When Yesterday’s Abortionists Buried Babies Alive

In the period of pre-Islamic ignorance, known in Arabic as the ‘Jahiliyyah‘, many fathers despised that their wives give birth to girls. This is to such an extent that some would bury their living daughters shortly after birth in what exemplified one of the worst ills of this period that Islam would later eradicate:

“Whenever one of them is given the good news (Bushra) of a baby girl, his face grows gloomy, as he suppresses his rage. He hides himself from the people because of the (Bushra) bad news he has received. Should he keep her in disgrace, or bury her (alive) in the ground? Evil indeed is their judgment!”[1]

Contemplate the verses above. They not only chastise the murder, but tell of the absurdity of harbouring negative feelings towards being gifted with a daughter. Their faces turn glum, despite it being a ‘Bushra’ – meaning, fabulous news. And the word is repeated twice, even though on the second occasion it is preceded with the word ‘evil’, almost to exemplify their oxymoronic situation. They deem it evil and proceed to mourn, despite such a joy being cause to celebrate.

A more literal rendering would be “He hides himself from the people because of the terribleness of ‘this good news” – good news at having been gifted with a baby jewel, the spring of compassion and cradle of love, born on her feminine disposition to care and mother tomorrow’s generation.

Instead, they buried her alive, submitting to a ridiculous, societal paradox that left them unnaturally dissatisfied because of “the people” despite being given what will have enriched their lives and enriched their society. Then paradoxically, they proceeded to direct such seething resentment against their wives, for having bore a girl, though knowing well that they were the ones who impregnated them!

Still, these pagan, child-killing ‘Bedouins’ have every reason to scorn at the modern day. Though liberal progressivists would have us believe that their minds have brought us into ‘enlightenment’ and freed us from such archaic misogyny and contempt for life and its sanctity, they have much to answer for themselves.

Though it is true that many pagan Arabs carried out this heinous crime, they never lobbied or sloganeered in its favour. In fact, many recognised its monstrosity and through taking in many of these unwanted foetuses into their own care, femininity was salvaged. Their chauvinism would prevent them from boasting of their crimes and fewer ever became its advocates.

The pagans of yesterday can indeed be scorned at for their idolatry and insanity. But they could just as well scorn at today’s idol of ‘liberty’, under whose name thousands of unborn, fully-developed foetus are agonisingly torn out of their mothers’ wombs every day – boys and girls. Though not for a child’s gender, but instead, their faces turn glum at the very news of a child, the detested consequence of their uncontrolled lusts. Unlike the pagan Arabs, whose impetus to murdering the innocent child was often neediness and poverty that comes through rearing a child, abortionist heathens encourage the same for ostensibly having no need for a child.

‘Liberalism’ has forged a brutal and paradoxical society, pretentiously concerned about ‘her life’, ‘her body’ or ‘her right’ while encouraging that for this a child is deprived of theirs, defacing a real ‘Bushra’ with the evillest judgement:

“Evil indeed is their judgment!”[2]

This premediated, sacramental offering for the idol of liberty -the murder of an innocent human life- pales in comparison to the pagan Arab’s futile sacrifice of a goat or lamb for their idols. To not only torment a foetus, as it is pulled from the womb, limb by limb, but to do so indifferently, by the ‘choice’ of a mother, desensitised, or enthralled by her belief to have exercised her ‘choice’ is insanity. Modernism has thus brought about bestiality in the name of humanity.

If ‘choice‘ can override morality, then morality is rendered obsolete as choice knows no boundaries. Which other crimes will soon be justified by the ‘right to choose’? And is it lust and savagery involved in conceiving then killing an unwanted child the type of obedience the idol of liberty demands?