping down from their previous positions on the matter.

The pro-life movement is against this because it is compromising. But when there has been a push in the United States to immediately end all abortions, it has, with great effort, killed the bills that promoted it. That’s also a compromise.

In April 2022, the Abolition of Abortion in Louisiana Act passed through the Louisiana House Criminal Justice Committee by a 7–2 vote. But the vast majority of the pro-life leaders actively oppose legislation to abolish abortion. 76 pro-life groups signed an open letter that killed the Abolition of Abortion in Louisiana Act. Or when National Right to Life VP Tony Lauinger was behind legislation to add rape and incest exceptions for abortion into Oklahoma State law. Every year, since 2016, they have killed the bill to abolish abortion at the Oklahoma Capitol.

‘’Turning women who have abortions into criminals is not the way… We ask you to continue to act with love and compassion toward abortion-vulnerable women. We urge you to reject any measure that seeks to criminalize women who have abortions.”

And it is in Oklahoma’s statutes: ‘’No criminal penalty may be assessed against the pregnant woman upon whom the abortion is performed… 63 O.S. § 1–750(B)

Abortion is the act of taking an innocent life in the womb intentionally. Within the movement, it is correctly told countless times. But not fully treated as such. It is a slippery slope.

We should not regulate abortion, but abolish it. That’s how we can also make abortion unthinkable. That’s how slavery ended, not just through law, but in the hearts of the people in countries like the United States of America and Great Britain. It was not through regulation.

THE GOSPEL & JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM

Another difference between the mainstream movement against abortion and the abolitionists is the Gospel. One does not centralize it, other does. As Christians, what can truly solve the malign forces of the culture of death? The Gospel of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. The only One who can restore, forgive, and redeem the wounds of this tragedy for the babies, mothers, and fathers. We cannot leave Christ out of the fight. We must bring the light, hope, and solution into this. And if you are a Christian, you know the Truth; it is our duty to proclaim it.

It is important to remember, as Christians, that our Lord is a just God. He is the judge. Yes, merciful, yes, forgiving, but also just. The way He saved us from eternal death was through a just measure. We must establish justice, too. ‘’Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven…’’

Being an abolitionist on abortion includes calling for parents involved in abortion, the ones working in the industry, to repentance and not condemn their hearts. And our Churches must be safe havens for families. We all must step up.

And I understand that this position might appear superficially as unmerciful and uncompassionate, but God also wants us to be righteous and just. And there can be, and should be, mercy while establishing justice at the same time.

‘’Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue, and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.’’ — Luke 11:42

But we must also be just fully, not partially. Nitpicking when to practice full justice isn’t real justice.

Proverbs 24 — o show partiality in judging is not good:
Whoever says to the guilty, “You are innocent,”
will be cursed by peoples and denounced by nations.
But it will go well with those who convict the guilty,
and rich blessing will come on them.

And if one opposes this, that mothers should escape any legal consequences of abortion, one should be against it when mothers murder their children outside of the womb. But that is not rejected by the same individuals who reject the abolitionist movement of abortion. What changes? One baby is outside of the womb, the other one isn’t. Isn’t that the same argument that pro-abortionists make to justify the act of abortion?

Isaiah 1:16–17 — Wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds out of my sight;
stop doing wrong.
Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
plead the case of the widow

Last year, a father from Texas was charged with capital murder after he ordered abortion pills via mail and put them into the drink of the mother, and unfortunately, the baby died. Mason Herring told his wife, Catherine Herring, that her pregnancy “would ruin his plans and make him look like a jerk.” And the charges are just, because that is murder of a human being and his own child. He does not get a pass because he was the father of the child. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison, which, in my opinion, is not just in contrast with the severity of the crime! In the mother’s own words: “I do not believe that 180 days is justice for attempting to kill your child seven separate times,” Harris County District Court Judge Andrea Ball also gave him a 10-year probation.

And the arrest of the father was justly supported by the pro-life movement. But why, when the mother consciously chooses to order the abortion pills and takes them, killing the child, why does the ethical aspect of it change all of a sudden?

Abolitionist activist James Silberman met with the office of Ohio State Senator Andrew Brenner in April 2019. James explained to Brenner’s aide the importance of introducing and passing a bill that nullifies Roe and treats abortion like murder from the moment of conception. At the end of James’ presentation, Brenner’s aide said, “This was very interesting, but it’s Senator Brenner’s personal religious conviction that life begins at a heartbeat.” He concluded with this statement from the Heartbeat Bill, which had just passed in Ohio a few months earlier.

(These informations are found on the Abolitionists Rising Website)

Abolitionists Rising’s T. Russell Hunter was ministering outside an abortion facility in Norman, OK, in 2016. A young mother whom Russell was pleading with not to have the abortion told him, “It’s okay. My baby won’t even feel any pain.” She has likely concluded this position from the Pro-Life Movement and the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which highlights pain as the reason abortion should be illegal. But we know this is incorrect, but it is bringing confusion and not the whole truth on the matter. But this is and will cost more lives if we continue this way.

In Kansas, a mother, Melinda Spencer, was charged with first-degree fetal (‘little human’ in Latin) homicide using an abortion pill and burying the baby in a shallow grave near her home. Melinda admitted this on December 31st:

“[Spencer] reported to United Clinics that she aborted her own baby within the last few days with medicine that she ordered off the internet. She told them that she buried the remains on the property. Kentucky State Police was then contacted.”
“She gave a description of the grave and a search warrant was obtained. During a search of the property a shallow grave was located where [she] said it would be. Located in this shallow grave was a white plastic grocery bag. Inside that grocery bag was a light bulb box wrapped in Christmas Wrapping Paper. Inside the box was a white rag with a small male corpse wrapped up inside it. The Wolf County Coroner took the corpse into his possession. Autopsy has been scheduled.”

She was also charged with the abuse of a corpse and tampering with physical evidence. Both are Class D felonies. But recently, this charge was dropped.

Why? Commonwealth’s Attorney Miranda King, who handles cases in Breathitt, Powell, and Wolfe counties, cited a Kentucky statute that ensures women are not prosecuted regarding the deaths of their preborn children.

Police spoke with her at Clark Regional Medical Center, where she admitted to having taken the abortion drugs off the internet. She said the baby (notice that she is aware that it was a human being inside her womb) was not her boyfriend’s, and she did not want him to find out she was pregnant with another man’s baby. She took the drugs on 12/26 and delivered the baby the next day. This is, in fact, a premeditated murder.

In South Korea, in 2024, a mother who aborted her baby in the 9th month, as her nurse told her multiple times that she would be murdering a baby, a human being, went with it with her doctor, who is charged with murder. It is also believed that the baby was born alive and left to die, as this has occurred in the West as well, the Korea Times reports:

‘’Judge Park Jeong-ho at the Seoul Central District Court issued arrest warrants on Saturday for the surgeon, identified only by his last name Shim, and the clinic’s head, surnamed Yoon, over their alleged roles in the death of a baby believed to have been born alive and then left to die through willful neglect.’’

The Korean Medical Association released a statement:

“A fetus at 36 weeks of pregnancy is a baby who could survive well if born, and terminating a pregnancy at this stage is tantamount to murder.”

The investigators “also found that hundreds of other pregnant women had undergone abortion procedures at the same clinic.”

The mother of the child also released a YouTube video ‘documenting’ her having aborted a 36-week-old baby…her baby. In South Korea, this crime would have led to a few years in prison, but it has been overturned in recent years.

For there not be any legal consequences for abortion is, in a sense, dehumanizing the baby in the womb. Because if we say not to apply the charges, we would, if an infant outside the womb were murdered, we are essentially stating there is something less human, as the full equal protection of all people doesn’t apply to them.

Romans 3:8 — Why not say — as some slanderously claim that we say — “Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!

Yes, abortion is not likely to be abolished overnight, but we ought consistently call for total and immediate abolition while working diligently to reduce the number of abortions by practicing moral suasion and assistance for as long as it takes, until total abolition is accomplished. But if in the very anti-abortion fight, leaders are opposing it and fighting not to pass the bill, we are delaying what we say we fight so badly for. We want abortion to end, because human beings are being murdered through it. The laws against murder should be applied equally to all people.

Criminalizing abortion is not about putting ‘’women in jail’’ but establishing justice when this crime occurs. The guilty is the abortionist. Be it the mother, the father, the doctors, or an outsider who forces the mother, etc.

We should reach out to mothers in difficulty and help them with compassion to choose life. We shouldn’t want to have mothers in such a situation anymore. Create more safe Havens, as a matter of fact, a first baby was put in a safe haven baby box in Texas just recently, in late December of 2025. Only in 2023 did lawmakers approve the use of newborn safety devices, often referred to as “baby boxes,” for anonymous surrender. The baby is healthy and will be put up for adoption, which in the United States alone is estimated to have around 2 million parents waiting on the adoption list.

Press enter or click to view image in full size

Photo from: KLBK Meteorologist Jacob Riley

If we are clear in law what abortion does, and hence starting to shape how we approach abortion itself, like today with slavery, it truly becomes unthinkable, and women won’t even desire to seek an abortion. Because they would know 100% that it is a human being, they wouldn’t be misinformed or gaslighted to believe it’s just a ‘’clump of cells.’’ We must love them both. We don’t want mothers and fathers to carry such a cross and grief. This can truly become unthinkable, but we need to all work together.

The real tragedy and problem is not that there wouldn’t be legal and ‘’safe’’ abortions, but that mothers would choose and even risk their lives to take the life of their child. That’s the brokenness, not the unavailability of abortion. And in my opinion, abortion clinics and mega industries (ex. Planned Parenthood) should be put on trial, not just defunded.

“When you have to be the person signing off on 500 bodies a week to be cremated with trash from hospitals, you understand that what you have been selling has never been freedom — not for the mother and not for the child,” said Mayra Rodriguez, a former Planned Parenthood staffer.
“What you have been selling, it’s pain and darkness, and it’s bloody. And it’s all about money.”

We can end this. And it will.

And let’s finance even more safe housing for mothers in danger or in great difficulty, safe havens, and pregnancy centers that truly help. Almost every mother who has aborted her child has regretted doing it. But never have I personally heard a mother who kept her child or gave her child away to adoption regretted that decision, despite all the hardships she might have gone through.

But will there still be someone who will illegally abort their baby? Unfortunately. But other horrendous crimes that are illegal and we morally reject still occur, but we don’t make them legal simply because there are people who break the law; rather, we bring them to trial. And what is extremely important is that the hearts of the majority of people continue to reject that crime. There will always be evil done, but as a society and as Christians, we must try to do our best to limit it as much as possible and take the right position on the matter.

IMMEDIATE IS THE WAY, NOT GRADUAL

Slavery is used as a comparison with abortion, even within the pro-life movement, with the point that in both cases there is this feeling of having a ‘’right’’ over the autonomy of the other; the slave, the unborn in the womb. But as mentioned before, how was this evil truly defeated after 400 years in the U.S., for example? Through abolitionists.

A slavery abolitionist, Elizabeth Heyrick, explains the following very well. It is lengthy, but important to ponder on:

“The slave holder knew very well that his prey would be secure, so long as the abolitionists could be cajoled into a demand for gradual instead of immediate abolition. He knew very well, that the contemplation of a gradual emancipation would beget a gradual indifference to emancipation itself. He knew very well, that even the wise and the good, may, by habit and familiarity, be brought to endure and tolerate almost anything.

Elizabeth Heyrick

He knew very well that the faithful delineation of the horrors of West Indian slavery, would produce such a general insurrection of sympathetic and indignant feeling; such abhorrence of the oppressor, such compassion for the oppressed, as must soon have been fatal to the whole system… Our example might have spread from kingdom to kingdom, from continent to continent, and the slave trade, and slavery, might by this time, have been abolished all the world over: ‘A sacrifice of a sweet savour,’ might have ascended to the Great Parent of the Universe, ‘His kingdom might have come, and his will (thus far) have been done on earth, as it is in Heaven.’

But this GRADUAL ABOLITION, has been the grand marplot of human virtue and happiness; the very masterpiece of satanic policy. By converting the cry for immediate, into gradual emancipation, the prince of slave holders, ‘transformed himself, with astonishing dexterity, into an angel of light,’ and thereby ‘deceived the very elect.’

He saw very clearly, that if public justice and humanity, especially, if Christian justice and humanity, could be brought to demand only a gradual extermination of the enormities of the slave system; if they could be brought to acquiesce, but for one year, or for one month, in the slavery of our African brother, in robbing him of all the rights of humanity, and degrading him to a level with the brutes; that then, they could imperceptibly be brought to acquiesce in all this for an unlimited duration….’’

Moses was also an abolitionist. Pharaoh offered him many deals, many compromises on his behalf. He offered to let some of the Hebrews go, he offered to let the Hebrews go for a certain amount of time, and offered to let all the Hebrews go free permanently, so long as they left their animals. But Moses replied, “Not a hoof shall be left behind” (Exodus 10:24–26).

image from ‘Abolitionists Rising’

Other abolitionists, such as William Wilberforce (who was in the movement to abolish the Atlantic slave trade and played a crucial role in the passage of the Slave Trade Act of 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833) and Abraham Lincoln’s speeches, are the same cries we should all be shouting.

William Wilberforce

In Leviticus 19:15, God commands Israel’s judges, “You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.”

Equal justice is the fulfillment of this principle that God commands us to live by.

Abraham Lincoln

The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, for instance, reads, ‘’nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This law prohibits any state from allowing crimes like homicide to be committed against preborn human beings, and further prohibits states from treating preborn children differently under the law, as Abolitionists Rising reminds us.

There can never be a compromise with the crime of murder. And abortion is included in that list. Elizabeth Heyrick, a British abolitionist of slavery, said:

‘’On this great question, the spirit of accommodation and conciliation has been a spirit of delusion. The abolitionists have lost, rather than gained ground by it; their cause has been weakened, instead of strengthened. The great interests of truth and justice are betrayed, rather than supported, by all softening, qualifying concessions. Every iota which is yielded of their rightful claims, impairs the conviction of their rectitude, and, consequently, weakens their success.’’

Compromising with evil, like slavery, does undermine the power that the anti-slavery stance is all about, for instance. Hence, making the abolition of an evil more difficult. And I’m unfortunately seeing this happen to some degree within the pro-life movement, as I have cited a few examples throughout this article.

Not merciful?

Something I come across when abolitionists discuss this matter with a pro-lifer who rejects the abolition of abortion, we are accused of not being merciful towards the mother, and especially if we are Christians, we are not obeying Christ by wanting to abolish abortion. I understand this point of view. I myself held it. I get it, it’s a hard pill to swallow in our times. But we tend to put our emotions in charge of morality nowadays. And THAT can become dangerous.

In justice, mercy is met. Our Lord Jesus Christ said to visit prisoners, and we know how many priests go to prison and those on death row to bring God’s mercy, love, hope, and salvation to these individuals. As Christians, we cannot reject the position of putting people who commit crimes in prisons, but we also bring hope to them.

One saying that criminals should face prison time does not mean that we are condemning them and shutting the door of Christ in their faces. But because we serve a just God as well. We also love the people who were victims of such crimes, such as murder, trafficking, rape, and being stolen from, etc. Their rights and dignity were violated, and consequences must be met. Sometimes it appears to me that compassion has become one-sided, and usually with the criminal, with the cases of Iryna Zarutska, Austin Metcalf, Luigi Mangione (who murdered Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare), Tyler Robinson (Charlie Kirk’s assassin), and, unfortunately, many more.

In California, for example, it is illegal to harass, harm, or collect sea turtles and their eggs (because they admit that a fertilized turtle egg is a living turtle, developing, but deny this scientific fact about human beings) under the Endangered Species Act (which I don’t personally oppose). Violating these laws can lead to severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment! But guess what is legal? Abortion is legal in California up to the point of fetal viability.

The state’s highest court recognized abortion rights under the California Constitution in 1969, four years before Roe. State law. In November 2022, Prop 1 passed, which explicitly added abortion and contraception rights to the state constitution!

What hypocrisy! We are ready to imprison the individual who harms turtle eggs, but find it immoral if it were to apply to human beings (our own species) in the womb.

If we stand with the position that abortion should not be criminalized, knowing it is taking the life of an innocent human being, holding the position that human life begins at conception, are we seriously considering that, for example, theft is a graver sin and crime to go to prison for, but murdering a child in the womb is not?

Mercy does not outweigh justice. We have to bring them both.

Amos 5:15 — Hate evil, love good;
maintain justice in the courts

Psalm 82:3: ‘’Provide justice for the needy and the fatherless (the unwanted baby is fatherless, we ought to protect); uphold the rights of the oppressed and the destitute.’’

How many times have I read and heard of countless powerful testimonies of murderers in prison who were transformed by Christ, born into a new life, even more zealous Christians than those out of prison? They met Christ, they were cleansed and redeemed, and they have changed hearts. They love God and their neighbour.

But not once, those in prison who follow Him, know Him, say that they did not deserve to be serving their sentences for the crimes they committed, but saw it rather as an instrument that can bring them to the only way there is, Christ. Thousands of prisoners are baptised yearly in all parts of the world. God is there. He can meet us in our darkest valley and save us.

Abortion is wrong because every human, at the moment of conception (which science confirms — 96% biologists affirm this), has been created in the image of God. Jesus came here to save us through the womb of a Virgin! It is an attack on Christ Himself. He did say whatever we do to the smallest of ours, we do to Him. And that goes also for the wrong we do to our neighbours.

THE GOSPEL IS NECESSARY FOR THE FIGHT AGAINST ABORTION

Another criticism I have of the mainstream pro-life movement is the fact that the Gospel is not at the center. We can truly defeat the culture of death by being with Christ and bringing complete healing to this wound in our culture. We have to abolish the desire for death in the hearts of people, not only through law. And doctors must be healers, not murderers. That can truly be healed through entering the only physician who can heal, Jesus. Our Saviour said firstly in His ministry to repent. That’s the message we must send too, as His followers.

A slavery abolitionist, William Lloyd Garrison, said very well, “My fanaticism is to make Christianity the enemy of all that is sinful.” That should be our focus also as Christians.

And the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear as day on the matter:

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person — among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life. [Cf. CDF, Donum vitae I, 1] [1703, 357]
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish. [Didache 2, 2: SCh 248, 148; cf. Ep. Barnabae 19, 5: PG 2, 777; Ad Diognetum 5, 6: PG 2, 1173; Tertullian, Apol. 9: PL 1, 319–320]

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes. [GS 51 § 3]

Then, how can we accomplish what we are fighting for in such secular societies? How to talk about this with a non-believer in Christ?

The answer is, first and foremost, faith. All is possible with God. Remember Abraham. Remember Gideon. Remember Moses. Remember David and Goliath. Remember Esther. Remember the Virgin Mary at the Annunciation. Remember Christ scourged, crucified, and resurrected.

Abraham Lincoln, who signed the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared the freedom of enslaved people in the Confederate states, on January 1, 1863, which proclamation was a significant step towards the eventual abolition of slavery in the United States, said when asked if God was on his side:

“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.”

Will it be even more challenging to confront these heavy atheistic cultures by bringing the Gospel to the center of our fight? Probably. But again, is anything too hard for our amazing God?

I would argue that it would strengthen our fight because putting God in the discussions will demonstrate why abortion is objectively wrong. There are secular, atheistic/agnostic pro-lifers, and that’s awesome.

But if you hold your atheistic beliefs and you are against abortion, rightly so, how do you truly know that it is objectively wrong? Science? Well, someone else could argue that the value of a human being relies on having our souls, not merely being physically a human being developing in the womb. Can we prove scientifically in a lab the exact moment when one receive his soul? What makes a human being so precious? They could insist that when brain waves and heartbeat are detected, that’s when the human soul comes. For instance, in Islam, it is believed that the human soul is breathed into the body at around 120 days from conception.

“Each one of you is constituted in the womb of the mother for forty days, and then he becomes a clot of thick blood for a similar period, and then a piece of flesh for a similar period.
Then Allah sends an angel who is ordered to write four things. He is ordered to write down his deeds, his livelihood, his (date of) death, and whether he will be blessed or wretched (in religion). Then the soul is breathed into him…” (Sahih al-Bukhari no: 3036).

And Imam Ibn Abidin states:

“The soul enters the foetus at 120 days (4 months), as established by the Hadith.” (Radd al-Muhtar ala Durr al-Mukhtar 1/202)

With this belief, it is easy to morally justify aborting a baby before the 4th month.

This is why the Bible is essential in the fight against the culture of death.

But there is a deeper conversation to be had, because being a human existence is more than our physicality. Our current culture is hyper-fixated on matter alone, echoing gnosticism.

Hence, the concern is that leaving God (especially the God of the Bible) out of the discussion makes it very tempting to fall into the pro-abortion position or be flexible about it. I have heard some ‘’pro-lifers’’ say that abortion should be permitted in the cases of rape and incest.

What makes us valuable at the moment of conception is the One who crafted us in our precious mother’s womb. Because of our purpose. Because God created us out of His love and goodness. That’s why we are good, because our Creator is goodness and love itself. That’s why being merely human is so precious. That’s why we ought to protect them, even when the baby looks just like a ‘clump of cells.’

Press enter or click to view image in full size

Lennart Nilsson’s photos were published in Life magazine (April 30, 1965)

That’s why we fight for the dignity of the embryos frozen because of IVF. Or those babies who fell victim to fetal research. (In a recent press release, the NIH announced the policy change. To ban “the NIH Intramural Research Program and all NIH-supported extramural research, including grants, cooperative agreements, other transaction awards, and research and development contracts.”)

— To read more, click here. I also wrote a detailed article on this topic; click here!)

Press enter or click to view image in full size

Photo by TING SHEN/AFP

But if you don’t believe in God, where is the moral foundation truly? It is actually harder to argue the value of being a human without God.

We must rely on God’s Word and not on worldly strategies.

Isaiah 10

‘’Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.
What will you do on the day of reckoning’’

CONCLUSION

(Graphic image below)

I’m an abortion abolitionist.

And I believe that every fighter against it should call themselves that, too, and join the movement and demand the abolition of abortion, not regulation. I pray and hope that you will seriously consider this in your heart if you disagree with me and the abolitionist movement altogether. It is a discussion we must have within the anti-abortion movement.

Lives relying on it. And we must keep going every day and keep praying for everyone involved in this tragedy.

The foot of a baby aborted at 16 weeks.

Sources:

https://abolitionistsrising.com/ (Their YouTube channel that I highly recommend. Many important discussions are worth listening to)

Catholic Abolitionists Website

https://www.fox4news.com/video/1655365

https://www.indy100.com/news/mason-herring-abortion-pills-texas

https://nrlc.org/nrlnewstoday/2025/06/south-korean-abortionist-charged-with-murder-after-allegedly-aborting-full-term-baby-who-was-born-alive-and-then-left-to-die/

The Open Letter from the 76 pro-life organizations

96% Biologists affirm that human life begins at conception

Islam and 120-day — when the human soul enters

Catechism Of The Catholic Church on Abortion

Abraham Lincoln’s ‘’House Divided’’ Speech (Abolition speech)

‘’Abolition Speech’’ by William Wilberforce

Zhoran Mamdani Won. Now What? And What Does It Mean For Life?

Mon, 10 Nov 2025 13:17:00 +0000

A New, but Worse NYC.

Zohran Mamdani will become the first Muslim mayor of New York City beginning on January 1st. Besides the policies that align with the communist ideology, and Mamdani's dedication to Islamize The Big Apple. The same city where 24 years ago, the Twin Towers were destroyed, with 2.977 victims dying as a result, including 2,606 at the World Trade Center, 125 at the Pentagon, and 246 on the four hijacked flights. It appears that New York forgot 9/11, their victims, and what the terrorist attack signified to the world. There have been young people on TikTok signifying that Osama Bin Laden's ''Letter to America'' was very 'valid' and 'justifiable.' Or going as far as suggesting that the Islamic terrorists were not behind the attack that shook Western civilization in the 21st century.

All of this has had a role in the fact that around 78% of Mamdani's voters were under 30 years old, and a high number of Muslim voters. The young generation in the West has seen the rise of sympathizing with communism, even terrorist organizations like Hamas, and has largely supported the murder of innocent babies, even up to birth, and in some cases, even after birth. Euthanasia has seen strong support by my generation as it appears to be a ''merciful'' act towards the sick, instead of alleviating their sufferings and being beside them and truly loving and caring for them. But the main attraction of Mamdani's voters has been the frozen rents, taxing the rich, and the free buses. The promises he made recall the same promises of Fidel Castro, Khomeini, and other communist leaders. And we know how under every communist leader in history has resulted for the people and the well-being of the country.

But there is always hope, where God's love radiates. God has changed many hearts, and there are many young people today choosing to fight for life and for truth. For Democracy and Western civilization. Do, however, pray for NYC.

It is reported that 1 million New Yorkers will leave the city, as the New York Times writes in this article. Around 765,000 people of the 8.4 million residents of New York City are preparing to leave, with about 9% sharing that they would “definitely” leave the city if Mamdani is elected the 111th mayor, according to the Daily Mail report, which cites a survey conducted by J.L. Partners. That would be equal to the population of Washington, DC., or Seattle fleeing the city. Among high earners, 7%, who earn over $250,000 a year, stated that they would definitely leave the city.

Mamdani's Priorities & Policies

Mamdani embraced gender ideology during his campaign, vowing to provide $65 million in tax funding for hormone therapy drugs and surgeries. President Donald Trump’s executive order wants to remove federal funding from health care providers that provide such drugs and surgeries to children. The new mayor also wants to create “an office of LGBTQIA+ affairs” and declare New York City a sanctuary for “LGBTQIA+” people. He also supported a bill to prohibit law enforcement from aiding out-of-state investigations into health care professionals who provide hormone therapy drugs and surgeries to minors.

The 34-year-old Mamdani's position in New York City won't be in favor for life. He has promised to double city tax funding for the New York Abortion Access Fund and the city’s Abortion Access Hub. The new mayor vows to shut down pro-life pregnancy centers in the city to “protect New Yorkers from” and accused them of spreading “false or deceptive information.” This refers to the only three pro-life medical pregnancy centers in all of New York City, which are run by CompassCare, a pro-life and Christian pregnancy center.

Mamdani's policies break without question the 1st, 5th, and 14th ammendemnt in the United States.

1st Amendment respects the freedom of religion and speech in the public square. Hence, pro-life people will struggle to freely speak on behalf of the voiceless preborn children and protect them through service.

5th Amendment affirms that no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. However, every abortion law and abortion itself violates this right.

The 14th Amendment ensures equal protection under the law for all persons. And again, every abortion violates this. It is scientifically proven that life begins at conception, with 96% of worldwide biologists affirming this fact, according to the National Institute of Health.

Mamdani prides himself on his policies that are in the best interest of the people of New York. But by supporting, for instance, abortion and the industry he vows to strengthen, Mamdani and his supporters ignore and will be complicit in the reality that abortion covers and nurtures the epidemic of sex trafficking in NYC, or the covering of sexual abuse in general. The fact that abortion increases a woman’s risk of breast cancer by even 44%, future preterm deliveries by 52%, and increases suicide for the women who have had abortions as high as 5x, does not appear to be the priority. But what appears to be the priority is money and power. In today's political climate and death culture, we live in, standing for life all the way and prioritizing Judeo-Christian values that built the West we have been privileged to live in, and everyone can benefit from, is not popular anymore.

We see this pattern happening with the current president of the United States of America, Donald Trump. He has made good progress for life by signing the ''Great Beautiful Bill'' and protecting minors from tans surgeries and hormones. However, the President and his administration have proposed to make IVF more affordable, instead of promoting RRM.

Or the biggest stain was when the Trump administration's FDA approved, in September of 2025, a cheaper abortion pill, a second generic version of mifepristone. This method of abortion starves the child to death. 60% of the abortions in the USA are due to abortion pills. Babies will die more with this new approval, mothers risk of dying as well, health issues, and water being polluted by this drug are a couple of horrific consequences of this pill.

Remember, if one has taken the pill, there is a chance to reverse it if done in time.

It is effective in around or more 60% of cases. Over 7,000 children have been born as a result of this abortion pill reversal protocol in the US. For further reading, go here: AbortionPillReversal.com

Nobody's life and dignity should be a game or a Russian roulette in the hands of people who can make permanent changes to defend their rights.

Conclusion

In 2022, there were 68,388 abortions performed on New York state residents, which was a 15% increase from the previous year. Additionally, New York reported a total of 72,710 abortions to the CDC, including those performed on non-residents, according to the reports by Charlotte Lozier Institute and by Pew Research Center. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that approximately 119,600 abortions took place in New York during 2024. Every day, around 344 babies are killed through abortion in NYC.

And this tragedy and countless heartbreaks and destruction of family and society in the Big Apple seem not to end with the next NYC mayor. What we can do is pray, continue to be the voice for the voiceless, and defend the victims, the Truth, and the family. To pray for Mamdani's heart to be softened by the Holy Spirit and choose to truly take care of the people, and to protect the life of the baby in the womb and mothers in difficulty.

May God have mercy on all of us.

Sources

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/267597/democratic-socialist-zohran-mamdani-wins-new-york-city-mayoral-race

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/states/new_york/

Information About RRM

https://www.liveaction.org/news/whistleblower-planned-parenthood-arizona-sexual-abuse

NYC's silent sex trafficking epidemic

https://www.icmec.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Health-Consequences-of-Sex-Trafficking-and-Implications-for-Identifying-Victims-Lederer.pdf

An increase in premature deliveries among women who abort

An increase in breast cancer among women who abort

A study on the increase in suicide among women who abort

Contraception. The Silent Serial Killer.

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:01:00 +0000

Did you know that the Oral Contraceptive Pills (not only the so-called “Morning After” Pills) have abortifacient capabilities? And did you know that the estimate of zygotes killed after fertilization (but before implantation) is around one billion a year worldwide?

Annually, around 73 million babies are murdered in the womb. But add the victims of 'silent abortion,' and that number is tragically higher.

One such statistic can be found in Who’s At The Center of Your Marriage… the Pill or Jesus Christ? Contraception’s Disintegrating Effect on Marital Harmony, a book by Mr. Patrick McCrystal, head of Human Life International of Ireland.

Despite the surgical abortion ban in many states in the USA, there has been an increase in abortions because of the chemical abortion pill, as Guttmacher admits.

This is also why abolishing, meaning criminalizing abortion federally, is the true victory, not the gradual approach.

In the United States alone, over 60% of abortions are done through the pill RU486, which is increasing in other countries as well. In Italy, for instance, this abortion pill is being pushed to have the same type of availability as in the United States.

The abortion pill is highly discussed in the anti-abortion movement, but we don't discuss a silent killer enough. Our societies have become so numb to this, even the faithful, even among Catholics, who should oppose this as the Church condemns it.

Contraception.

An estimated 966 million women of reproductive age globally use some form of birth control.

Hormonal Birth Control (HBC) and combined estrogen-progestin oral contraceptives (COC), morning-after pill are among the options.

But what are HBC and COC? How do they work, and what makes them 'silent killers'?

WebMD explains it in this way:

“Hormonal contraceptives (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones inhibit your body’s natural hormones to prevent pregnancy in a few ways. Hormonal contraceptives usually stop the body from ovulating. They also change the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to go through the cervix and find an egg. They can also prevent pregnancy by changing the lining of the womb so it’s unlikely the fertilized egg will be implanted.”

One key aspect that is incorrect in this statement is the very fact that pregnancy has already occurred. At the moment of fertilization, not only when the egg is implanted. I'm very confident when I say that this is done deliberately, not out of ignorance.

The re-definition of pregnancy on their website is due to 20th century abortion-politics. Even Wikipedia admits: “In the past, pregnancy has been defined in terms of conception: In 1959, Dr. Bent Boving suggested that the word ‘conception’ should be associated with the process of implantation instead of fertilization.” Due to the political influence of Boving and others, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) then began (from 1965 onwards) to define conception as “the implantation of a fertilized ovum.”

“The Pill can also prevent pregnancy by changing the lining of the womb so it’s unlikely the fertilized egg will be implanted.''

Another lie from WebMD. Every geneticist knows that pregnancy begins at fertilization, as 96% biologists affirm. Hence, the pill terminates the pregnancy, not preventing it from happening. This is abortion. This is murder.

Many studies are proving that the Pill has caused strokes and pulmonary embolisms in women. LifeSite News has reported such stories here, here, here, and here. (I)

How Contraception is the Mastermind Behind Abortion

It is often claimed that contraception would reduce abortion, because if sex is done 'responsibly' then problems won't arise from it, and it would reduce the chance of getting pregnant, which would mean fewer abortions...right?

THE HISTORICAL ASPECT

Both abortion and contraception have existed long before the 1960s, but in the 60s the birth control pill opened a dark door. Let's summarize it this way:

1956 - The U.S. legalized the pill.
1973 - The U.S. legalized abortion.
1961 - The UK legalized the pill.
1967 - The UK legalized abortion.
1961 - Australia legalized the pill.
1969 - Australia legalized abortion.
1967 - France legalized the pill.
1975 - France legalized abortion.
1969 - Canada legalized the pill.
1988 - Canada legalized abortion.
1978 - Spain legalized contraception.
1985 - Spain legalized abortion.

Recognize the pattern? First, the pill, second, legalized abortion.

In 1960, the FDA approved the pill, and marketers claimed that sex could now be commitment-free and child-free. The sexual revolution started to take off during this period as well. There was still a resistance against it, as many deemed it immoral; some states restricted or banned it. But five years later, in 1965, Griswold v. Connecticut made contraception a constitutional “right” for married couples, as Connecticut’s law against contraception was now overturned.

In the same year, the word 'conception' was redefined to justify and push the contraceptive mentality. The research for the modern IUD was being conducted, but its operation fell under the definition of
abortion. So, to fix this obstacle, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists changed the definition of “conception” from fertilization to implantation. Through this, the IUD could destroy a newly formed human being on its journey to the uterus and still be called a “contraceptive.” There was no new scientific information to support and prove this definition change. There was just evil manipulation.

In 1972, the ''right'' to contraception for married couples went to the unmarried couples. The boiling frog analogy is clear here. In Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Supreme Court decided that the “right to privacy,” which forced states to legalize contraception for married couples, applied to the unmarried, hence to everyone.

In just a short 12 years, the standard knowledge that sex belonged within marriage was broken culturally. These moral convictions were now deemed bigoted.

And tragically, in 1973, Roe v. Wade legalized abortion nationwide, a ''right'' to abort (intentionally murder a child in the womb), which violates the 14th Amendment in the USA (right to life). Children were not protected anymore. And in the United States alone, since 1973, over 60 million babies (of which black babies are the highest, which was Margaret Sanger's, founder of Planned Parenthood, goal) have been murdered in the womb. The number is higher, including the silent abortions from the abortifacients.

Contraception does create a pro-abortion mentality, because it changes the approach to the purpose of sex (which should be only within marriage), from being for a unitive spiritual meaning between the married couple and for creating new life, to it becoming a mere physical, pleasure-only purpose. And the mindset behind using contraceptives is leaving children out of the picture. Hence, if an 'unplanned' or 'mistake' pregnancy happens, the baby is most likely viewed as a burden or an obstacle to their life plans. Almost as if they feel a 'right' to abort, because the very thing that should have avoided from happening, failed. To use another medical way to cover up another medical failure, forgetting that there is someone involved.

Fr. Paul Marx explains:

''Up until the early 1980s, the most famous pro-abortion leaders admitted that an increase in contraceptive availability inevitably leads to an increase in promiscuity and therefore abortions.
Both of the co-inventors of the birth control pill have confessed that a greater use of contraceptives has led to greater promiscuity and carelessness, which inevitably leads to more abortions.
The large-scale use of contraceptives and abortifacients leads to a tremendously increased rate of
sexual activity, which, combined with method and user failures, leads to a huge increase in the number of
“unplanned pregnancies.”

A very well-known sexologist, Alfred Kinsey, admitted the following:

“At the risk of being repetitious, I would remind the group that we have found the highest
frequency of induced abortion in the group which, in general, most frequently uses contraceptives.”

Malcolm Potts, former Medical Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), acknowledged the contraception-abortion linkin 1981:

''As people turn to contraception, there will be a rise, not a fall, in the abortion rate.''

There are more than two million contraceptive failures in the United States alone annually, of which half end in abortion.

THE LIE SOLD

It is believed that contraception is a secure, stable way of avoiding pregnancy. Well, the numbers show otherwise. It has been demonstrated countless times that more than half of all women who obtain abortions were using contraception when they got pregnant. Actually, as couples use regular contraception, like condoms, the higher the chances of getting pregnant as time passes.

If a sexually active girl of age 15 starts using the Pill regularly, there is about a 50% chance that she will become pregnant by the time she is 22!

This statistic can be verified by pro- abortionists, such as Dr. Christopher Tietze, who said: “Within 10 years, 20 to 50% of Pill users and a substantial majority of users of other methods may be expected to experience at least one repeat abortion.''

So the probability of getting pregnant on the pill is:

9% in the first year
25% in three years
38% in five years
61% in ten years

And unfortunately, sex education given to us in schools is not helping. They teach us that for a responsible sexual life and to avoid pregnancy are all solved through contraception, by also distributing contraceptives and abortifacients to teenagers without parental consent or knowledge. We are trained from a young age to be numb to this and accept it as moral. Think of the iceberg analogy. Abortion is at the top, contraception in the middle, and at the very bottom, sex education.

The Numbers

The sad reality is that most child-bearing women in first and second-world countries are on the Pill (and most urban third-world women), and the number of women being on the pill would be around 1 billion, but it is believed that this is a conservative number. Of these 1 billion women on the Pill, probably each one of them experiences at least once a year (probably more than once) a breakthrough ovulation during times of intercourse, leading to a fertilized egg (life), which won't be implanted, meaning aborted.

Mathematically, it would mean that globally, one billion abortions occur every year due to the Pill. It is equivalent to the entire population of North America and South America combined being eradicated every year by the Pill alone. And tragically, many Christians from all denominations use contraceptives. We, who should be the salt of the earth and the light of the world, become collaborators with the darkness we ought to resist.

If the Pill kills 1,000,000,000 people a year, and it is likely higher, it would be one seventh of the world’s population that are murdered every year.

Contraceptives are abortifacient!

As briefly mentioned at the beginning of this article, there are many silent abortions annually. And unfortunately, there are pro-lifers and Christians alike who use them as well.

An abortifacient is defined as “an agent (such as a drug) that induces abortion.''
But manufacturers often market these drugs under the name “contraception” to attract customers and make it less ''graphic.''

There are two kinds of abortifacients:

To prevent a child (embryo) from implanting in the uterus; Oral contraceptives such as the birth control pill, Intrauterine devices, Injectables such as Depo-Provera, Implants such as Norplant, Jadelle, Implanon, and Nexplanon.
That kills the child after implantation; RU-486 (the “abortion pill”), the methotrexate/misoprostol combination. “Emergency contraception”: usually called “morning-after pills.” They consist of high doses of the artificial steroids used in oral contraceptives. The most popular brand is Plan B.

And unfortunately, the evil of contraception has entered the lives of the faithful. The National Survey of Family Growth shows large majorities of Catholics report using at least one form of artificial contraception, with over 90% having used condoms and more than 60% having used the hormonal birth control pill. In 1968, St. Paul VI, who in his encyclical Humanae Vitae declared: “any action … specifically intended to prevent procreation” was “absolutely excluded.”

And today, abortion has become a ''contraceptive.''

Psychologists Eugene Sandburg and Ralph Jacobs noted:

“As legal abortion has become increasingly available, it has become evident that some women are
now intentionally using abortion as a substitute for contraception.”

Dr. Alan Guttmacher, former Medical Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, also stated the same around 50 years ago:

''When abortion is easily obtainable, contraception is neither actively nor diligently used. If we had abortion on demand, there would be no reward for the woman who practiced effective contraception.”

And a Canadian sex educator, David Robinson, said the same:

“Today abortion is the most widely used birth control method in the world.''

THE CATHOLIC RESPONSE TO CONTRACEPTIONS

Contraceptives not only kill babies (the most tragic part) but also are a direct attack on family, marriage, and chastity.

Despite the argument made in our cultures today, especially in the post-sex revolution era, that we now have a better and healthier view of sex, this is far from the truth. When we disconnect sex with procreation and the unitive meaning behind it, which is also proven biologically/scientifically, one cannot have a healthy approach to sex. The very purpose of it is being rejected and viewed as negative, hence disaster follows.

Nearly 9 in 10 children who are aborted are conceived to unmarried parents, who did not publcily made that lifelong commitment. In the USA, 51% of women who were seeking abortions reported using contraception in the month they became pregnant with their child. And Planned Parenthood is the largest contraceptive provider and the largest abortion chain in the country. The abortion industry has created this cycle on purpose. It will bring millions and millions of money and power to them. They don't care about you, but your wallets.

And contraceptives have contributed greatly to the decline of marriage, with a higher likelihood of divorce among other factors. Contraceptives actually disconnect the women with her fertility, which is a sign of being healthy, and I say also beautiful, now deemed as almost a disease, a burden, and something on the way to a ''happier'' life for the woman. It has become a heavy burden for many couples nowadays. It requires that the spouses use each other rather than giving and receiving fully and selflessly. It has also been used by corrupt governments to control populations.

IUDs have also been placed in Inuit women without consent in Greenland, allegedly to decrease the Inuit population. Similar in India, which sterilized 6.2 million men in the ’70s (and thousands died because of the botched sterilizations). In Peru in the ’90s, when President Fujimori practically forced women to sterilize themselves, and offered poor women food as a strategy. And of course, the very well-known China’s one-child policy, which led to more than 330 million abortions, sterilizations, and, as a result, severe population decline.

Contraceptives have toxic and unhealthy side effects on the bodies of women, but birth control has also affected men. Women who regularly ingest the powerful steroids in all modern hormonal methods of birth control experience effects such as ectopic pregnancies, cancers, heart attacks, mood swings, and depression. Hormonal birth control can even affect who a woman is attracted to! For example, birth control pills have been found to add estrogen to tap water, which has health consequences that do not appear positive, as Business Insider has written. (II)

Photo: Human Life International

We have been taught to believe that contraception, especially with condoms, can avoid STIs, instead of teaching that sex belongs within marriage and not normalizing fornication. But numbers prove otherwise:

STIs have increased dramatically despite the heavy promotion and distribution of condoms. In the USA alone, in 2018, as reported by the CDC, 1 in 5 people had an STI, with the majority of those cases occurring among young people, 15 to 24 years old.

Condoms cannot protect against infections that are transmitted through skin-to-skin contact or that affect areas not covered by the condom. Examples of such infections include HPV, herpes, and syphilis (the CDC admits that condoms do not protect against these diseases). Given that the incorrect use of condoms is common, HIV transmission is also high. Indeed, there is only an 80-94% reduction in transmission risk, and thus there is a 6-20% chance of transmitting HIV.

Pope Paul VI predicted that forced sterilization would result in the acceptance of contraception. It came true.

IUDs have also been placed in Inuit women without consent in Greenland, allegedly to decrease the Inuit population. The story is similar in India, which sterilized 6.2 million men in the ’70s (and thousands died as a result of botched sterilizations). Again, we see the same in Peru in the ’90s, when President Fujimori practically forced women to sterilize themselves, offering poor women food as a cruel incentive. Perhaps the most famous example of forced sterilization and abortion is China’s one-child policy, which led to more than 330 million abortions, millions of sterilizations, and severe population decline. Sadly, these are only a few examples of government-imposed population control that result from a nation straying far from the truth.

CONCLUSION

The Catholic Church recognizes that parents must be responsible with their sexual intimacy. This is where NFP, or Natural Family Planning, comes forth. It respects and treats women's fertility as it is, a beautiful gift, and not a burden. Similar to RRM, regarding couples who struggle with fertility and conceiving a baby, rather than choosing IVF.

Philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand reminds us of something important:

“Every true Catholic must rejoice also when he is allowed to see clearly that the Church does not conform to the ‘majority opinion’ but to the Word of God, and that the Holy Father [Paul VI] must proclaim the truth even when it goes against the current of the times. The encyclical Humanae Vitae, in which the Holy Father teaches us clearly the true moral nature of artificial birth control, enables the individual to know exactly what God expects of him and appeals to our conscience not to offend God” (The Encyclical Humanae Vitae: A Sign of Contradiction).''

Unfortunately, with poor choices by Pope Leo XIV to appoint bishops like Cyril Villareal as bishop of Kalibo, Philippines, who is in favor of contraception, the mission for every Christ follower and server of our King has become heavier.

Bishop Villareal suggests departing from natural law principles, which were reaffirmed in Humanae Vitae and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, to find a 'new way' to evaluate sexuality and marriage.

In Bishop Villareal's 2011 academic work submitted to the University of Vienna, he wrote the following: “a new way of looking at sexual morality through the Trinitarian love and not anymore through the natural law perspective.”

He has also continued to state:

“On the one hand, there is the magisterium of the Church imposing her teaching on sexuality, which invokes the power of the natural law as springing from the divine law,” he wrote. “On the other hand, the laity clamor about the difficulty of what the Church imposes on them. … The big question then is, why can’t the Church change its teaching on sexuality?”

Villareal suggested that the traditional teaching no longer applies because “times have changed.”

This approach is incompatible with the official moral teaching of the Catholic Church, which affirms that certain acts are intrinsically evil and may never be chosen, regardless of intention or circumstances. The Catechism of the Catholic Church: “there are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit.” (CCC, no. 1756)

Pope Leo XIV has appointed several bishops whose statements and theological positions have contradicted the teaching of the Church guided by the Holy Spirit: Shane Mackinlay in Brisbane, Australia; Beat Grögli in St. Gallen, Switzerland; José Antonio Satué Huerto in Málaga, Spain; Sithembele Sipuka in Cape Town, South Africa; and Joseph Grünwidl in Vienna, Austria...just to name a few.

There is a deep crisis within the Church (intensifying from the 60s on and has increased from 2013 onwards), and Pope Paul VI did warn us in 1972 in his homily, that ''the smoke of Satan has entered the Church of God.''

SOURCES

https://www.padreperegrino.org/2023/07/hbc/

https://www.hli.org/resources/contraception-lead-abortion/

https://www.guttmacher.org/2024/03/despite-bans-number-abortions-united-states-increased-2023

https://web.archive.org/web/20231230024835/https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pills

When Life Begins

(I) Life Site News' Reports-- 1. , 2. , 3., and 4.

(II) ex. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, “Micronor®” Oral Contraceptive Tablets, May 2020. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, “Highlights of Prescribing Information: Yasmin,” April 2012.

& the review of 1,346 patient information pamphlets on various hormonal methods of birth control distributed by the manufacturers. The National Cancer Institute (NIC) states, “The risks of breast and cervical cancers are increased in women who use oral contraceptives, whereas the risks of endometrial, ovarian, and colorectal cancers are reduced.”

https://www.statista.com/topics/3267/contraception-in-the-us/#topicOverview

http:// Source: https://www.hli.org/resources/how-effective-are-condoms/

https://www.hli.org/resources/chances-of-getting-std-with-condom/#condoms-are-ineffective-against-hiv

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10502556.2023.2179837?journalCode=wjdr20

https://www.hli.org/resources/chances-of-getting-std-with-condom/

https://infovaticana.com/en/2026/01/27/new-bishop-appointed-by-leo-xiv-in-favor-of-contraceptives/

https://www.lifesitenews.com/analysis/pope-leo-xiv-appoints-bishop-who-rejects-catholic-teaching-on-sexuality/

https://ewtn.co.uk/article-contraception-will-always-be-intrinsically-evil-a-look-at-the-development-of-doctrine/

https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/exposing-the-racist-crusade-of-margaret-sanger-and-planned-parenthood

https://www.jstor.org/stable/community.32162028?seq=1

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey

https://www.azquotes.com/author/29472-Malcolm_Potts

https://www.hli.org/resources/the-kissinger-report-nssm-200/

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/149817/cdc_149817_DS1.pdf

The Danger and Immorality of Surrogacy

Mon, 28 Jul 2025 10:47:00 +0000

God has commanded ''Go forth, be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth'' in Genesis 1:28. hence, creating new life, passing love forward, and growing future generations is a deep desire, humans naturally tend to have, and not being able to bring this forth, due to infertility or any other reason, can be a deeply sorrowful pain to endure.

But an important question needs to be addressed, which will make us understand the fundamental problem with the act of surrogacy: Is having children a fundamental right, hence, to achieve it at any cost?

Surrogacy appears, at first glance, to be a perfect solution. It even seems quite charitable, as surely many of the intentions are derived from that, to carry a baby for a couple struggling to conceive. But as in my previous articles about IVF and fetal research, the reality breaks this 'fairytale' like story. It is doing and bringing more harm than the opposite. Once again, even our good intentions cannot surpass the objective reality and morality. If we still continue to do it, then we must ask ourselves what are our true desires and intentions. Who are we prioritizing? Who are we hurting in the process?

To get straight to the point: Surrogacy is exploitative. Both altruistic (the surrogate does not receive monetary compensation) and commercial surrogacy. How? Why is banning surrogacy what our societies should strive for? Hopefully, this article will answer these questions.

I pray that this blesses you and maybe someone in your life in any way, or someone who might cross paths with you, to bring into light this injustice and embrace life in such a way without harming our neighbours.

The Process

Surrogacy has been practiced in ancient societies, such as allowing lawfully, a husband to divorce his wife lawfully because of her infertility. (1) Surrogacy today is done not just by infertile couples, but by those who don’t want to pass a genetic defect or health condition on to their child and by homosexual couples and single men and women who desire children.

Surrogacy in the 1980s was primarily based on artificial insemination, but since the 2010s, IVF has been chosen. The surrogate’s baby undergoes prenatal genetic diagnosis (PGDs) early in the pregnancy. And if the baby is healthy, she carries it to term and delivers the baby. These seven stages usually occur throughout surrogacy:

Selection of the Surrogate Mother: Identifying and choosing a surrogate, followed by the signing of a legal contract.
Embryo production and preimplantation genetic diagnosis
a) Selection of Oocytes and Sperm: The oocytes (eggs) are often selected from a “catalogue” of women, and sperm is chosen either from a donor or the male client.
b) IVF is performed to fertilize the eggs, and embryos are screened for genetic health and other factors. In some cases, sex selection may also occur.
Embryo transfer:
Preparing the surrogate’s body for embryo implantation, which includes hormonal treatments and screenings.
Embryo(s) are implanted into the surrogate’s womb.
Pregnancy confirmation. Verifying that the surrogate is pregnant.
Pregnancy monitoring. regular check-ups to ensure the pregnancy is progressing well, and keep the commissioning people informed.
Delivery and handover: The surrogate gives birth, and the child is handed over to the commissioning people. We are seeing how the child is treated as a product being purchased like an object...
Transfer of parentage. Parentage is officially transferred from the surrogate to the people who ''purchased'' the baby.

In the United States, surrogacy is deemed much more acceptable than in Europe, for example. Several European nations have banned surrogacy due to the abuse and exploitation, particularly of poor women hired as surrogates. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union bans using one’s body for financial gain, banning paid surrogacy (but altruistic surrogacy is still legal in some European countries, unfortunately).

Image: Michigan Advance

The Exploitation/Horror of Surrogacy

Recently, a heartbreaking tragedy has unfolded in California, which, unfortunately, is not so rare. A gay couple, who had their surrogate, Brittney Pearson, due to a breast cancer diagnosis, let the baby boy die at 25 weeks, after she delivered early because of the diagnosis, to give the baby a chance to survive, while getting the chemo treatment. As Nash, a 21-week-old premature baby, was delivered, a world record as the youngest baby delivered successfully, we know, today, with the progress of technology, a 25-week-old premature baby can survive outside of the womb.

The couple did not want to pay the surrogate for a baby not born before 38 weeks, because of the health risks associated with a premature baby.

Brittney did not want to kill the baby, so they threatened with legal action
She offered the option of adoption, but they demanded a death certificate
She has stated that as a surrogate, she feels used, as a ''rented out uterus.'' Surrogacy does exploit the reproductive.

Brittney Pearson said: ''I want to keep this baby safe and bring it earthside.'' But that was not guaranteed, because of the legal rights not given to the surrogate. This is one of the dangers, the most dangerous, of surrogacy. The gay couple had an 'ownership' right, which surpassed the human right of the baby and silenced Brittney. The very act of surrogacy from all parties played a role in this baby's tragedy. Children are not products. But that is what surrogacy does. It rips away the fundamental right and dignity of the baby and even of motherhood itself.

And recently, it was discovered that a baby was allowed to be adopted by a gay couple through surrogacy. This already strips away the motherly role necessary for the baby, and as research shows, a child needs a mother and a father. Children do best when raised by their biological, married mother and father. It is not just an opinion, but decades of social research. But coming back to the previous topic, one of the couple, Brandon Keith Riley Mitchell, was convicted in Pennsylvania for the sexual abuse of a minor and is publicly listed on the Megan’s Law registry as a Tier 1 child sex offender.

Surrogacy Takes Advantage of Vulnerability

During the war in Ukraine, many have stayed close and care for the babies born to surrogates, many abandoned without parents. The war has prevented parents from returning to Ukraine, leaving their children with an uncertain future. Ukraine has had a growing international trade in surrogacy. The New York Times reports, “The country’s favorable laws — biological parents are listed on the baby’s birth certificate — and affordable prices, generally around $40,000, have attracted many aspiring parents.” It is estimated to be one of the most popular destinations for surrogacy in the world, with more than a dozen agencies specializing in the regulated practice. One agency alone arranges around 1,000 surrogate births each year. In 2020, the pandemic lockdowns barring international travel left many parents unable to reach the babies they paid women to carry as well.

These precious babies do not only find themselves in an actual war zone, but another type of war zone, being stranded because of surrogacy and treated as property.

Surrogacy ‘hotspots’ have thrived in areas of economic deprivation. This destroys the claim that financial gain is not a motivating factor. In reality, when gestational commercial surrogacy first became possible, some feminists expressed their fears that it would lead to the creation of a ‘sub-class of breeders’, women who would only be used as a means to an end, to bear children for other couples.

Brian Clowes, director of research and training for Human Life International, said when he traveled to Bengaluru, India, several years ago, the Parliament was considering banning surrogacy because groups of women were being abused as “baby farms” for rich women, both in India and the West. The nation eventually passed a law banning commercial surrogacy, but not “altruistic” surrogacy, in which the mother is only compensated for essential medical expenses and insurance.

India is a high-profile spot for surrogacy. Because of the immense exploitation of Indian women, especially the low-income women, India has banned surrogacy, but like some countries in Europe, kept altruistic surrogacy legal. Non-Indian couples cannot seek surrogacy in India. New Delhi’s Center for Social Research stated, “Surrogacy degrades a pregnancy to a service and a baby to a product. Thailand and Cambodia are among other countries that have taken action towards the exploitation of commercial/international surrogacy. Surrogates are also found to have increasing psychological and emotional distress post-surrogacy. The children have shown to be in the same line as the surrogates, as this study shows.

Julie Bindel, a writer, exposes the hypocrisy of our culture by saying:

''The accelerating boom in surrogacy for gay couples…represents a disturbing slide into the brutal exploitation of women who usually come from the developing world and are often bullied or pimped into selling their wombs to satisfy the selfish whims of wealthy gay or lesbian westerners…. This cruelty is accompanied by epic hypocrisy. People from Europe and the USA who would shudder at the idea of involvement in human or sex trafficking have ended up indulging in a grotesque form of “reproductive trafficking.”
Also, surrogates who are exploited sign contracts that they cannot read. They’re kept in dorms, isolated from family and friends. Forced to deliver by cesarean section. Some aren’t paid the full amount they’re promised. A few surrogates have died.
Toboni, in an interview with New York magazine, exposes what she has uncovered:

“There are cases where American couples feel a little strange about what is happening, and the ethics of it, but turn a blind eye because they don’t want to pay the higher rates in the States. Many couples don’t want to know what’s behind the scenes, they want their baby fast, and they want it done cheaply.”
And as the National Catholic Register exposes in this article:

''the Indian restaurant is crowded, and the ambient noise of fellow diners all around makes it hard to hear. But Gianna Toboni, an investigative reporter from HBO’s documentary show VICE, slowly begins to understand what is being offered to her by a woman sitting across the table.

Toboni is in India to get a firsthand look at the country’s booming international surrogacy industry. She has heard rumors of “extra” Caucasian babies for sale, so she meets a surrogacy broker for dinner. On camera, the broker, holding a swaddled infant, tells Toboni she can take the baby home tonight — for a price.

The source of these “extra” babies is beyond horrifying. Western couples are taking advantage of the discounts international surrogacy offers. They get a baby gestated for them at a low price, and the women in third-world countries get more money than they could make in several years.

To make the process more efficient, doctors often transfer more than one embryo to a surrogate. If she gets pregnant with multiples, sometimes the commissioning couple is not told. Nine months later, they fly in and get the one baby they paid for. The “extras,” however, are peddled on the black market. While the couple thinks they’re getting a miracle at a bargain price, they are unaware that their “extra” children are being sold to whoever is willing to pay.''
But similar cases happen in the West, too, unfortunately. In that same article, you will find a few heartbreaking stories, which bring forth the realities of this horror occurring all around the world.
Today. many women fight for the ''right'' to abortion (which ends the life of an innocent child) because of women's ''reproductive rights'', but are usually in favor of surrogacy. Interesting, isn't it? Modern feminism has not, in reality, protected girls (like the unborn baby girls in the womb), nor has it protected the dignity of actual reproductive rights (like the exploitation in surrogacy) of a woman (often poor), but has failed to live by what they preach.

End of my rant. Let's move on.

But if the surrogate has consented, what is the problem then?

Something done out of the consent of someone does not make it automatically a good moral decision, nor acceptable. If someone consents to be murdered, it does not take away the immorality of murder; hence, the restrictions and opposition towards murder still should apply, nevertheless. An article from Catholic Answers evaluates this matter well:

“Sometimes people consent to things that are bad for them. But in such examples, consent is not what is driving the moral evaluation. What’s in the driver seat is a more fundamental underlying moral theory that says these actions are bad and thus need to be avoided. If there is a more fundamental framework that does the evaluative work, then it follows that consent by itself isn’t sufficient to justify some activity.”

We have to take the children's well-being as a priority as well. Studies have demonstrated the psychological effects on children. It is quite clear as day, that much harm comes from surrogacy. It is not a fairy tale-like magic that the world tries to sell you. Here are involved, not just the women, but also the children. Let's not forget that.

What Does The Catholic Church Say? What should be the Christian response?

The Catholic Church considers surrogacy to be immoral because, as the Catechism states, surrogacy dissociates husband and wife by the intrusion of a person other than the couple, infringing “a child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage.” Of course, the usage artifical insemination and IVF for surrogacy is, by the Church is also deemed as morally unacceptable.

Donum Vitae states, “A true and proper right to a child would be contrary to the child’s dignity and nature. The child is not an object to which one has a right, nor can he be considered as an object of ownership: rather, a child is a gift, ‘the supreme gift’ and the most gratuitous gift of marriage.” God designed the family in a way that serves the best interests of the child, not the opposite.

And the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral”(2376).

The Church's stance is often viewed as non-compassionate towards couples desiring children, a family. However, as said in the previous articles, the methods cannot be unethical, even if the intentions are good. And as Christians, we contradict our faith and the love that Christ has shown us, if we accept immoral methods, such as surrogacy, IVF, fetal research, etc. Also, the Church does sympathize with the pain of infertility, stating: “Couples who discover that they are sterile suffer greatly,” and “Research aimed at reducing sterility is to be encouraged.”

The Church offers hope.

But often, women and couples desiring a child are unaware of the ethical option available, like NaPro (Natural Procreative) Technology, which is approved by the Catholic Church. Madeleine Kearns expresses this in this article, that many women, not knowing the root cause of their infertility, believe that IVF is the only option. Several fertility clinics tell women that IVF is the only option, not recommending NaPro at all.

Surrogacy rips away the rights of children, who are treated as objects of commercial contracts. As Joseph Meaney, past president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, said:

“What surrogacy also does is it commercializes women’s reproductive capabilities. In a sense, their bodies are being rented out to be used by others to carry children. In some cases, the surrogate mother is the biological mother. In other cases, she will have an embryo transferred into her womb not related to her biologically. In both circumstances, it is extremely unnatural for her to be used in such a way, even with her consent. It goes against the dignity of a human being.”

Meaney also adds that there is a social-justice aspect to be said about surrogacy, because surrogate mothers tend to be from lower economic backgrounds, and those ordering are on the elite scale. “So it’s the rich exploiting the poor, which from a Catholic perspective is blamable.” Meaney says.

A 2015 poll indicated that 71% of Americans approve of surrogacy, with 57% approving of commercial surrogacy, and even those who consider religion "very important" showed a 48% approval rate for commercial surrogacy. Different Christian denominations vary in their moral view towards surrogacy. This is concerning, like with the seeming approval, even from the religious, towards IVF.

It is obvious that, especially as Christians, if we are faithful to the faith, we cannot deem surrogacy as a moral way or as a solution for families in difficulty with having a child, or simply to fulfill the desire to have a child. The dignity of every individual should never be compromised. I understand that superficially, it seems a kind act, but we must be careful, because we know that the enemy is great at deceiving.

As Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder and president of The Ruth Institute, states:

“[Surrogacy] is a practice that turns the person from a person created in the image and likeness of God into a commodity,” says Dr. Morse. “Something that can be bought and sold and is property.

“It’s very important for Christians to look beyond those [fancy] headlines and look beyond the advertising copy to realize that this is a business,” she continues, “and it’s being run like a business. Exploitation of women and the buying and selling of children is part of what this business is doing.” A child of any kind of third-party reproduction […] is a child of God and loved; you must never regret the child. […] But that child may end up having different kinds of issues that will be very difficult to discuss inside the family.”

Artist: Tianna Williams

Conclusion

I truly hope this article has blessed you, and it will bring forth light into the darkness of this fallen world. I pray that each one of us will defend all lives and dignity, no matter what our surroundings say. I believe that we, even we Christians, must speak out more intensely, even in Churches, about the many ways the violation of God's gift, life, is abused. To educate our young and work towards it becoming the standard approach for a society when confronting these matters.

Being truly pro-life is not just about bringing life into the world, but also protecting the sanctity, the right, and value of life itself. Pro-life's mission does not end with the evil of abortion, or when a baby is delivered, but also after. In supporting struggling families, single-parents, and children at risk, among all the other scenarios, our stance is to uphold the dignity of that person until their natural death. But even after that, for example, a dignified burial and respect to the deceased must be upheld as very valuable, and if violated, fight back because that's how valuable their existence is.

SOURCES

Need help? This is a resource (in the United States) that helps pregnant women in difficulty. https://letthemlive.org/our-mission/

https://unlawjournal.blogspot.com/2025/03/wombs-for-rent-dark-side-of-surrogacy.html

https://ewtn.co.uk/article-bizarre-surrogacy-case-pinpoints-moral-morass-of-the-baby-brokering-business/

https://ncfamily.org/the-danger-and-detachment-of-surrogacy/

https://aul.org/2023/05/16/the-surrogate-mother-and-the-child-she-bears/

https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/surrogacy-s-incredibly-dark-side

https://notthebee.com/article/gay-men-order-surrogate-to-let-preemie-baby-die-after-she-delivered-early-due-to-cancer-diagnosis

https://studentsforlife.org/2022/04/06/caught-in-a-war-zone-commodified-children-are-stranded-because-of-surrogacy-in-ukraine/

https://www.hli.org/resources/surrogacy-ethical-issues/

(1) Nicholas Postgate. Early Mesopotamia Society and Economy at the Dawn of History [Routledge, 1992], page 105.

Author: Aamu Maria C.

Fetal Harvesting/Research. The Legs of the Abortion Industry.

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 14:21:00 +0000

Introduction

''If you are going to kill all these [Jewish] people, at least take the brains out so that the material may be utilized.''

Nazi doctor Julius Hallervorden, Nuremberg trials, 1945

''We can either use the tissue in what we know to be lifesaving [fetal tissue] research, or we can bury it. That is the choice.''

United States Senator Brock Adams, 1992

According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), human fetal tissue “is defined as tissue or cells obtained from a dead human embryo or fetus after a spontaneous or induced abortion or stillbirth.” Fetal tissue most of the time refers to pancreatic or neural brain tissue (tissue from the cranial cavity).

The first fetal organ transplant was done in December of 1985 in Denver. Researchers Everett Spees and Kevin Lafferty transplanted fetal pancreatic tissue into the body of a 51-year-old diabetic. These cells began to produce the needed insulin for the patient. In 1988, researchers went further. Brain cells from an aborted seven-week-old baby were transferred to an adult patient for the first time, implanted in a 55-year-old male with Parkinson's disease by a surgical team led by Dr. Curt Freed and Dr. Robert Breeze at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.

My first encounter with the reality of the harvesting of aborted babies started sometime after God opened my eyes fully to the matter of abortion itself. From sources like LiveAction, I began to know about this horrifying crime done on babies, that not only were killed but were also subjected to experiments. But my knowledge flourished through Tommy Kearns, the father of little hero Clementine, who was aborted against his wishes (the mother regretted the decision right after it), and her organs were sold/harvested illegally for profit by the abortion facility in New Jersey.

I couldn't believe it. How more evil can this industry get? And perhaps even worse, how is this allowed to happen in our society? By the government? By their neighbours, who should care for and protect them? We have failed and betrayed each other.

So many questions, so much frustration, anger...but then the determination to do something about this, even in the smallest ways. God wants us to act. And doing that, while loving even the ones supporting, and even committing this horror. It is not easy, but that is why we need Him, why we must deny ourselves and let Jesus Christ increase in us and work through us.

Again, like with IVF and surrogacy, the methods are not questioned or justified, because a baby born to an infertile couple through IVF or surrogacy helps couples with having a baby, and the woman carrying the child receives benefits. Everyone's happy, and everyone gets what they want. As Guttmacher.org states:

''Medical research using human fetal tissue obtained from abortions has benefited millions of people worldwide and holds great promise for the continued advancement of basic science, as well as for the development of lifesaving vaccines and therapies. Since 1973, when abortion became legal nationwide, fetal tissue research has, time and again, become entangled in the abortion controversy. The current controversy—set off by a series of heavily edited and misleading videos—grew out of abortion opponents’ long-standing campaign to vilify abortion and abortion providers, and it now threatens fetal tissue research itself.''

But at what cost?

This article will explore the following topics. Sources will be provided at the end of the article, and other educational sources to dive into to expand our knowledge on this topic, which is not widely spoken about.

But before going forward, we must start by knowing the body systems most affected by the diseases that are allegedly ameliorated in those who receive fetal tissue transplants.

Brain stem (The lower portion of the brain)
Cerebellum (located forward of and above the medulla)
Anencephaly ( Total lack of the cortex (upper brain), with lack of skull closure. Usually, the hypothalamus is malformed, and the cerebellum is rudimentary or absent. This condition includes the exposure of the cranial matter to the air and is almost always fatal within hours or days (about 75 percent stillborn, with mortality of birth survivors at 90 percent in the first week), but some anencephalic babies do live several years.)
Hydranencephaly (the cortex (upper brain) is entirely replaced with spinal fluid. There is total or near-total hemispherical destruction. There is great ventricular (brain cavity) enlargement with little or no cerebral mantle. The brain stem, cerebellum, and basal ganglia are present but may be abnormal. Usually, the brain stem remains functional.)
Hydrocephalus ( The obstruction of the normal accumulation or drainage of cerebrospinal fluid from its points of production to its areas of absorption, involving increased pressure in the head.)
Microcephaly (Abnormally small head size, usually (but not always) associated with brain disease and/or mental disability.)
Megalencephaly (The baby's head is enlarged due to abnormal enlargement of the brain.)

The ''Benefits''

Over 15 million Americans alone suffer from diseases and injuries that are believed could be aided to various degrees by fetal tissue transplants. Including Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, diabetes, head injuries, paralysis, etc. These are the conditions that pro-harvesting researchers focus on when they say that fetal transplants are necessary. Through millions of abortions, we can help others. This brings great joy to researchers, the medical world, and, of course, to many people suffering from the illnesses listed before.

That is why Dr. Abraham Lieberman of the New York University Medical Center said:

"This [fetal tissue techniques] is to medicine what superconductivity is to physics."

The Reality

More than three-fourths of all studies in this area have concluded that fetal tissue transplantation benefits only a very few people: The scientists participating. Only a very few articles have described measurable improvement in symptoms related to neurological disorders, and most of these articles describe studies that are incomplete or flawed.

Dr. Robert J. White reviewed these studies and stated:

"The clinical studies so far conducted in transplanting human fetal brain tissue into the cerebral hemisphere of patients with Parkinsonism have demonstrated little evidence of measurable, lasting improvement in neurological dysfunction."

Keith Crutcher, Ph.D., states the following:

My own research has been focused with the hope of providing some information that might lead to the relief of pain and suffering of individuals who suffer from neurological diseases. But that cannot be the ultimate guideline for all that I do ... If I have to rely on the death of another individual to extend the life of another, I reject it and I have done this very forcefully.

Evil disguised as good

Medical researchers stating that fetal harvesting and their experiments to find a cure for illnesses encourage abortion in the first place. More abortions, more fetal research, and in belief that more chances for finding cures. Or might get a pregnant woman who is considering abortion to think that ''well, if I abort this baby, at least some good thing comes out of it..''

In the 1988 hearings before the National Institutes of Health, one pro-fetal organ harvesting researcher insisted that "There should be no attempts to influence the women's decisions about having an abortion or persuading them to donate the [fetal] tissue."

Later, the same researcher acknowledged the unworkability of this concept, saying that in Sweden, where fetal organ harvesting is common, "The reaction from most women is that they are encouraged that at least something 'good' is coming out of this invariably negative experience of having an abortion."

Or as Mary Ann Warren proposes in her "Can the Fetus be an Organ Farm?" Hastings Center Report, October 1978, Warren not only endorses the practice of using the organs from the babies who are aborted because they were products of unintended pregnancies, but she also recommends that women become pregnant intentionally to grow babies for the sole purpose of harvesting their organs. This is the conclusion: Human babies must die to improve the quality of life for adults.

Some physicians, like Dr. Ralph DeGeorgio, resist this and fight back. And won't compromise on morality for the sake of convenience. As the doctor himself stated:

"We must recognize why the use of human fetal tissue is being advocated in the first place: Precisely because it IS human.''

A fetus is a person. To obtain fetal tissue is to obtain the bodies or parts of preborn human beings. Many Pro-choicers/abortionists claim that a fetus isn't a human being (fetus in Latin means 'offspring'), but for these experiments, research to happen, we need human organs from humans. Contradictions left and right.

And continuing this horrendous and immoral crime in the name of progress simply follows the belief that, in the name of progress, if any atrocity must be committed, it should be for the sake of progress. As if there is a worship done towards 'progress.' It has become above human dignity for some.

But it goes further. Many see no moral obstacle to using live, unanesthetized unborn babies in the name of progress. In February 1987, in the issue of the Hastings Center Report, 'ethicist' Mary Mahowald and researchers Jerry Silver and Richard Ratcheson of the Case Western Reserve School of Medicine stated that using live babies for the same purposes ...'' is morally defensible if dead fetuses are not available or are not conducive to successful transplants."

Aborted preborn babies will inevitably become transplant donors, because rarely are miscarried and ectopic babies suitable.

Frederick Bieber, a geneticist in Brigham and Women's Hospital's pathology department, examined the results of 1,025 miscarriages during a year and found that only 39 (3.8 %) produced a genetically normal baby that had not died two or three weeks previously and hence been unusable for transplantation purposes. Of these 39 babies, most were infected in some manner and hence unusable. During this same year, most of the babies who died as a result of 125 ectopic pregnancies that Bieber examined were also unusable for transplant purposes. This is why abortion is, and will be, encouraged even more, for the so-called ''greater'' good, if fetal research is encouraged.

''The Love Of Money Is the Root of All Evil''

In 2018, the NIH provided funding for 200 such projects involving fetal tissue at a total cost of $115 million. There is much effort and money spent to harm others rather than to care and help, like the pregnant mothers in difficulty or struggling families, for example.

But read for yourself what this money helps to do:

Abortionists alter the abortion procedure so that they can obtain more intact fetuses or parts that are useful on today's fetal organ market. Abortionists have known that live-born aborted babies are more profitable than those who are aborted dead. Therefore, to profit from their crimes, they have altered their procedures so that aborted preborn babies are either kept alive or killed in such a manner that their organs are not destroyed in the process.

The Fetal Pancreas Network, organized in 1984, recommends that the best 'abortion tissue' is obtained from 6-month babies killed by D&E abortion. Dr. Kurt Hirschhorn of New York's Mt. Sinai Hospital says that "With prostaglandins, you can arrange the whole abortion so the fetus comes out viable in the sense that it can survive hours, or a day."

The abortionists also assess "service charges" by providing dead unborn babies to labs that specialize in experiments requiring fetal tissue. All of this is reported poorly in the mainstream media and prestigious medical journals, demonstrating the casualty of accepting this violation of a right every human possesses. The New England Journal of Medicine of May 18, 1972, reported that "Most of the babies delivered by the latter method [ hysterotomy or Cesarian section] were still alive when they were dropped into a tissue grinder to be homogenized."

And according to the April 15, 1973, Washington Post, Dr. Gerald Gaull, Chief of Pediatrics at the New York State Institute for Basic Research in Mental Retardation, "... injects radioactive chemicals into umbilical cords of fetuses ... While the heart is still beating, he removes their brains, lungs, liver, and kidneys for study."

James S. Bardsley, president of the International Institute for the Advancement of Medicine, provides hundreds of pounds of fetal tissue annually to researchers. The company advertises for abortionists to use a specialized abortion suction technique that leaves the baby's head intact so the brain can be removed, and later used for experiments.

They also advertise for the remains of second-trimester babies killed by dismemberment (D&E) rather than by salt poisoning, because in the D&E, the baby is still alive when the abortion begins, and the aborted tissue is much fresher in that way.

Caution: This video contains graphic images. However, they must be seen, so I highly recommend watching even if it is difficult.

Greed of Profiting and Manipulation

The National Institute of Health tells us the following:

''Those who claim that fetal tissue research and transplantation are ethical offer several responses. First, in this nation, over 1.3 million induced abortions are performed each year. Hence, a plethora of fetal tissue exists. Second, under the proposed NIH guidelines, women will be informed about the option to donate fetal tissue only after they have chosen to abort.''

But Bardsley once again reveals the importance of the role privacy plays in this practice: "All too often, the woman is not even told that the tissue will be used for medical research."

And as Tommy Kearns, father of Clementine, testifies:

''They asked her repeatedly if she was ready to schedule an appointment, in which she explained, "I don't have money." They told her not to worry because there were many women just like her who didn't have money and they had funding. They did not tell her that funding was going to be birthing our daughter alive and harvesting her organs.
Clementine's mother thought she was dying on the second day because of the amount of Misoprostol and Pitocin that was given to her. On the first day, they never mentioned fetal research or a fetal donation. Over the phone call, they never mentioned fetal research or donation. On the second day, they never mentioned fetal research or donation, so how were they able to take our daughter's body?''He continues:
''On the first day, Clementine's mother was under the influence of marijuana, and that's stated on the medical documents. You cannot sign a consent for any medical procedure while under the influence of any narcotic, so we have the evidence proving that the consent form for the abortion was void. On top of this, the consent form for fetal research was given to her on the second day, which is illegal and void. There is no date on this consent form. You cannot be given a consent form after a procedure has already begun.''
(Read his full testimony here)

This refusal is very telling. The abortionists know that women would reject the idea of having their babies torn apart. Like the mother of little Clementine. This is similar to the refusal to provide 'listening rooms' for pregnant mothers to hear their baby's heartbeat, because 9 out of 10, if not 10 out of 10, a mother would change her mind on abortion after hearing her baby's heartbeat.

But as pro-abortion medical 'ethicists,' Marjorie Schultz has suggested, the doctors and companies may soon be making millions from selling fetal body parts, and the woman should be able to profit too.

And Harry Schwartz, a member of the New York Times editorial board, stated that "If a poor woman wants compensation for the use of tissue from her aborted fetus, by all means let her have it if someone needs that tissue and is willing to pay for it."

This is yet another potential way to exploit women through abortion. Some pro-choicers have even suggested that poor women should turn to "tissue breeding" as a replacement for welfare and workfare.

At the 1990 annual meeting of the National Medical Association in Las Vegas, Dr. Mark Evans seriously proposed that "... possibility of creating a new legal definition to permit physicians to declare anencephalic neonates 'brain absent' and therefore legally dead, so their organs might be harvested for transplantation."

The Hope Not Shown

Advances have been made in adult stem cell research and other non-embryonic avenues for repairing or replacing damaged organs and tissues. The field of "tissue engineering" using adult cells has exploded as researchers move toward rebuilding ears, tracheas, and hearts. (1)

Adult stem cells have successfully treated hundreds of thousands of patients with cancer and leukemia, have repaired damaged corneas, restoring sight to people who were legally blind, healed broken bones, and are being used to regenerate heart tissue damaged by a cardiac arrest. (2)

Adult bone marrow stem cells were responsible for the first completely successful trial of human gene therapy, helping children with severe combined immunodeficiency disease to recover an immune system and safely leave their sterile environment for the first time. Adult cells from a young paraplegic woman's immune system, injected into the site of her spinal cord injury, have cured her incontinence and enabled her to move her toes and legs for the first time (3) – "generating hope for those with spinal-cord injuries around the world," as one news report states. (4)

Finally, adult pancreatic islet cells from cadavers have been used to reverse juvenile diabetes in fifteen patients, and further human trials are being planned at several centers in the United States. At the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association, researchers announced that all patients benefited from the transplants, and nine have remained insulin-free for eight months, with some patients requiring no injections for up to two years. (5)

Considered by experts as a "remarkable advance," this breakthrough has also received enthusiastic attention from Lee Ducat, founder of the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation (JDF). "There's still a lot to be learned, but this is the most optimistic I've been in 30 years," she continues. "To take patients who are ill and going in and out of shock and give them a normal life... this is an unbelievable result. They say they never knew what feeling normal is all about." (6)

But as the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) states:

''Yet this good news has gone largely unnoticed by the current leadership of the JDF. Instead, the organization is focused on diverting funds toward a misleading ad campaign to persuade Americans to support killing human embryos for their stem cells.''

Summary of the Catholic Church's Response

Donum vitae highlights that the corpses of embryos and fetuses, deliberately aborted or not, “must be respected just as the remains of other human beings.” And in the case of adult corpses, “all commercial trafficking must be considered illicit and should be prohibited.”

Dignitas personae (2008), issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI, states the following:

''The dignity of a person must be recognized in every human being from conception to natural death. This fundamental principle expresses a great “yes” to human life and must be at the center of ethical reflection on biomedical research, which has an ever greater importance in today’s world. The Church’s Magisterium has frequently intervened to clarify and resolve moral questions in this area. The Instruction Donum vitae [1987] was particularly significant. And now, twenty years after its publication, it is appropriate to bring it up to date.''

Donum vitae (focused more on the morality of assisted reproductive technologies and their impact on the dignity of marriage and protection of the human embryo), on embryo research, rejects the “principle of separation” that is the foundation of American and British public policy on FTR:

''The criterion of independence as it has been formulated by some ethics committees in not sufficient. According to this criterion, the use of “biological material” of illicit origin would be ethically permissible provided there is a clear separation between those who, on the one hand, produce, freeze and cause the death of embryos and, on the other, the researchers involved in scientific experimentation. The criterion of independence is not sufficient to avoid a contradiction in the attitude of the person who says that he does not approve of the injustice perpetrated by others, but at the same time accepts for his own work the “biological material” which the others have obtained by means of that injustice. . . .

It is necessary to distance oneself from the evil aspects of that system in order not to give the impression of a certain toleration or tacit acceptance of actions which are gravely unjust.''

Conclusion

What also made me sad upon writing this article for you was the challenge I faced while searching for sources to provide for you, and widening my knowledge on this topic even deeper, but as I said, it was a challenge. The second source link you will find at the end of this article was the richest source. A lot of what I wrote today, the direct quotes and older sources, are from there. You will find the very original resources from them.

I highly recommend continuing with the research, as I must do as well. This crime is done regularly, but very much in the dark, but it is an industry, or rather a crime, that is receiving positive responses. If we can dismantle the harvesting industry, this exploitation of murdered children, which enriches the abortion industry, the industry itself, can, through that, fall completely and hopefully permanently.

We can suffocate this industry with every act of courage we take for the defense of these little human beings, who are infinitely precious in the eyes of God, and if we remain faithful to our conscience, it should be precious to us as well.

Image from 'LiveAction'

SOURCES

https://humanlifereview.com/fatal-tissue-the-horror-and-the-lure/

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/fetal--newborn-organ-harvesting-respectable-graverobbing-9611

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6699036/

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44129.pdf

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20010810_RL31015_d452c9dbf0d9ed8e5c5a0f5442eb89e96ed8361e.pdf

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/stem-cell-research/human-embryo-research-is-illegal-immoral-and-unnecessary

https://www.cbhd.org/cbhd-resources/the-ethics-of-fetal-tissue-research-catholic-perspective

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html

(1) G. Vogel, "Can Old Cells Learn New Tricks?", 287 Science 1418-9 (February 25, 2000) at 1419; L. Johannes, "Adult Stem Cells Have Advantage Battling Disease," Wall Street Journal, April 13, 1999 at B1.

(2) G. Kolata, "Parkinson's Research Is Set Back By Failure of Fetal Cell Implants," The New York Times, March 8, 2001, at A1, A12.

(3) R. Folkerth and R. Durso, "Survival and proliferation of nonneural tissues, with obstruction of cerebral ventricles, in a parkinsonian patient treated with fetal allografts," 46 Neurology 1219-25 (May 1996).

(4) A. Caplan and G. McGee, "Fetal Cell Implants: What We Learned," Hastings Center Report, May-June 2001 at 6.

(5) S. Stolberg, "Scientists Create Scores of Embryos to Harvest Cells," The New York Times, July 11, 2001, at A1.

(6) A. Regalado, "Experiments in Controversy," Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2001, at B1

(These sources are credited to USCCB, providing the original resources above (1-6))

- @clementines.voice is Tommy Kearns' Instagram, where many have joined to pray and fight for Clementine. Tommy also provides educational sources on this matter.

Author: Aamu Maria C.

IVF is not pro-life. Here's why

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 11:04:00 +0000

Can you be pro-life and support IVF?

IVF is something that many pro-lifers deem as a moral and acceptable option, because through the process, life is created. But there is a problem with this stance.

Being pro-life is fighting for the dignity of all lives, including the embryos. And interestingly enough, when talking about abortion, we pro-lifers do say that the embryos have value and abortion is wrong from the moment of conception. But there is a slippery slope with accepting IVF as a pro-lifer. Yes, a life is formed, and a couple can have a child. But the methods need to be questioned. And as people, and as Christians, we have to pay close attention to the way we proceed with things, and not come at the expense of causing harm to others and violating God’s design.

In this article, we will examine what exactly happens during IVF, including its consequences, potential harms, and moral implications, viewed through a scientific lens, with a hint of a Christian response.

Before moving forward…

We must clear something important before going further: All children who have been conceived through IVF and have received this gift, that is, life, are themselves a gift from God. They are precious, and through an immoral way, something beautiful and sacred came through it. So their value are not different from those who were conceived naturally. And desiring a child is not bad.

However, this should not, as a society, justify continuing an immoral act. An act where, when one child lives a full life, several other babies are killed in the process or are used as an experiment. Taking someone else’s dignity should never be the means to run to. And our culture should stop preying on the emotional struggle and grief of those couples who are sterile and desire a child, to achieve selfish desires and profit off of them. And treating children as objects and testing on them. Our desires for something that is in itself good, like wanting children and a family, should not overpass morality, because then, it becomes selfish.

Our subjective intentions, even the good intentions, cannot dominate objective reality. Many pro-lifers tend to have a softer and flexible position about IVF. And if we truly value life and want to defend it with our best efforts, there can be no exceptions.

If you are struggling to conceive a baby and are suffering due to infertility, just know that you are not alone, and there is a way to bring this dream into your life and homes. I hope and pray that this article will help you with that. Help you to go closer to that, in an ethical way. ❤

What is IVF?

IVF is one form of assisted reproductive technology. It involves combining sperm and one or more eggs outside a woman’s body in a laboratory.

Image from ‘University of Utah Health’

Quick facts:

1960s-1970s: Research into human oocyte fertilization led to the possibility of IVF.
1978: Dr. Patrick Steptoe and Sir Robert Edwards achieved the first successful IVF birth with the birth of Louise Brown.
1 in 6 couples suffer worldwide from infertility.

The Process

To get the gametes, men usually masturbate, and women’s ovaries have to be dangerously stimulated by drugs. Technicians examine the semen and eggs and select the “healthiest”, creating with them multiple human embryos (which are human beings) in petri dishes. The embryos are then examined under microscopes, and any that show defects are killed. “Healthy” embryos are grown for a few days, tests are performed on them to make sure they “pass” quality control, and a few are selected for transfer to the woman’s womb or the womb of a gestational surrogate. Other embryos are killed or frozen and selected for various purposes, like donation to other patients, embryo-destructive research, or for future pregnancies etc.

What does IVF take away?

IVF is dehumanizing. As we recognize in the process of IVF, children have become test subjects. Their dignity is attacked.

In vitro fertilization produces the destruction of discarded embryos (equivalent to abortion), and in the case of multiple embryo transfer, is often accompanied by selective reduction (equivalent to abortion) of implanted embryos. The principle of this procedure is evil, involving the destruction of human embryos.

And the heartbreak of infertility puts couples in a vulnerable situation. And we must be careful that our desires that are in nature good, like wanting children, do not become an enemy to another child. It can also transform into selfishness. But the heartbreak of infertility also makes them vulnerable to an industry that gains its profit through their suffering and ultimately the lives of other children.

Why Catholics, and ultimately all Christians, cannot support IVF morally

Unfortunately, even when the Catholic Church condemns IVF, many Catholics do choose IVF and disagree with the Church’s stance on IVF. A 2013 Pew Research survey found that only 13% of U.S. Catholics believe IVF is morally wrong. This is heartbreaking to know as a Catholic and alarming. And many non-Catholics do not view IVF as immoral as well. If we don’t defend all lives and their dignity as Christians or pro-lifers, we do contradict ourselves.

The Catholic Church supports the pursuit of finding both technological and natural ways to overcome the unfortunate and painful situation of couples’ infertility. “Since children are a wonderful gift of marriage, it is a good thing to try to overcome the obstacles which prevent children from being conceived and born.” However, Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states:

“One may never do evil so that good may result from it” (1789). This principle is tied to the truth that certain acts are intrinsically evil. “There are some concrete acts … that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil” (CCC 1755)... “

In 1987, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a document known as Donum Vitae (“The Gift of Life”) addressing the moral point of view of the modern fertility procedure.

IVF separates the procreative and unitive meaning of the conjugal act. It seeks to procreate without the one-flesh union. This is a violation of the dignity of the human person because “the child has the right…to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents; and he also has the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception.”

The Dark Reality

In IVF, the embryos created in the lab are graded on their “quality.” If any embryos don’t hold up to the standard, they are discarded, frozen indefinitely, or even donated to research and eventually destroyed. These are human lives being destroyed because they have “undesirable” genetics.

IVF is modern-day eugenics. No different from the Nazis, who eliminated anyone who were ‘’unfit’’ for their ideal society.

Embryo “grading” — a subjective inspection to assess an embryo’s potential to successfully implant and grow to live birth (with “unfit” embryos destroyed). Preimplantation genetic testing also should not be conducted. This testing intends to select for desired traits and against unwanted ones. For example, if a couple only wants a girl, male embryos would be discarded. Couples who desire a child without certain birth defects may opt to destroy embryos that might have trisomy 21 (Down syndrome), etc. Do you start to see the enormous moral problem? Does this remind you of something?

Dr. Lauren Rubal, a board-certified OB/GYN and integrative medicine physician with a subspecialty in reproductive endocrinology and infertility, is among many doctors who have changed their minds on IVF and stopped offering it to their patients, acknowledging the immorality behind this process. And, instead of offering moral options to the couple longing for a family, without harming other children in the process.

“A recent study showed that the number of embryos needed to optimize cumulative live birth rates was nine,” said Rubal.

“This means that up to eight embryos may not survive or will be frozen or destroyed. So effectively, you are choosing the death of nine to get the life of one. Even though you have good intentions — you want life, you’re also choosing all of the consequences that follow.”

In choosing the deaths of other lives, IVF is not a pro-life choice. Another moral problem we face is the fact that nearly 1.5 million embryos are believed to be currently frozen in the U.S. alone. This process treats these children like property.

Dr. Rubal makes us notice something else: women who undergo IVF have two times the risk of life-threatening pregnancy complications, and a 26% increased risk of preterm birth. The children conceived through IVF who survive to birth have a 40% increased chance of birth defects and about double the chance of having autism. Recent studies have shown a significant risk of maternal death and morbidity associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and multiple pregnancies after IVF.

In the Netherlands, the overall mortality due to IVF is higher than the overall maternal mortality rate. The increased mortality is due to multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In an editorial in the British Journal of Medicine, Dr. Susan Bewley noted that in the United Kingdom between 2003 and 2005, there were two deaths due to abortion. In contrast, there were seven deaths related to complications from IVF. These cases go unreported.

The National Library of Medicine in 2020 reports:

“Today, almost 3% of all children in Germany — and in countries with a very liberal policy, like Denmark, 6% of all children are conceived by IVF. In every class at school, there is one IVF child.”

Researchers have found that regarding the health of those conceived and born:

Risks of heart defects, musculoskeletal and central nervous system malformations, preterm birth, and low birth weight are increased in children conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF). The risks seem to be based on maternal and paternal factors, but also on IVF itself.

The Catholic News Agency estimates that more die from IVF than abortion, stating:

“The CDC estimates that more than 238,000 patients attempted IVF in 2021. If clinics created between seven and eight embryos for every patient, that would yield about 1.6 million to 1.9 million embryos over a year. Despite these high numbers, fewer than 100,000 embryos were brought to term, which suggests that somewhere between 1.5 million and 1.8 million embryos created through IVF were never born. Alternatively, the abortion industry claimed about 985,000 lives from July 2022 through June 2023, suggesting that the IVF industry could be ending nearly twice as many human lives every year.”

IVF is not an option. Then what is?

NaProTechnology is one ethical alternative to IVF. One study has confirmed earlier findings that NaProTechnology results in several live births, without the danger to women and newborn infants. Adoption of born children is another ethical option. Many children seek a stable, loving home. One can even adopt embryos that have been abandoned as well. At the end of this article, you will find the source for this, if interested.

What is NaProTechnology?

NaProTechnology (NPT) — that makes use of a woman’s natural fertile cycles, and in vitro fertilization (IVF), which is a form of assisted reproductive technology (ART) and which seeks to replace the natural means of procreation.

Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) focuses on this. By addressing the underlying causes of infertility, rather than directly manipulating the reproductive process. It is safer, moral, and even more affordable than IVF, and improves the health of the patients. Multiple studies have shown that through RRM, an equal or even higher birth rate occurs than with IVF.

Let’s summarise:

IVF neglects the underlying health issues, and costs on average 20,000$ per cycle. Remember, couples need multiple cycles.
Costs 4x more per birth compared with RRM, and has a low success rate (10%).
Has a high human embryo loss rate: 85% of the human embryos are either frozen, discarded, used for experimentation, or miscarried.

In the US alone, over 1 million embryos are frozen. In 2019, Europe saw 335,744 frozen embryo replacement cycles, according to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), and 2019 over 1 million ART treatment cycles were reported.

In the UK, embryo storage cycles increased to 10,719 in 2021, a 30% increase from 2019, according to the HFEA.
In Spain, there are 668,082 embryos in the conservation banks, and about 10% (around 60,005) of them have an uncertain fate and risk of being abandoned, according to the latest data provided by the Spanish Fertility Society (SEF).

RRM helps you get pregnant ethically, yet also values the health of the woman, like PCOS, hormonal imbalances, endometriosis, etc.

This shows that RRM provides the longing desire to build a family ethically, without sacrificing other children throughout the process, and prioritizes health and addresses the root cause of infertility.

What we must confront

Donor sperm or eggs can introduce problems of identity. Research shows that individuals conceived with donor sperm often experience confusion later in life. Also, a child needs a mother and a father. Research has shown this unpopular belief in today’s day and age. IVF is a popular option for same-sex couples, like surrogacy; an article that will be written soon. Also, the ‘trend’ of women choosing to become single mothers and not wanting to carry a child, like some celebrities have done, uses surrogacy or IVF as an option.

These are too ‘controversial’ to talk about, and one will most likely be called all sorts of names, like ‘homophobic’ or shaming women wanting to become mothers, etc. However, this is for the good of all, especially the most innocent. The destruction of human embryos, the danger to women and newborn infants, and the replacement of the marital act in procreation are all consequences of IVF, which have a long-term impact, as in our culture, for example.

I would more than encourage family life, especially as I’m a Catholic, but to do it evilly is not the right way. It shouldn't sit right with us to stay silent or neutral about these realities, just because of how others will perceive us. Sinning in vanity is too common, and I have personally committed this sin too often in the past, and it hasn’t led to the goodwill of others. We also must share these truths with others, as many people, including couples considering IVF, who most likely are not informed of this dark reality. And to know that there is an ethical, healthier, and even more secure chance, and a way to bring a baby into this world with love.

We must bring the darkness into the light. And defend every life. Yes, including the human embryos.

Sources

An adoption resource - https://christianadoptions.org/

https://studentsforlife.org/2024/02/23/what-to-expect-when-youre-expecting-to-talk-about-invitro-fertilization-ivf/

https://studentsforlife.org/learn/in-vitro-fertilization/

https://abolitionistsrising.com/ivf/

https://www.adoptingembryos.com/— You can adopt the abandoned embryos.

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/reproductive-technology/begotten-not-made-a-catholic-view-of-reproductive-technology

More resources are found on the 'Service' section of the website

Basic Biology and Guide to the Beginning of Life (fertilization)

Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:14:00 +0000

There is much debate over when life begins. Some say after the baby's viability, others say when consciousness or 'personhood' begins, or simply right after birth. Some go as far as to say that no one knows when life begins. Where are these claims founded upon? Are they scientific? What is the evidence supporting their statements?

Unfortunately, they are based on an emotional approach and not facts. And because many doctors are promoting this due to the profit they gain, as the abortion clinics, and the majority of celebrities and politicians in the West do as well, it has become a strong influence and a 'confirmation' that makes us feel 'better' about accepting abortion. But they aren't based on facts, but on propaganda and emotional arguments with repeated words and phrases that they sometimes have a difficult time reasoning with logical answers. And unfortunately, being pro-abortion has been masked with it being 'merciful' and doing the 'moral' thing by the woman, not realizing that they are stepping on the value that a woman (a mother in this case) has, and abortion wounds that, while also taking someone else's life.

The Pro-Life stand is a scientific one, which demonstrates life begins at conception. The response is often that it isn't true or that this is solely a religion-based answer. But science disputes otherwise, because objective truths do exist, and one does not necessarily have to be a Christian to know them.

Let's begin our basic guide to the first step of when life is created, and get our basics well learned.

fertilization - the fusion of an egg and sperm immediately resulting in a new, genetically distinct human being (zygote). A multi-step process that is complete in 24 hours.

The fetus/baby has his/her human DNA, distinct from the mother and father, The gender and physical traits like skin, hair, and eye color of a baby are determined at conception So no, a fetus is not part of the woman's body, but a woman's body carries another body that has its own unique human DNA, which is entitled to the rights of his or her autonomy, as this word is often used to justifu abortion. And two humans, a female and a male, cannot produce a cat or an elephant, because they are not of the same species. We can only procreate human (Homo sapiens) babies and vice versa. Embryology (the study of the formation and development of an embryo and fetus) and developmental biology have proven this. Embryology texts, scientific journals, and other relevant authorities also confirm them. Just to bring a few examples:

"Human development begins at fertilization when a sperm fuses with an oocyte to form a single cell, a zygote," explains the textbook The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology. "This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual."

"The development of a human being begins with fertilization," notes Langman's Medical Embryology, "a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

Scientists have discovered something amazing. When the sperm enters the egg, within minutes of fertilization, a burst of light emerges. This, once again, signals the beginning of a new, unique life.

If someone insists that fertilization is not the beginning of life, are the following options the correct ones? The following options have been used to indicate that it is the beginning of life. But are they? No, they aren't, and science will tell you why:

Implantation — it is a change in location of the human embryo from the fallopian tube to the uterus. Again, when sperm and egg unite, a unique human life has begun. And this, fertilization/conception, occurs before implantation.

Heartbeat or brainwaves — those are just developmental breakthroughs.
Pain sensation —it is a stage in development ( Congenital Insensitivity to Pain (CIP) is a rare genetic condition where individuals cannot perceive pain from birth, so this stage never develops in some people. Are they less human because of this lack of sensation?)

Consciousness — that’s also, once again, a stage of development which can even change after birth (in a coma, when we sleep, under anesthetic...).
Birth — that’s just a location change. We did not become magically alive in one second.

After fertilization, a human being continues to develop. Our human brains don't fully develop until the age of 25, according to science. How far can this go, then? As said before, after birth, we continue to develop. Are children, teenagers less human, valuable, and deserve fewer rights than fully developed adults? Often, I hear pro-choicers claiming that the fetus is not alive; only after birth does it become magically alive. But how can someone or something grow if it isn't alive?

Final Thoughts

At first, pro-choicers were not so much on board with abortion throughout all nine months. Abortion is extreme in itself, but the other side has its limits. But today, we see that it is widely acceptable to support abortion up until the ninth month and even after birth, if the baby is simply not wanted. How much further will this go if we don't act? I once heard a woman say that we should kill even foster children because of their hard situation. We are seeing the furthering of this with assisted suicide.

Just recently, France passed the law for assisted suicide. Countless stories and statistics are showing the high numbers of people with depression, the homeless, and the elderly with health problems are being offered assisted suicide as a first option. That is for a future article, but the point is that when we accept murder with one set of people, the most innocent ones like babies in the womb, how much more numb will this world become towards other groups? Nothing can come good from something that is, by its nature, destructive.

That is why every single voice, action, and effort to defend life and the most innocent, defenseless humans of our societies is crucial. How did slavery in the USA come to an end? When actions were taken. When a complete abolition of its crime was to be done. When they risked everything to fight for those humans, who had value and were made in the image of God, Who is goodness and love itself.

Our laws, societies should protect the vulnerable, defenseless members of our societies. To ensure that the right of each human life is met. To ensure with their fullest efforts to protect and prevent anything that threatens that. To create a standard of receiving life among the people, rather than welcoming death and abandoning the vulnerable, as assisted suicide does as well. And it all starts at home, too. We can, in our little corner of the world, bring the value of life.

Just because a majority agrees upon something does not make it automatically right. Historically, it has usually been the minority that has fought for the right moral position. In the USA, most people, even those who did not own slaves, believed that slavery was necessary for their economic supremacy in the world and rejected the abolitionists who wanted to criminalize slavery. Once, in Europe, Jews were seen as a problem (and unfortunately today is rising again), and Nazi Germany came, killing over 40 million people, 6 million Jews, just because they weren't seen human enough, if human at all. This is happening again, with our babies. Our society accepts it, justifies it, creates a reasoning that justifies the crime, by molding it being a better moral stand and choice. And staying lukewarm and neutral on these issues is not solving it, rather helping the problem to continue and nurture itself.

Below, you can watch a short but educational, scientific video on fertilization. Fantastic for children as well. Do share these educational videos as much as possible.

Source/video from: Nucleus Medical Media- subtitles are available in 44 languages!

Since “human rights” are rooted in being a human being, rather than one's characteristics, such as size, age, development, etc. It should be obvious that these same rights and dignity that apply to me and you are also to be applied to the baby in the womb. As many try to dehumanize the baby by calling them 'fetuses' (which means 'offspring' in Latin, so the name itself highlights their humanity) or 'zygote' or an embryo, these scientific names do not take away the truth of what the very science proves.

A baby at 7-8 weeks. Image from 'LiveAction'

I hope this has been a helpful, straightforward, and simple guide to the basics of the creation of life. Next time and in future articles, we will dive deeper into specific issues, like answering the solution of these issues in the cases of r*pe and incest, how all pro-lifers should be abolitionists (meaning that abortion should be criminalized), fetal development, the effect of abortions in women physcally and mentally with statistics and personal stories, on chemical abortions, IVF, does banning abortions harm women and more!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May God bless you, whoever you are, and bring light into your lives. And may through His love, we fight for life and transform our culture of death into a culture of life. And may He heal us from the effects of this culture of death. And know that forgiveness and healing from abortion are found in Jesus Christ.

Sources: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/

https://www.mccl.org/post/2017/12/20/the-unborn-is-a-human-being-what-science-tells-us-about-unborn-children

https://aul.org/abortion/

https://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_documents.asp?session=33&docid=31381

Baby Olivia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-lQOooYAs8

There are more resources in the 'Service' section of the website.