Michael Forrest is a Catholic writer, speaker and catechist who converted to the Catholic faith from the Baptist church. He has written for several Catholic periodicals with a focus on pro-life, cultural and ecumenical issues. He resides in Massachusetts with his wife and four children.
As we have seen in recent weeks, a number of states have begun passing increasingly inhuman and barbaric laws that permit abortion up until birth for almost any reason and that allow a child who survives a failed abortion to be left to die. Massachusetts is now fast-tracking just such a law: Bill number S.1209 the “Act to Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Access” (ROE Act).
And in the spirit of Orwell’s 1984, pro-abortion governmental forces in Massachusetts are rushing to redefine key words and concepts in order avoid the danger that people might actually think about what abortion really is, and what it does. The “ROE Act” would make the following definitional changes to current abortion law.
Current wording of Massachusetts General Law 112, section 12K:
Abortion: the knowing destruction of the life of an unborn child or the intentional expulsion or removal of an unborn child from the womb other than for the principal purpose of producing a live birth or removing a dead fetus.
Pregnancy: the condition of a mother carrying an unborn child.
Unborn child: the individual human life in existence and developing from implantation of the embryo in the uterus until birth.
Replacement wording of ROE Act:
Abortion: any medical treatment intended to induce the termination of a clinically diagnosable pregnancy except for the purpose of producing a live birth. The term abortion does not include miscarriage management.
Pregnancy: means the presence of an implanted human embryo or fetus within a person’s uterus.
Did you notice a term that is entirely missing in the proposed new section 12K under the ROE Act?
Yes, that is indeed a very dangerous term when it comes to abortion goodthink. A recognition that there is an “unborn child” being killed? Can’t have that! Doubleplus ungood!
In 1984, the “Ministry of Truth” created the word “unperson” for an individual who had all evidence for his existence erased after being executed. In Massachusetts, they delete words that acknowledge the existence of a whole class of human beings who are being executed. Kudos for efficiency.
Next, you’ll notice that “the knowing destruction of the life of an unborn child” is excised from the definition of “abortion.” Instead, the new definition begins with abortspeak euphemisms like “medical treatment” that is “intended to induce the termination of a clinically diagnosable pregnancy.”
And last, the definition of “pregnancy” is stripped of the words “child” and “mother,” and replaced with the less troubling “embryo,” “fetus” and “person’s uterus.”
Of course, no amount of language redefinition will alter the brutal reality that we’re still talking about the killing of unborn children right up until birth, and allowing children who manage to survive the attack and be born, to be left to die.
God help us.