Reducing the Stress of Violence

The use of the gas chambers in the Nazi holocaust is common knowledge. What is not so commonly known, however, is the reason why the method of killing was changed from shooting to gassing.

And that reason reveals a frightening parallel with what is going on in the abortion industry today.

In the documents of the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, we read the following excerpt:

"…Women and children were to be executed with the men…. In this respect, the Einsatzgruppen leaders encountered a difficulty they had not anticipated. Many of the enlisted men were husbands and fathers, and they winced as they pulled their triggers on these helpless creatures who reminded them of their own wives and offspring at home. ... This was hard on the executioners, personnel experts reported to the RSHA in Berlin, and to relieve their emotional sensitivity, gas vans were sent to the rescue."

(Title: "XI: Opinion and Judgment: Appropriation of Personal Methods of Execution: Part 2, United States of America v. Otto Ohlendorf, et. al. (Case 9: 'Einsatzgruppen Case'). District of Columbia: GPO, 1950. pp. 448-453.)

Gassing was not bloody, and took place behind the closed doors of the vans. It reduced the stress placed on the killers.

Abortion practitioners publicly admit a similar emotional stress on the clinic workers who have to deal with the body parts of aborted babies.

In the book "Second Trimester Abortion: Perspectives After a Decade of Experience" (Berger, Brenner, Keith, eds, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1981), there is a chapter called "Psychological Impact on Patients and Staff," in which we read that "soon after voluntary abortion became a legal reality, some authorities observed an unanticipated, strong emotional reaction by the staff" (p. 242).

Notice the similarity of the following quote with the one from the Nuremberg trials:

"Nurses found physical contact with the fetus particularly difficult; it reminded them of the 'preemies' just down the hall and made them uncomfortable as they thought about their own potential future pregnancies" (p. 245).

We read further in the Nuremberg documents that even the method of gassing created problems for those who had to unload the bodies:

"Becker then complained that members of the Kommando should not be required to unload the corpses. 'I brought to the attention of the commanders of those S.K. concerned, the immense psychological injuries and damages to their health which that work can have for those men, even if not immediately, at least later on. The men complained to me about headaches which appeared after each unloading.'"

(Title: "XI…" as above).

This is why the task of unloading the bodies was eventually given to the Jews who themselves were destined for killing.

In the abortion industry, we see a similar effort by abortionists to distance themselves from the bodies of the children they kill. Abortionists leave to the nurses and the assistants the grim task of reassembling body parts after dismemberment abortions, in order to make sure that no body parts were inadvertently left inside the womb. Those assistants then have the task of disposing of the bodies.

Moreover, this desire to shield oneself from the grisly reality of abortion is one of the key motives for the push for abortion methods that involve prescribing medication rather than performing surgery. In medication abortions, the mother herself has to deal with seeing the baby’s body when it is expelled at some unexpected time in their own home.

While abortionists attempt to reduce the psychological impact of the killing, the pro-life movement seeks to increase that impact on the public, through educational efforts that expose the hidden violence abortion imposes on children (for instance, www.LookAtAbortion.com).

And here again, we see a parallel with the Holocaust, with one important difference. Education about the Holocaust — whether by experiences like the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., or by films like "Schindler’s List" — reveals the horrors of recent history, in the hopes of instilling the resolve that “Never Again” will such an atrocity occur. Education about abortion likewise reveals its horror, with the difference that this is not about past history, but about an atrocity that is still unfolding, on our watch.

Fr. Frank Pavone is one of the most prominent pro-life leaders in the world. He became a Catholic priest in 1988 under Cardinal John O’Connor in New York. In 1993 he became National Director of Priests for Life. He is also the President of the National Pro-life Religious Council, and the National Pastoral Director of the Silent No More Campaign and of Rachel’s Vineyard, the world’s largest ministry of healing after abortion. He travels to about four states every week, preaching and teaching against abortion. He broadcasts regularly on television, radio, and internet. He was asked by Mother Teresa to speak in India on abortion, and was asked by then-candidate Donald Trump to serve on his Pro-life and Catholic advisory councils. He has served at the Vatican as an official of the Pontifical Council for the Family, which coordinates the pro-life activities of the Catholic Church. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.