Blog Archive


Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Regarding the recent SCOTUS decision... I came across a blog in which the writer wrote the following:
The purpose of Orwellian language is so people can pretend there is a slight possibility the words are an accurate description.
Some people, who have not actually read the decision, think the Supremes recently limited the ability of women to have late term abortions. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In these situations women can still become un-pregnant. They can “disarticulate the fetus” and even “reduce” or “separate the fetal calvarium.".

"Disarticulate" actually means to dismember it.

"Reducing the calvarium" means to suck out the baby's brains. Sorry--I mean "fetus."

When a doctor separates the calvarium she is removing the head with scissors.

These procedures can all still be used in late term pregnancies. Although, it requires a little more finesse, the court said it is ok to require that it all be done without inducing delivery.

Does anyone else think there is something wrong when civilized people can sit around and actually discuss whether it is better to sever a baby’s head or just suck out it's brain, and then conclude it all depends on the precise physical location of the body at the time?

This is all Orwellian obfuscation of the truth. There is a slight possibility that the location of the body at the time the brains are sucked out has some profound moral bearing, but it is unlikely.

None of us are as precise with language as we should be, but Orwellian doublespeak is something altogether different.

There is always a reason for it.
After having read that post, with which I agree completely, one would tend to assume that the writer must be socially conservative in his or her beliefs (since the liberal agenda is so anti-life). So it would come as quite a surprise to the reader that the writer actually describes herself as a bisexual post-modern neo-feminist with unique interests including nudism. So if she can "get it" on abortion, why can't her fellow feminists? The concept of every human being's right to life shouldn't be so hard to grasp, right? But, as we read in Keystone last night,
they are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more. (Eph. 4:18-19)
Only through the saving power of Christ can we see the "light" and become sensitive again to God's law.


Recent Comments


Darius' book montage

The Cross Centered Life: Keeping the Gospel The Main Thing
Crazy Love: Overwhelmed by a Relentless God
Overcoming Sin and Temptation
According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible
Disciplines of a Godly Man
Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism Is the Solution and Not the Problem
When Helping Hurts: Alleviating Poverty Without Hurting the Poor. . .and Ourselves
The Prodigal God: Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith
Respectable Sins
The Kite Runner
Life Laid Bare: The Survivors in Rwanda Speak
Machete Season: The Killers in Rwanda Speak
A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I am a missional, evangelical, post/protestant, liberal/conservative, mystical/poetic, biblical, charismatic/contemplative, fundamentalist/calvinist, ... anabaptist/anglican, metho
Show Them No Mercy
The Lord of the Rings
Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass
The Truth War: Fighting for Certainty in an Age of Deception
Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming
The Chronicles of Narnia
Les Misérables

Darius Teichroew's favorite books »