What a world we live in where the media doesn’t even know what to call the unborn. Check out the headlines at a local newspaper called the Bennington Banner: Unborn children are killed in head-on Route 7 crash.
But the the story which follows classifies the victims differently.
Drug use may have played a role in a head-on crash Monday night that resulted in the death of two fetuses and is being investigated as a criminal act, law enforcement officials said Tuesday.
The crash on Route 7 near the Apple Valley Inn sent five people to the hospital, including a woman pregnant with twins. Bennington Police Sgt. Lloyd Dean said the 6-month-old fetuses did not survive the crash.
So the headlines says unborn children and the story says fetuses. And if that’s not enough schizophrenia they add an updated story with the headline “UPDATE: Unborn fetuses died in crash.”
“Unborn fetuses” as opposed to born fetuses?
Now, to add a wrinkle, if the mother was going to have the babies which it appears she was shouldn’t the twins be called unborn children since if we are to believe it’s all about the mother’s choice then her decision would be paramount here.
But we’ve always known it’s not about the mother’s choice. It’s about dehumanizing a class of people to make it ok for their slaughter.
The awful truth is that there were probably editorial meetings where reporters and editors had to decide what to call the victims. The sad part is that they had it right the first time. This is a tragic story about the death of unborn children.
The logic of abortion is so non-existent that intelligent people don’t even know what to call babies anymore.
HT Drew Ann
August 12, 2009 at 5:22 pm
If the babies are "fetuses", then are they able to prosecute? Some loon lawyer will argue that no one was killed.
August 12, 2009 at 6:12 pm
If they admit that the "fetuses" died, they tacitly admit that they were alive in the first place. They really are doing the most evil kind of dehumanizing. They've already answered the question of when life begins, but they're going to ignore that and go back to the "blob of tissue" excuse.
August 12, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I guess the loss of human life in the fetuses is undeniable. The question is if this life is already vested with any right. Correct me if I am wrong, but the current standard is when it starts to breathe through the mouth. So, the injury done to these "non-persons" is not actionable based on US law.
August 12, 2009 at 8:06 pm
In this story… http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090812/NEWS/908120356 Four people died. Not three as the article states. Mary, Mother of the unborn, Pray for us!
August 12, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Actually, the medical term for a baby residing in its mother's uterus is "fetus". This is no more judgmental than calling a stomach a "stomach" rather than a "tummy".
August 12, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Just a quick comment- this kind of confusion is more common in the media. Verum Serum ran an article a while back about the brutal murder/kidnapping of the 8 month pregnant lady from Massachusets. The mom was murdered with her child in the womb (technically fetus), but the baby that was so brutally welcomed to life was kidnapped, as a breathing baby.
Per the fetus-is-a-dehumanizing-term arguement, I agree that it is dehumanizing. Fetus can refer to unborn pigs as well as unborn children. It is a biology term, and although correct in the scientific world, it is completely devoid of the sense of infinite worth that we should be conveying about the unborn child in the womb.
The stories here sicken me, as does the terminology. Why can't we drop baby and fetus and call the unborn children or something? That's what they are- children at early developmental stages…
Anyone else have better suggestions on how to get the language back in our favor without dehumanizing the unborn?
August 13, 2009 at 1:50 am
I actually favor opening a story with "unborn children" and then moving to phrases like "both fetuses were killed"– make it very, very clear that they're referring to the same stage of human life.
Same way that calling someone "female" exclusively can be mildly insulting, calling the unborn exclusively "fetuses" can be insulting– but using a medical term that is accurate isn't, in and of itself, bad.
August 13, 2009 at 1:56 am
Scientifically accurate or not, the word "fetus" in the media is a politically loaded word.
August 13, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Which is why we need a better term to refer to the unborn. Fetus, since it is a correct medical term also used to describe any mammal of that gestational stage, can be seen as a non-descript, non-human way to refer to children not born yet. All of which furthers the whole "blob of tissue" dissociation.
Fetus: correct? Yes. Truly descriptive of the child waiting to be born? No.
August 13, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Isn't fetus latin for infant?
..just sayin'
-Chris M
August 13, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Chris M,
Yes. But fetus is also modern English for "not fully human"
Just sayin….
August 13, 2009 at 5:16 pm
One request– when trying to find a way to talk about unborn kids, please avoid all the cutesy names people have been suggesting to me as ways to refer to him… "Gootchaboo" and such….
It's true my POV is a bit more clinical than most, because I grew up on a ranch– I've seen calves miscarried at late second trimester, and know anyone trying to say they weren't alive or the same species as their mother is insane on a deep level.
Maybe that's why I favor making folks realize what exactly a fetus is– the stage before infant.
Beats the heck out of "fertilized egg," something that doesn't exist in humans…
August 14, 2009 at 4:31 am
It's actually worse… The original story stated that the woman lost her twins babies which was then changed to 2 fetuses. Under Vermont law, there are no charges for killing an unborn child (even if the parents intend to and want to have the children). The mother is speaking out about changing the law. I'm sure that the Legislature of the State of Vermont won't do a thing… they have better things to do, like allow assisted suicide…
August 15, 2009 at 8:21 pm
I accompanied my pregnant cousin to her first ultrasound (her husband-a Marine was stationed in Iraq at the time), We were lucky enough to have a great ProLife Dr who had her husband joined us via Internet webcam.
The funny thing-Not one of us said or even thought the word"fetus". It was, "Oh, look at my baby!" and " Your baby is beautiful". Proud Daddy exclaimed, "O my God, my child!" as he welled up with tears.
The Dr then explained how the "baby" was developing & what happened in each stage. the last thing was that we heard the babys heartbeat-a human heartbeat.
Enough of this fetus nonsense-thats fine for Drs in medical school & hs biology class but lets stop kidding ourselves: Nobody with a half of a brain goes to the Dr and says: "Is my fetus okay, Dr?
"Wrong is wrong even if everybody's doing it [saying it] & right is right even if nobody's doing it. [saying it]
Here's a novel thought: why doesnt everyone just start saying exactly what they mean-oh thats right that would make sense!!
I know Im ranting & my grammar is incorrect here, but Im getting really sick of the constant nonsense & Im aggravated… (Im Italian, Im allowed!:)
thanks for the opportunity to rant!!
August 25, 2009 at 6:53 am
A new-fangled drug, Saphris, has received the approval of the FDA for treatment of adult schizophrenia and bipolar disorder I. Bipolar I disorder is an unremitting, vicious, intermittent psychiatric disorder that leads to sporadic episodes of despair, agitation and reduced sleeping patterns. The general side effects in schizophrenics are restlessness or staying totally stock-still, reduced oral sensation and sleepiness.