Baby body parts for sale

Dr. Chuck Baldwin
March 13, 2000
copywrite: 2000 Chuck Baldwin Live


Marketing aborted babies

Several months ago I commented that our country has sunk to its lowest moral depth yet by harvesting and selling body parts from aborted babies. That's right. An entire industry has grown out of killing unborn children. Not only are the baby butchers collecting millions of dollars from this hideous practice, so are baby-parts wholesalers.

According to Wendy Griffith at CBN News, "Wholesalers, like the Anatomic Gift Foundation, headquartered in Laurel, Maryland, place workers or technicians inside abortion clinics to 'harvest' fetal tissue and organs for researchers such as universities and pharmaceutical companies. The wholesalers or middleman pays the abortion clinic for access to the aborted babies. They call it a 'site fee.' The researcher then pays the wholesaler for the parts, and since it's illegal to sell baby parts, they call it a 'fee for services,' technically skirting the law."

A sampling of actual catalogs reveals advertised prices for various body parts, not excluding whole cadavers. Examples:

Adding insult to injury is the fact that you and I are paying for much of this with our tax dollars via the National Institutes of Health. The justification used for this Nazi-like practice is "medical research." Under this guise, aborted babies are used as guinea pigs in public university and pharmaceutical laboratories. At least one governor is steaming mad about it, too.

Gov. Mike Johanns sent a letter to the University of Nebraska officials asking them to stop using baby body parts for research at the NU Medical Center. University officials have indicated they will "discuss it." One member of the NU Board of Regents, Chuck Hasselbrook, is quoted as saying he doesn't have a problem with the research. Other board members agreed with Hasselbrook or refused to answer reporters' questions, according to a story in the Omaha World-Herald.

Some on Capitol Hill also profess to be concerned. Yesterday, the House Commerce Committee conducted (un-televised) hearings to investigate this pernicious practice. (Then again, Congress has conducted copious hearings to investigate the atrocities at Waco. That has accomplished a whole bunch, hasn't it?)

I can think of nothing that insults and degrades the conscience and soul of America like this does. Allowing such a practice to legally transpire (with tax monies, no less) attacks our morals and culture in an unprecedented manner. Yet, where is the outrage? Where is the public outcry?

A recent caller to my talk show might have it right. He suggested the problem is America no longer has a conscience. You can't offend a seared conscience, he opined. Maybe he's right. Maybe we, as a nation, have lost our conscience. If this doesn't offend us (and it obviously doesn't) nothing will.

I suppose the next step is to follow China's example. According to the April 13, 1995, London Telegraph, "Aborted human fetuses intended for human consumption are being sold in the Chinese city of Shenzhen."

At the state-run Shenzhen Health Center to Women and Children, a female doctor "handed a reporter a fist-sized glass bottle stuffed with thumb-sized fetuses. The doctor was quoted as saying, 'There are 10 fetuses here, all aborted this morning. Normally we doctors take them home to eat -- all free. Since you don't look well, you can take them.'"

"Zou Qin, a doctor working at the Luo Hu Clinic in Shenzhen, said the fetuses were 'nutritious' and claimed to have eaten 100 herself in the past six months. She said the 'best' were first-born males from young women. 'We don't carry out abortions just to eat the fetuses,' she said, but added that the fetuses would be 'wasted if not eaten.'"

The proponents of extending permanent MFN to China keep telling us that doing so will make China more like America. It seems to me it's the other way around: America is looking more like China all the time.

Copying of this material is free for non-commercial educational and research use. Unless explicitly stated, copyright of this material is owned by the author and/or sponsoring organization, and/or newswire services. (Pro-Life E-News)