At first, I thought partial birth abortion was a hoax.
I mean, why would any woman submit to this procedure? Why would any doctor do it?
It made no sense.
Now it does.
Read how I came to understand the whys of partial birth abortion at The National Catholic Register:
Partial birth abortion.
The phrase is an oxymoron of itself. How does one do both birth and abortion in one procedure? It appears that doctors perform this feat by inducing a “partial” birth … which then turns into an abortion.
I never heard the phrase “partial birth abortion” until the late 1990s. The procedure, as I understood it then and understand it now, is as oxymoronic in medical terms as it is in linguistics.
How and why would it ever be in the best interests of the mother to induce labor of a near-term baby, which is then delivered feet first with all the tearing and agony to the mother that this entails, then stop the delivery long enough to suction out the baby’s brain before pulling out the head backwards?
How graphic do I have to get to demonstrate that this would be agony for the mother, that it would damage her physically, and that it is far more dangerous to her medically than just delivering the baby normally and trying to save it?
Partial birth abortion is so obviously bad for the mother that I did not, when I first heard of it, believe that it existed. I honestly thought that the term and the procedure were both fictions that someone dreamed up.