But is it as simple as that?

Not really.

What the abortion rights advocates and the transgender proponents don't want known is there is a fair amount of buyer's remorse.

RESOLUTION D083

(Addressing the erosion of reproductive rights and autonomy)

The unwanted cluster of cells which is removed is actually actively multiplying until the moment it is either scraped out or sucked out of the womb. If left undisturbed, that growing cluster of cells would continue to be shaped and formed into a human baby, not a kitten, not a calf, not a puppy, not a fawn, but a fully-developed baby boy or a baby girl.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I consecrated you ..." (Jeremiah 1:5)

"For Thou didst form my inward parts,
Thou didst knit me together in my mother's womb.
Thou knowest me right well; my frame was not hidden from Thee, when I was being made in secret ..." (Psalm 139:13-15)

An abortion, however it is performed, is a painful experience: physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. The painful and pain-filled memories are lingering.

When a woman becomes pregnant, she has a fair idea of when that baby would be born. What her "due date" is.

That due date passes even after the willful termination of her pregnancy and many times that's when the buyer's remorse kicks in.

Many post-abortion women are racked with remorse as their due date approaches, even if they don't want to admit it to themselves or others. They are fully aware that this is when their baby was to be born.

Would it be a boy or girl? What would he or she look like?

She will never hear the first cry nor gaze with wonder at the new little face or check to make sure there are 10 little fingers and 10 tiny toes.

Then every year as the due date approaches, the fleeting thought crosses the mother's mind that little Alex or Alexandra would be one today. Edwin or Edwina would be five today. Michael or Michelle would be 10 today. Carl or Karla would be 16 today. Uriel or Aurelia would now be in high school ...

The thought never really goes away about the "lost" baby and how that baby was "lost."

Of course, if Mom comes to a point of conviction of sin and seeks to repent and confesses her part to God she can be forgiven. But the lingering memories will still haunt her.

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (I John 1:9)

Not only has she "lost" her child, but perhaps her grandchildren and great-grandchildren too. The future generation or generations of her family are preemptively erased. Her own personal legacy through that aborted child ceases to ever exist.

The Episcopal General Convention (#80GC) thinks that "pregnancy and childbirth are dangerous undertakings." So, to alleviate this "problem" General Convention proposes that unfettered "access to abortion is a key element in preserving the health, independence, and autonomy of those who can bear children."

But pregnancy and childbirth have been going on since Adam and Eve's time.

"Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, 'I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD.'

And again, she bore his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." (Genesis 4:1-2)

"And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, 'God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him.'" (Genesis 4:25)

The House of Deputies has already passed Resolution D083, the abortion measure, and is waiting for concurring action from the House of Bishops.

There has been a slow but steady creep from the 1967 General Convention which stated to have an "unequivocal opposition to any legislation on the part of the national or state governments which would abridge or deny the right of individuals to reach informed decisions in this matter [the termination of pregnancy] and to act upon them," to the now convened 2022 General Convention which proposes that "all Episcopalians should be able to access abortion services and birth control with no restriction on movement, autonomy, type, or timing."

But then of course the 1967 General Convention was pre-Roe v Wade where the 2022 Convention is post-Roe v Wade.

In between those two dates General Convention dealt with abortion through a series of Resolutions.

**1976-D095 -- Reaffirm the 1967 General Convention Statement on Abortion;
*"1982-B009 -- Reaffirm the Church's Guidelines on the Termination of Pregnancy;
**1982-D016 -- Reaffirm the Right to the Use of Artificial Conception Control;
**1982-A065 -- Condemn Use of Abortion for Gender Selection and Non-serious Abnormalities;
**1988-D124 -- Condemn Acts of Violence Against Abortion Facilities and Their Clients;
**1988-C047 -- Adopt a Statement on Childbirth and Abortion;
**1988-A089 -- Promote Use of Materials on Human Sexuality and Abortion for All Age Groups;
**1991-C037 -- Oppose Legislation Requiring Parental Consent for Termination of Pregnancy;
**1994-D105 -- Commend the Work of Pregnancy Care Centers;
**1994-A054 -- Reaffirm General Convention Statement on Childbirth and Abortion;
**1997-D065 -- Express Grave Concern Over Misuse of Partial Birth Abortion;
**2000-D104 -- Affirm Adoption and Support Legislation on Adoption Counseling; and
**2018-D032 -- Equal Access to Health Care Regardless of Gender.

RESOLUTION D076

(Addressing the ongoing harm of Crisis Pregnancy Centers)

It's interesting to note that the 1994 General Convention commended the work of pregnancy care centers.

Today, as General Convention meets, pregnancy care centers have fallen into disrepute and #80GC even condemns the work of pregnancy care centers.

"That the 71st General Convention (1994) commend the members of this church who minister through pregnancy care centers, thereby helping to accomplish the will of General Convention to 'assist those faced with problem pregnancy' ..." states Resolution D105 in 1994.

Pregnancy care centers walk with the expectant mother through her unplanned or unexpected or difficult pregnancy and help her to embrace the new life which is growing within her and help identify her options after the baby is born.

In 1994, it was considered a good thing to walk with those mothers who were dealing with problem pregnancies.

"This General Convention (1994) commends the work and mission of pregnancy care centers which stress unconditional love and acceptance, for women and their unborn children," states Resolution 1994-D105. "We encourage the work of local pregnancy care centers to develop an outreach of love to pregnant women and to mothers and their children."

Now 28 years later (nine General Conventions), #80GC is posed to do a complete 180° turnaround and repudiate, denounce and reject the work of pregnancy care centers because they encourage and support the life of the child growing in the womb, while the 2022 General Convention now embraces death to the child in the womb.

Since the decision in Roe v Wade in 1973, more than 63 million babies failed to take their first breath. That is more than the populations of California and Florida combined.

#80GC "... affirms that all Episcopalians should be able to access abortion services and birth control with no restriction on movement, autonomy, type, or timing ..."

"There are six things which the Lord hates,
seven which are an abomination to him:
haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood ..." (Proverbs 6:16-17)

Not only does the #80GC repudiate passing Resolution D105, it apologies for its action in 1994. Describing the work of pregnancy care centers as creating "ongoing harm" because they advocate for life in the womb rather than embrace the death of the child in the womb through abortion.

Be it "Resolved, that the 80th General Convention apologizes for the Church's previous support of Crisis Pregnancy Centers as detailed in Resolution 1994-D105."

The House of Deputies has passed Resolution D105 on the first day of the shortened Convention and now waits for the House of Bishops to concur.

RESOLUTION D066
(Addressing restrictions on access to gender affirming care)

Bottom surgery, too, leaves devastation in its wake for it involves a mutilation of a human body for vanity's sake and misplaced self-awareness alone. For women wanting to become "men", this involves a hysterectomy, the removal of her uterus and ovaries. For men wanting to become "women" this involves castration. In both cases, the person is left sterile and unable to procreate and is relegated to hormone therapy for the rest of their lives to maintain the fallacy.

It is now becoming known that all is not well in paradise. There is an increased indication that the transformed transgendered people have buyer's remorse and they are transitioning back to their birth sex -- the way God created them.

"I Underwent Gender Transition Surgery. Here's Why I Regret It" Walt Heyer explained to the Daily Wire.

"Inconvenient Truth: No One Actually Changes Gender, Only Persona," Walt Heyer tells the Daily Signal

"I regretted my transition to female. Hundreds of other trans people feel the same," Walt Heyer told Premier Christianity.

Walt Heyer knows of which he speaks. For eight years he lived as a transgendered woman, taking the name Laura Jensen, before he saw the error of his ways in 1991.

Since then, Heyer has been a strong advocate for those who are detransitioning. His website is: sexchangeregret.com.

It is estimated that one in five (20%) have buyer's remorse.

"I learned the truth: Hormones and surgery may alter appearances, but nothing changes the immutable fact of your sex," Heyer concludes.

"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." (Genesis 2:27)

"Male and female He created them, and He blessed them ..." (Genesis 5:2)

The immutable fact of your sex is that God created you and no matter how many external changes you make, you cannot change the DNA. A transgendered female will always have XY (male) chromosomes and the transgendered male will always have XX (female) chromosomes because that's how God made them. That is immutable and cannot be changed because chromosomes are found in every cell of the body save for red blood cells. The chromosomes reveal the true gender of the human body.

As the detransitioning person reverts back to their birth sex, because that cannot be changed, they can reclaim their birth name, readopt their former pronouns, and change their clothing style. However, if they have had bottom surgery there is no reclaiming the true integrity of their birth sex.

The castrated male remains forever a eunuch and will sit to pee the rest of his life. The woman who has had a hysterectomy has lost her reproductive organs (uterus and ovaries) for the rest of her life. She will never again experience ovulation and menstruation or birth a baby even if her biological clock is ticking.

They look upon their mutilated bodies and realize what they have lost in the quest to become someone, something else. To try and live a lie.

If a child should survive the Holocaust of the Womb, The Episcopal Church wants to make sure that child does not grow up to reproduce.

Yet, The Episcopal Church thinks that it is a good and holy thing, as a part of the baptismal call "to advocate for access to gender affirming care in all forms (social, medical, or any other) and at all ages."

This means children. The five-year-old who wants to transition because they saw it in a Disney cartoon, or weas enticed by what he saw and heard during a Drag Queen Story Hour, the innocent child should be allowed to do so with the blessing of The Episcopal Church.

Be it "Resolved, that the 80th General Convention calls for The Episcopal Church to advocate for access to gender affirming care in all forms (social, medical, or any other) and at all ages as part of our Baptismal call to 'respect the dignity of every human being' ..." Resolution D066 declares. "... the 80th General Convention affirms that all Episcopalians should be able to partake in gender affirming care with no restriction on movement, on movement, autonomy, type, or timing ..."

The House of Deputies considers this to be celebrating "the diversity of human experience." They are now awaiting the House of Bishops to respond.

The full range of gender affirming care includes, but it's not limited to: cross-sex hormone therapy including feminizing hormone therapy or masculinizing hormone therapy with puberty blockers, and feminizing surgery or masculinizing surgery including top surgery and bottom surgery.

The little five-year-old who undergoes such aggressive transgender affirming care, albeit with The Episcopal Church's blessing, could experience deep buyer's remorse when he or she -- or is it she or he -- comes of age and realizes their five-year-old body didn't become a fully formed adult body. That she or he will live out the rest of their natural life mutilated and unable to fulfill their destiny as God originally created them. They will never procreate and have children of their own.

The Episcopal Church is considering that this a good outcome -- a fulfillment of the baptismal call -- to support and encourage gender affirming medical care for the youngest among us.

Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular contributor to VirtueOnline