New Stanek WND column, "Obama: Not pro-infanticide? Prove it!"

We don’t need to prove that Obama is pro-infanticide; it’s obvious to everyone, all he has to do is keep lying. Winning that battle would not accomplish our core pro-life objective which is to prove that the Zygote (the single-cell person formed by two gametes—a female ovum fertilized by a male sperm, each having 23 chromosomes—that, at the moment of fertilization, become a new, individuated (DNA) living human person) has a right to all the freedoms promised by the Declaration of Independence. Our current strategy is to incrementally chip away at the abortion tree of evil; we attack its branches one by one, hoping to eventually destroy the tree, but it thrives because it's fed by the root which is firmly entrenched, bearing its evil fruit, which the media feeds to the people. The root of the abortion death tree can only be destroyed by focusing on the core (root) of the debate.

The core or crux of the debate is the right of the preborn zygote, embryo, fetus, baby to be freely born! Early pro-life activism was virtually smothered by the contrived pro-abortion language and imagery of choice, privacy, and a woman's rights, and with the help of the media, shifted the debate from the core reality—the murder of innocent preborn babies—to a woman's rights. That shift was made possible by our fixation on making gradual progress at a time when we should have united solidly to fight for every single innocent preborn citizen. Our flawed strategy was rendered effete by its compromise of principle.

The unwarranted judicial activism of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions of 1973 turned the Constitution on its head. They not only legalized the barbarism of abortion at any time during pregnancy, they created a pervasive disrespect for all human life; the consequence has caused us to endure the shameful era of dump bin babies—treating human life as trash, and as we’ve found out, they have been trashed even in our hospitals where, other than in the womb, human life should be the most secure!

So let’s look at some of the core questions the abortion industry and its advocates must be challenged to answer: Does an innocent preborn female fetus have an inherent moral right to be born once she has been launched into human existence by the behavior of a person or persons outside of herself? If not, why not? Why do we ignore the fact that when a woman makes the choice to have her fetus killed, it is actually her second choice; isn’t the behavior that produces new life the first choice? Doesn’t this suggest that the euphemism pro-choice should be changed to pro-second-choice? How does a pregnant woman suddenly become God-like with the supreme power and moral right, to decide if a child will live, or a fetus will die? By what great power does the right of “choice” create life where life already exists? And if her “choice” is fetus (destined to die) but during the abortion process a boy or girl manages to survive, as many have, by what creative power does the essence of this non-person fetus (with no rights) shift to the essence of a baby person (with all rights)? And who has the burden of proof for the right to execute a preborn life since there is no evidence that he or she is not a human person with all rights? How can we sentence the innocent life to a capital punishment, as though he or she had been proved guilty of a capital crime, beyond a shadow of a doubt, in a court of law? Why don’t we challenge the obvious violation of the principle of non-contradiction? Why do we accept the premise that a pregnant woman at the point before she makes her choice (whether a baby will live or a fetus will die) that the life she carries, is and is not a person at the same time—clearly a contradiction. Why do we ignore the reality of objective truth? Writers for Life