Tearing Us Apart: How Abortion Harms Everything and Solves Nothing
- Downloads：3685
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-07-15 20:21:37
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：Ryan T. Anderson
- ISBN：1684513502
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The political philosopher Ryan T。 Anderson， bestselling author of When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment， teams up with the pro-life journalist Alexandra DeSanctis to expose the catastrophic failure—social， political， legal， and personal—of legalized abortion。
Hope in the Ruins of Roe
Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v。 Wade and returned abortion law to the democratic process， a powerful new book reframes the coming debate: Our fifty-year experiment with unlimited abortion has harmed everyone—even its most passionate proponents。
Women， men， families， the law， politics， medicine， the media—and， of course， children （born and unborn）—have all been brutalized by the culture of death fostered by Roe v。 Wade。
Abortion hollows out marriage and the family。 It undermines the rule of law and corrupts our political system。 It turns healers into executioners and “women’s health” into a euphemism for extermination。
Ryan T。 Anderson， a compelling and reasoned voice in our most contentious cultural debates， and the pro-life journalist Alexandra DeSanctis expose the false promises of the abortion movement and explain why it has made everything worse。 Five decades after Roe， everyone has an opinion about abortion。 But after reading Tearing Us Apart， no one will think about it in the same way。
Hope in the Ruins of Roe
Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v。 Wade and returned abortion law to the democratic process， a powerful new book reframes the coming debate: Our fifty-year experiment with unlimited abortion has harmed everyone—even its most passionate proponents。
Women， men， families， the law， politics， medicine， the media—and， of course， children （born and unborn）—have all been brutalized by the culture of death fostered by Roe v。 Wade。
Abortion hollows out marriage and the family。 It undermines the rule of law and corrupts our political system。 It turns healers into executioners and “women’s health” into a euphemism for extermination。
Ryan T。 Anderson， a compelling and reasoned voice in our most contentious cultural debates， and the pro-life journalist Alexandra DeSanctis expose the false promises of the abortion movement and explain why it has made everything worse。 Five decades after Roe， everyone has an opinion about abortion。 But after reading Tearing Us Apart， no one will think about it in the same way。
Reviews
Clau Gennari
，
a great book for people trying to understand the pro-life argument This book is very good！ I would recommend it for people looking to understand the pro-life argument， either because they are questioning their pro-choice stance or because they want to strengthen their pro-life argument。
Shane
，
I couldn't stop thinking about how similar to Mein Kampf this was。 I couldn't stop thinking about how similar to Mein Kampf this was。 。。。more
Brittany Petruzzi
，
Quite the read。 By and large， an excellent book。 Anderson and DeSanctis shine when discussing thee cultural， philosophical， medical， and moral harms of abortion。 Truly compelling stuff。 Where they fail is in the use of statistics。 Percentages that are too small to matter when abortion-advocates cite them suddenly become huge problems when the authors cite them as proo0f of the danger of various kinds of abortion。 I’m also a little leery of attributing psychological harm to abortions （though I do Quite the read。 By and large， an excellent book。 Anderson and DeSanctis shine when discussing thee cultural， philosophical， medical， and moral harms of abortion。 Truly compelling stuff。 Where they fail is in the use of statistics。 Percentages that are too small to matter when abortion-advocates cite them suddenly become huge problems when the authors cite them as proo0f of the danger of various kinds of abortion。 I’m also a little leery of attributing psychological harm to abortions （though I don’t doubt it， personally） because I’m not sure how your can really disentangle correlation and causation。 （Maybe women prone to anxiety。depression are more likely to get an abortion， even if procuring an abortion does increase your likelihood of anxiety/depression。）Worth every penny for the outline of action in the conclusion， but the chapters on on how abortion harms the medical profession， law， and culture are particularly good。 And， of course， on how abortion harms the unborn child。 I do love that Alexandra gets her digs in at her fellow “Catholics” who flagrantly disobey the magisterium。 。。。more
Oscar Martinez II
，
Using hard data， personal stories， and logical and philosophical arguments， Anderson and DeSanctis make a compelling case for the pro-life position。 Consequently， the work serves as a great means of strengthening one's own stance if the reader is pro-life， trying to convince someone to support life if they're on the fence， or challenging one's preconceived notions of abortion if they're pro-choice。 With the recent Supreme Court decision sending the decision making about abortion back to the stat Using hard data， personal stories， and logical and philosophical arguments， Anderson and DeSanctis make a compelling case for the pro-life position。 Consequently， the work serves as a great means of strengthening one's own stance if the reader is pro-life， trying to convince someone to support life if they're on the fence， or challenging one's preconceived notions of abortion if they're pro-choice。 With the recent Supreme Court decision sending the decision making about abortion back to the states， the fight for life is one that has become much more localized than ever before， so it's important to be equipped with the relevant facts regarding such highly important and controversial topic。 This book does exactly that in a easily readable format therefore I recommend it to everyone no matter their position on the issue of abortion。 Even if it doesn't end up changing your mind at least it'll have you engage with arguments for the pro-life position that aren't the mischaracterized straw men that are shared by the mainstream media。 。。。more
Jennifer
，
This was a very timely read， one that I think everyone could benefit from。 Anderson and DeSanctis rely on data and soundly backed arguments to make the case for life， showing how abortion not only harms the unborn child， but also the mother， a disproportionate number of children with disabilities， the medical system， and the rule of law。 The chapters I found most compelling were chapters 1-3。 I would encourage anyone， regardless of where they stand on the issue， to read this book with an open mi This was a very timely read， one that I think everyone could benefit from。 Anderson and DeSanctis rely on data and soundly backed arguments to make the case for life， showing how abortion not only harms the unborn child， but also the mother， a disproportionate number of children with disabilities， the medical system， and the rule of law。 The chapters I found most compelling were chapters 1-3。 I would encourage anyone， regardless of where they stand on the issue， to read this book with an open mind。 Our goal should always be to know the truth， regardless of if it follows our preconceived ideas or our personal feelings。The primary questions at the heart of this debate are: Is it ever morally right to take the life of an innocent human being？ - and - Does each and every human being have an equal right to life？ Or do only some have it in virtue of some characteristic that may come and go？ As Mother Teresa stated: “Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government。 They are every human being’s entitlement by virtue of his humanity。 The right to life does not depend， and must not be declared to be contingent， on the pleasure of anyone else， not even a parent or a sovereign。”Edited to respond to comment:Vladimir， I took some time to read John’s review。 I appreciate his thoroughness when expressing his opinion。 His issues with “incorrect data” centered on claims such as: 1） There is an increased risk of breast cancer when women have had an abortion， 2） Women who have abortions are at increased risk of mental health problems 3） Banning abortion reduces the maternal mortality rate。 While I am not convinced that Anderson’s and DeSanctis’ presentation of the data was incorrect， what would it change if they were wrong in those areas？ The question at stake is “Is it ever morally okay to take the life of an innocent human being？”We could argue all day about what data is the right data， but in the end you have to decide when life begins and when an individual gains rights。 When Life Begins: （Source - @ProLife_Millenial） It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception:Multiple medical experts and embryologists agree that human development begins at conception。One study found that 96% of biologists agree that human life begins at conception。 The majority of these biologists identified as liberal， pro-choice， non-religious， and Democrat。Our knowledge of fetal development supports this。 The zygote which is formed at fertilization already contains the full genetic code （DNA） of a human。 Before most women ever know they are pregnant， every major organ has already begun developing， as well as some external features。 Here is a detailed explanation of the science behind conception and why， from the very moment of fertilization， a brand new human life begins。Because human life begins at fertilization， then abortion effectively ends a human life。The intentional taking of a human life is murder。When an Individual Gains Rights - Essential Question: Given the humanity of the unborn， does each and every human being have an equal right to life or do only some have it in virtue of some characteristic that none of us share equally and which may come and go within the course of our lifetimes？ There is no morally significant difference between the embryo you once were and the adult you are today that would justify killing you at that earlier stage of development。 Differences of size， level of development， environment， and degree of dependency are not good reasons for saying you had no right to life then but you do now。“Abortion-choice advocates deny that all human beings are valuable and deserve protection。 Which ones don’t qualify？ The ones that are too small， not developed enough， in the wrong location， and are too dependent on other people。 “ - SLED TestPeople are not valuable based on their stage of development or their exercisable capacities or abilities。 If we base people’s value on their capacities， it is impossible to defend equality - those who develop their capacities the furthest should matter most。 Think of what that means for babies， the mentally disabled， or the elderly。 Anytime we see denials of personhood used throughout history， it has always been used to oppress and even extinguish groups of people。 。。。more
John Graham
，
Published only four days after Dobbs deposed Roe， Tearing Us Apart was written by the authors （both conservative Catholics） to “equip pro-life readers with the truth so that they can offer it courageously to others。” The Religious Right wants to ban abortion nationwide， and this book encapsulates their case in more ways than one。 This book is intended for pro-lifers and this review is intended for pro-choicers。 Here is what you need to know:This Is Not A Bible-Thumping ExerciseThe authors are we Published only four days after Dobbs deposed Roe， Tearing Us Apart was written by the authors （both conservative Catholics） to “equip pro-life readers with the truth so that they can offer it courageously to others。” The Religious Right wants to ban abortion nationwide， and this book encapsulates their case in more ways than one。 This book is intended for pro-lifers and this review is intended for pro-choicers。 Here is what you need to know:This Is Not A Bible-Thumping ExerciseThe authors are well aware of the receding tide of religiosity， and wish to equip readers with a philosophical case against abortion that cannot be dismissed as merely faith based。 Their case against abortion rests on three principles: a unique human person comes into being at fertilization; abortion ends a human life; government has an overriding interest in preventing the killing of human life and， therefore， in preventing abortion。 The authors seem to use “fertilization” and “conception” interchangeably， asserting at one point that “a new human being comes into existence at conception” and then only two pages later: “When a sperm fertilizes an egg， a new organism comes into existence”。 Fertilization is when sperm meets egg。 Conception comes later when the blastocyst implants in the uterus’s wall – the formal beginning of pregnancy。 The book’s blurring of this distinction is not an encouraging sign。Beyond addressing the opposing side’s arguments， the authors don’t go further than asserting that human beings have a rational， and therefore personal， nature because we are capable of reason。 Since every human being is genetically the same organism throughout life， the stage of development can’t matter for personhood， only our capacity for reason。 On this logic， anencephalic babies who are born missing most or all of their brain never attain anything approaching rationality， let alone personhood， but the authors would have us believe that even anencephalics are persons with a rational nature that healthy animals do not possess。The Book Is Replete With Misinformation And PseudoscienceWhen it comes to telling the “truth about abortion”， chapter 2 is the absolute nadir of the book。 It is riddled with medical misinformation， such as the claim that abortion increases a woman’s risk of breast cancer， which has been debunked by multiple studies over the years。 It also plays up the death rate of 0。7 women per 100，000 abortions – for the record， the death rate from colonoscopies is 6。5 per 100，000 procedures。 These and countless other examples of pseudoscientific scaremongering have been forced on abortion providers in the guise of informed consent laws with the sole purpose of making it harder to get an abortion。 The authors then take the “abortion industry” to task for opposing providing women with “accurate medical information” regarding the risks and side effects of abortion; except that it’s not accurate medical information at all， which is why it is resisted in the first place。 The authors’ claims to the contrary are lies。One more dishonorable mention。 The authors devote a whole section to denouncing the landmark Turnaway study for one of its many findings: that women who got abortions felt relief not regret afterwards。 The most telling sign of the authors’ rank dishonesty is that they ignore the central findings of the Turnaway study: that women who were denied abortions， as well as their children， became materially worse off as a result。 Instead， the authors turn to Priscilla Coleman， a professor at Bowling Green State University whose research purports to show that women who underwent abortions were at far greater risk of anxiety and depression。 Look up Priscilla Coleman and you find that her work has been critiqued by dozens of colleagues who could not reproduce her results （the authors cite exactly one study which supposedly did）。 They further found that when pre-existing mental health histories are considered – something the authors falsely claim Coleman did – the disparities vanish。The Lies By Omission Are Even WorseWhat you won’t find in this book is any mention of the fact that maternal mortality， infant mortality， and poverty rates are far higher in the so-called pro-life states than in the pro-choice states。 Life expectancy is also far lower in the former compared to the latter。 The authors are correct that high pre-Roe maternal mortality was not connected to rates of “back-alley abortions”， but they are silent on the fact that current high rates are because of the poor state of healthcare and social services in pro-life states， which is telling because abortion was practically inaccessible in these states even before Roe was overturned。The authors instead press the spurious argument that banning abortion would reduce maternal mortality by citing a study from Mexico which showed this result for Mexican states。 If you look at the relevant CDC data， you will find the exact opposite is the case in America — only in America。 The Republican Party has been almost as zealous in gutting welfare programs and the social safety net as they have been in fighting against abortion。 Having won their biggest victory in half a century， it remains to be seen if they will compromise their hostility to “big government” in favor of saving babies。A Mirror For Thee But Not For MeHaving laid a foundation of outright lies about abortion， the authors spend the rest of the book presenting an alternate reality history of how abortion turned every aspect of national life against the pro-life movement to the detriment of the nation。 Apparently， it was the Democratic Party， under the nefarious influence of the abortion lobby， which corrupted the rule of law and American political life， and made “a toxic mess out of the confirmation process”。 Just look at how Robert Bork， Clarence Thomas， and Brett Kavanaugh became the victims of nefarious smear campaigns by pro-abortion Democrats fearful that they would overturn Roe v Wade。The pot is outraged at how black the kettle has become。 Both political parties have evolved considerably on abortion， in opposite directions， and whilst the authors accuse the Democratic Party of corrupting the judicial confirmation process for the sake of abortion， it was the conservative movement that spent decades packing the federal bench for its own aims， culminating in Trump’s nomination of three Supreme Court justices， including Amy Coney Barrett whose hearing took place only weeks before the 2020 election – Obama’s pick， Merrick Garland， was denied even a hearing by Republicans with almost a year to go until the 2016 election。Within days of the Dobbs ruling returning regulation of abortion to the states， the Supreme Court ruled that state regulation of open-carry firearms was unconstitutional， and also ruled to curtail the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to combat climate change。 A triple win for the Republican Party on abortion， guns， and corporate power; and yet the authors have the nerve to claim it was the other side whose agenda has corrupted everything。 That the Supreme Court is now an openly partisan institution has damaged the rule of law far more than abortion ever could have。 If judicial activism by the abortion movement gave us Roe， the conservative movement’s response was “two can play at that game”。The muckraking doesn’t stop there。 Margaret Sanger， the founder of Planned Parenthood， was a eugenicist， a fact that Planned Parenthood has reckoned with in recent years。 A lot of digital ink is spilled on the connection between race and abortion to charge the pro-choice movement – if not necessarily its members – with similar motives。 Much less space is devoted to examining the pro-life movement’s own origins， perhaps because abortion did not become a central issue for the Religious Right until 1979， six years after Roe vs Wade。They’re Coming For Contraception NextIn chapter 4， the authors take the medical community to task for: “an over-reliance on oral contraceptives， which likewise treat pregnancy as a disease to be prevented。 Both second-wave and modern feminists hail easy access to birth control as a key component of female liberation， but， similar to abortion， contraceptive drugs treat the male body as normative and use chemical methods to alter the female body， thereby rendering sex sterile。”Contraceptives prevent pregnancies and therefore prevent abortions。 If you’re surprised that this is ignored by the Catholic authors of this book， you have no right to be。 Do I even need to mention that the words “condom” and “sex education” appear nowhere in the book？ A better question is why this bizarre tangent about contraception appears in a book about abortion at all。 It’s almost as if the authors are laying the intellectual groundwork for a rollback of modern family planning methods along with abortion。Consider the philosophical case they put forward earlier。 If the fertilized egg is already a human person， then certain contraceptives which prevent the fertilized egg from implanting are “abortifacients” and therefore murder weapons。 This will be the basis for outlawing IUDs and certain forms of Plan B。 The authors also seem unaware that between a third and half of all fertilized eggs naturally fail to implant， and the erstwhile human person is washed out with the next period， which means， as the late comedian George Carlin once quipped， that “any woman who’s had more than one period is a serial killer！”Theocracy Will Never Happen， And Praise The Lord When It DoesThis book is a tendentious work of partisan fiction， advancing countless mundane lies in the service of the transcendent “truth” about abortion。 But it’s worse than that: the book’s conclusion inveighs against the sexual revolution with these words: “The breakdown of marriage and the family since the sexual revolution， fueled by a false ideology that portrays freedom as mere license， has created conditions that make abortion appear like a solution to a very real cultural ailment。”By marriage， the authors mean “real marriage”。 Co-author Ryan Anderson’s first two books were attacks on the movement for same-sex marriage， published respectively before and after Obergefell vs Hodges。 That case was cited in Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion calling on the court to revisit its rulings on contraception， gay rights， and gay marriage。 Notwithstanding wildly differing poll numbers， banning abortion enjoys far higher support than banning gay marriage or contraception， and advocating one of these does not mean that someone advocates all three。 But the core of the movement overlaps strongly with those who do， and their vision is of “real America” restored to its “Judeo-Christian roots” under a regime of “ordered liberty”， a pseudo-democratic theocracy in all but name。The right to choose was the first to fall， but make no mistake， they’re coming for all of it。 。。。more
Anne Mason
，