I don’t understand all of the “hoopla” over whether or not a woman should be required to have an ultrasound, sonogram, etc., before choosing to abort her unborn child.
If an unborn child is “just a fetus” or “a mass of tissue,” wouldn’t those medical procedures prove that ridiculous point? Maybe the reason for the opposition is the fear that it would prove the complete opposite: The “fetus” is a baby with a beating heart waiting to make his or her entrance into the world to be held, loved and protected – in other words, a person! And while this baby is waiting and being held in his or her mother’s womb, shouldn’t he or she be loved and protected?
At this point, it’s not about a choice. That “intimate and personal decision” was already made. Now it’s about the choice of loving and protecting the unborn baby!