On January 23, 2017, on Facebook, LMU’s Department of Sociology issued a statement claiming, “OB-GYNs have never heard of babies being ripped ‘out of the womb in the 9th month on the final day’ unless a Cesarean section is being performed (the rare terminations that occur at or after 21 weeks are due mostly to serious fetal abnormalities).”
Here is a small sampling of OB-GYNs and abortionists who have heard of babies being ripped out of the womb on their last day in utero, not for the purpose of saving their lives in Cesarean section but for the purpose of killing them. Let’s start with this footage in which abortionist Laura Mercer indicates what takes place in late term abortion.
In this video, OB-GYN Dr. Anthony Levatino who has performed thousands of abortions describes how abortions take place in the last trimester of pregnancy.
The evidence indicates that late-term abortion does involve ripping the human being in utero from the womb piece by piece.
In the United States, drunk driving accidents take the lives of more than 9,000 human beings per year. Such deaths are far too common and so can hardly be said to be rare. In the United States, late term abortions take the lives of more than 12,000 human beings per year, hardly rare.
Nor is LMU’s Sociology Department accurate in claiming that these second and third trimester abortions are mostly performed because serious fetal abnormalities.
In her article “Why do women get late-term abortions?” Sarah Terzo notes:
A study in 2006 in Perspectives of Sexual and Reproductive Health, a publication of the Alan Guttmacher institute, which has been affiliated with Planned Parenthood throughout its history, conducted a study of hundreds of women who had second-trimester abortions (the second trimester ends at 27 weeks). It came up with the following results:
68% had no pregnancy symptoms
58% Didn’t confirm the pregnancy until the second trimester
45% had trouble finding abortion provider
37% unsure of date of last menstrual period
30% had difficulty deciding on abortion
The study sample did not contain a single case of abortion for health reasons.
We applaud LMU’s Department of Sociology for its opposition to “ableist discrimination” against human beings with disabilities. But we call on the Department to be consistent in this opposition rather than engage in selective moral outrage. If all human beings deserve respect regardless of disability, human beings in utero with abnormalities deserve respect.
LMU’s Department of Sociology Statement continues, “Worth noting is that women’s indisposable contributions to the global and US work force and to higher education would not be possible without full control of their reproductive and other forms of health.”
The new-speak euphemism “reproductive rights” attempts to conceal the reality of abortion. Once a human being is actively self-developing towards maturity in utero, reproduction has already successfully taken place. Abortion is not about reproduction, but about killing the human being who has been reproduced. Abortion, particularly late term abortion, endangers the woman’s health (for example, by increasing the likelihood of ectopic pregnancy) and always destroys the health of her son or daughter.
Is LMU’s Department of Sociology correct that abortion, particularly late term abortion, is necessary for women to flourish? In Ireland, abortion is almost entirely illegal. As Ross Douthat noted in The New York Times, “Meanwhile, international rankings offer few indications that Ireland’s abortion laws are holding Irish women back. The country ranks first for gender parity in health care in a recent European Union index. It was in the middle of the pack in The Economist’s recent “glass-ceiling index” for working women. It came in fifth out of 135 countries in the World Economic Forum’s “Global Gender Gap” report. (The United States was 22nd.)” Indeed, Ireland has already had its first female president, but the United States (with its radical abortion laws) is still waiting.
Alternative facts, falsehoods, ignoring peer reviewed evidence in scholarly journals, concealing euphemisms are not bad ways of describing the defense late-term abortion provided by LMU’s Department of Sociology.
Below, you can find the full text of the Department’s statement as found on Facebook.
RenewLMU 
LMU’s Sociology Department earns a F. Unbelievable that these people can teach at a “Catholic” university.
Let’s see how this argument supposedly works, and the reductio counter argument that shows that it does not.
1. Trump is bad news.
2. Social scientists know the facts.
3. We are LMU sociologists.
4. So, we LMU sociologists know the facts about late-term abortion.
5. But the Sociology post with regard to late term abortion is demonstrably false.
6. So…well…(4) is false, and thus (2) needs sharp qualification. But, hey, since (1) is true, never mind the alternate facts of LMU sociologists.
Another disappointing moment brought to you by the novus Jesuits. Its time for the Norbertines to take over, or to have Bishop Gomez remove the right to use the term “Catholic” from the University. That at least will stop the fraud LMU is perpetrating on the Church and its students. It cannot claim to have anything to do with the Catholic Faith. And for those who have lost the faith, then at least you should be appalled at the inaccuracy being taught to this so called University.
It is enough of a scandal that faculty members would be so disrespectful of the foundational values of the university which employees them to post such an offensive and dishonest statement; but if this was simply a matter of being rude, it would not be that big of a deal. After all, it is hardly a secret that many LMU faculty members reject the Church’s moral claims about abortion, even if they are usually tactful enough to keep it to themselves. But the broader scandal here, and one which transcends the particular bullet point about partial-birth abortion, is that an entire academic department has rejected the principle of free academic inquiry.
Apparently, it will no longer be permissible for any student enrolled in an LMU sociology course to question the department’s settled orthodoxies on immigration policy, criminal justice, human sexuality, abortion, and other legitimately controversial issues. I don’t believe that a Jesuit university can or should try to censor the personal political opinions of faculty members, even when they are squarely at odds with Catholic moral teaching; but I am quite certain that LMU should not tolerate the presence of any faculty members who presume to place limits on the opinions and beliefs of others – and particularly when they use a public forum to contemptuously dismiss unwelcome challenges with the pejorative trope of “alternative facts.”
No LMU students should have to fear that one of the gutlessly anonymous authors of this post will abuse them in class or discount their grades if they happen to disagree with some professor’s pet grievances. This outrageous post ought to have provoked a swift and unambiguous defense of academic freedom by the Dean, the Provost, President Snyder, and the Faculty Senate. Unfortunately, while this post demonstrates the sociology department’s abject ignorance and lack of intellectual integrity, I suspect that they have accurately taken the measure of LMU’s administration, and that the individuals responsible for it have no concern whatsoever that they will ever be held to account for betraying the essential principles of a university education.
It’s truly amazing that because the geniuses at LMU don’t like Donald Trump, are able to explain late term abortions as merely Cesarean delivery births. Wow, and people PAY to attend LMU…how stupid can they be???? God bless President Donald Trump.!
THIS IS NO LONGER A CATHOLIC INSTITUTION —– IT IS A INSTITUTION FOR THE NON-
BELIEVERS. GOD HAVE MERCY !!!!!!!!!!