Comparing aborted fetuses (no memories, no personalities, no attachments, no dreams) to Holocaust victims (who had all of those things, were fully formed human beings) is incredibly disrespectful and shameful. Comparing a human being with ambitions and feelings to a clump of tissue that looks like a chunk of vomit in a petri dish is not only profoundly illogical, but heartless and belittling to those victims. You do not represent this generation, and your work does nothing but harm.
Which part to cover first? How fetuses can actually dream or recognize their mother’s voice? Therefore debunking what you said about attachments and memories and dreams?
About how you think this 9 week old baby looks like vomit, and not a human being? And apparently thinking looking like vomit means its okay to kill something no matter what it is, just based on what it looks like?
I think I’ll just say yet again, that we compare the abortion to the Holocaust sometimes not because the victims were good or bad, worthy or unworthy, old or young, but because they were human beings who were killed en masse.
There are three prerequisites for being a human being that is worthy of dignity and, you know, not being killed. Distinct, alive, and human. (Distinct and alive could be a bird, distinct and human could be a corpse, human and alive could be your fingernail.) But a fetus, which has its own DNA, processes wastes and can hear and dream, and is of the same species as both its parents because that’s how nature works, is all three. (Death penalty advocates might add innocent, but I’ve never heard of a fetus committing one of the Seven Deadlies, and you did not specify that Holocaust victims were innocent. So.) Holocaust victims were also all three. And they were massacred.
So our comparison simply says “look at all these millions of human beings being killed because someone decided to say they weren’t human! All humans deserve rights, not just the ones you like! Killing is wrong and terrible!” And you looked at that and saw “heartless”.
I think the reason for that is that it would be uncomfortable, wouldn’t it, to have something you advocate be compared to one of the worst acts in the modern world – perhaps in all of history? Yeah, that would suck for me too. That’s why I don’t go in for the Holocaust analogy. Not because it’s inaccurate. But because I’m pandering to your feelings. I’m actually trying to be sensitive to the fact that you don’t like to be called a murderer.
Well, I don’t like to be called disrespectful or heartless, but when you said it, I looked at it and thought about it logically and wrote out a reply. I’m asking you to look at what you said and what I said and think about it the same way. Maybe do some research. Read up on it more. Try to start friendlier dialogues. Wonder if maybe the Holocaust analogy is more sound than you think. Not perfect in every particular – that’s what makes it an analogy. But sound.
You made me angry, which is what I think you intended, so good job. But I’m not going to respond to you angrily. Because I don’t want you to be my enemy. I want you to be my ally. Not because I want to be right, but because the right already exists, and I want you to see the truth and join with me in my attempt to stop the idea that millions of deaths mean nothing. That’s why we say “we are the pro-life generation”, you know. Not because every single one of us is pro-life. We’re not talking statistics. We’re talking hope.
We say that in hope that this will be the generation that will win people like you and me and everyone else over to the truth. And in the hope that this will be the generation that will stop the slaughter. That will see that trying to do that isn’t harmful, it’s good. It’s a rally cry. And we’re not trying to leave you out of it, we’re inviting you in, so you don’t have to get defensive when analogies like that are made.
Think about it.
Be a voice for the voiceless by subscribing to our weekly digest and sharing the truth with the world.