Friday, March 23, 2012

You Should Be Equally Disturbed

Corpses scattered, man holds boy murdered in Rwandan Genocide

Bloodied bodies on Rwandan streets, 1994. A century of bitterness and oppression broke loose, as the Hutus mowed down the once superior Tutsis. The Tutsis were lighter skinned Africans with sharper features who in the 19th century, during Belgium's occupation of Rwanda, had been declared by the Belgic as the superior race. The Tutsis were the minority of Rwandans who were put into power in the Beligic colonies. The rest of the population, the darker skinned and less wealthy were called the Hutus. They were given identification cards and declared either superior or lesser. The 100 days of genocide in 1994 between the Hutus and the Tutsis was a result of this racial tension that had been created in the 19th century. This creation of race was a result of social darwinistic ideas imposed upon the Rwandan colony at the end of the 19th century. In 100 days, an estimated 800,000 people were murdered.

Today in Dr. Mac's Western Civ. class we learned about this, and watched portions from the movie Hotel Rwanda. Before class I had just been at Planned Parenthood doing sidewalk counseling, or trying to convince women not to get abortions and not to support Planned Parenthood. My mind was on the genocide of unborn babies when I came to class and learned about the Rwandan genocide. I was deeply disturbed by the images of all the dead people in the movie, but then I thought about how other people, whether Christian or not, would probably be equally disturbed. I would say that something is seriously wrong with a person if they are not at least somewhat disgusted by the Rwandan genocide. 

Yet an hour earlier I had conversed with a girl, 17 years old, who was at Planned Parenthood to get her second abortion this year. She already had a toddler, which her mom was currently caring for, and she had killed her second child in January. She told me that adoption wasn't an option for her because she couldn't live her life worrying about what kind of family her child was raised in. She couldn't do an open adoption because then she would have to worry about her kid. If she had the baby, she would keep it, but she doesn't have enough money. In her mind, she was doing what was best for herself and her daughter by letting this child go. 

I asked her why it was okay to kill a child because it's in her uterus but it's wrong to kill a little kid. She just answered that abortion isn't a good thing, but it was her best option. She said that it is nice to be able to get an abortion in her situation. She refused any alternatives like adoption, or charities to help with costs. When I realized I could do nothing to stop her, because my words had been spent, I told her about past-abortion counseling. But she informed me that she wasn't really affected by her last abortion, so she doesn't think she'll be needing counseling. 

She was cold, set in stone. I realize this could have been a front that she was putting on for me, but her arguments were all so self centered. They were all arguments I've heard before, the same dehumanizing selfish arguments. How can we rationalize murder? How did murder become an option because of convenience? 
Foot of an aborted baby found in a dumpster outside a Planned Parenthood

I see connections between the Rwandan genocide and the current worldwide abortion genocide. In America (mind you, this is ONLY the numbers from America, not counting everywhere else in the world), approximately 3,315 children are killed with their mother's consent everyday. In 100 days, that's 331,500. But now imagine that this is something that has been legal in America since 1973. This isn't 100 days we're talking about, but 39 years! And abortion is not just in America; it is all over the world. How can the world be horrified by 100 days of genocide in Rwanda killing 800,000 people, but so many people are indifferent, or stone cold careless, or radically in support of abortion, 39 years of unborn child genocide? 

Both the conflict between the Hutus and the Tustis were a result of social darwinistic theory, that some races and peoples are genetically superior to others. That those who are superior deserve power and better lives. Planned Parenthood was also started by Margaret Sanger, a huge social darwinist who wanted to stop minority groups (blacks, mexicans, etc), poor people, sick people, retarded people, etc from having children. She was a proponent for eugenics, sterilizing these groups, but she also found another way to make these unwanted human beings stop procreating. She set up Planned Parenthood centers in minority and low income areas that gave out birth control and performed abortions. Just because that was about 100 years ago does not mean that Planned Parenthood's reason for existence has really changed (other than the fact that they get a lot of money from abortions). They still dehumanize, and target these supposedly less valuable mothers, killing their unwanted children.  

There are social darwinistic similarities between the Rwandan genocide and the current abortion genocide, yet 100 days of murdered Africans disturbs most people significantly more than 39 years of unborn children murdered in clean medical offices that claim to be bettering society. Let's be honest about this. Stop looking the other way and rationalizing murder. Convenience is no excuse for killing. If killing innocent Rwandan people by the 1000s is wrong, then be consistent. Be equally as disturbed when you think about all the unborn children that are slaughtered every day by a doctors hands and a mother's consent. 

1 comment: