By Olivia Murray
What kind of a monster looks at a cherubic infant, with rosy cheeks and perfect little features, and then declares that precious child to be “useless” or “pathetic”?
I’ll tell you who: nihilistic leftists, that’s who. The fact that they’re obsessed with targeting and dehumanizing the most vulnerable ought to be a massive red flag, and there’s plenty of historical precedent to attest to that. What is it with these deranged freaks categorically targeting everything that is wholesome for destruction?
Yesterday, The Atlantic published an essay titled, “Pregnancy Is a War; Birth is a Cease-Fire” (yes that’s the actual lead-in to this steaming pile of drivel). Laying the framework for an argument against the sanctity of human life, the teaser then read, “Fetuses want more than their mother can safely give.”
The author, Katherine J. Wu, starts her tale with a logical fallacy, building her house of cards upon the “scientific” and widely-accepted theory that humans evolved from single-celled organisms. Let me stress the word “theory” as this is not settled science (unlike human embryology, a discipline of which I’m sure Ms. Wu is willfully ignorant), because it remains unable to meet a standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’
Throughout, Wu sprinkled references to the animal kingdom, blurring the hard line which separates animal life from human life, one that renders humanity uniquely sacred; but aside from that, the entire essay sets the stage for a reality in which “mothers” — hey, I thought the correct term was birthing parent, or pregnant person? — are at enmity with their children, both before and after birth. Or, as the enlightened academic would say, “maternal-fetal conflict.” Get a load of this:
However you look at it, pregnancy is marked by intergenerational strife, if not an all-out war between an offspring and its parent. Birth, then, in addition to welcoming new life, can bring out an end to the harshest hostilities….
Really? “Harshest hostilities”? Pregnancy is “harsher” than being sawn in half by German machine gun fire? It’s “harsher” than the torture at Japanese POW camps?
She continues, including insight from a host of “experts,” all of whom declare that mother and child are at war with each other (thank goodness for the contribution of modern, leftist science). Wu spoke to Jessica Ayers, an evolutionary social psychologist (whatever the heck that is), and wrote:
Fetuses may maximize their chances of surviving after birth by extracting as many resources from their parent as they can. Their tool for mooching [emphasis added] is the placenta—technically, the very first organ that any human produces, Ayers said—which allows a fetus to access its mother’s blood vessels and siphon out nutrients. The human placenta actually entrenches itself so aggressively into the uterine wall that it sometimes leads to severe hemorrhaging at birth, Ayers told me, when the tissues starts to rip away.
When describing human babies, Wu refers to them as “offspring” or “fetuses” — accurate, but rather sanitized so as not to induce affection — but when talking about a baby wildebeest? The sentimental and colloquial “kiddo”.
Nothing is sacred to the left, not even eternal truths like agape love.
Wu should have at least acknowledged her apparent mentor, and given a hat tip to Mr. Saul Alinsky. From his notorious handbook for Machiavellian maneuvering, Rule Thirteen states, “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Wu picked her target (innocent babies), steadied the crosshairs and ignored all distractions, didn’t shy away from her target, and polarized it. We can already see where this is going next: Abortion isn’t wrong! Infanticide isn’t wrong! After all, maternal-fetal conflict is a legitimate scientific and academic observation! Babies and children will kill their mother (sorry, birthing parent) if given the chance! She’s only acting in self-defense! You’re a Second Amendment supporter aren’t you? Isn’t self-defense a right?
I actually debated on whether to write this or not, because the Bible does say “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him” — but I simply couldn’t resist.