Category Archives: Abortion
From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
So…This is Who We Give Medals to These Days? Femi-nazi Abortionists? What else do we expect from A Baby Killing President?
From IOTW: http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
Planned Parenthood: Doing all They Can to Decrease the Black Population Because Margaret Sanger Said Blacks are Inferior
Gloria Steinem: When Obama Awards Me The Medal of Freedom He Will Be “Honoring The Work” of Racist Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger Who Advocated Genocide Against Black Babies…
There’s no way she doesn’t know about Margaret Sanger’s background, right?
Via CNS News:
Speaking at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on Monday, feminist Gloria Steinem said receiving the Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama would be “honoring the work of Margaret Sanger.”
“I hope this is retroactive in honoring the work of Margaret Sanger,” said Steinem about the woman who founded what would become Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the largest abortion provider in the United States.
“I hope that she would celebrate this recognition that reproductive freedom is a human right at least as crucial as freedom of speech and that no government should dictate whether or when we have children,” Steinem said.
In her remarks Steinem said that “the power of this honor may be even more evident in the withholding than in the giving,” noting that Sanger never got the medal.
“I was reminded by Ellen Chesler, biography of Margaret Sanger, that President Lyndon Johnson, even as he signed the first federal and international family planning act into law, refused to bestow the metal of freedom on Sanger,” Steinem said. “He feared reprisal from the Catholic Church.
“Ellen told me that when she looked at Sanger’s private history papers at Smith College – I’m proud to say the biggest archive of women history – she found a poignant little hand-written note from Sanger, asking that her body be buried here next to her husband but that her heart be removed to Japan – the only country in the world that had every bestowed a public honor on her,” Steinem said.
From WZ: http://weaselzippers.us/
“Feminism is the theory; lesbianism is the practice.”
– Ti-Grace Atkinson, 1971
“The political economy of socialist feminism establishes that, in contemporary society, women suffer a special form of exploitation and oppression.”
– Allison Jaggar, 1988
“Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice.”
– Andrea Dworkin, 1989
Professional athletes can spawn with multiple baby mamas, and feminists have no word of complaint. Gay men hiring surrogates to breed children for them? Lesbians raising adopted child sex-change experiments? No problem, say the Womyn’s Studies majors. In response to the general plague of divorce and fatherlessness, the poverty-inducing epidemic of illegitimacy that replicates underclass misery, the collective reaction of the Official Women’s Movement is . . . crickets chirping.
However, let a normal couple of married Christians give birth to more than the standard 1.7 children, and they become the targets of seething rage and resentment from the feminist Left. You saw this attitude exemplified in the hysterical reaction to Sarah Palin who, by giving birth to five children, was made the object of fathomless hatred. “For many liberal women, Palin threatens their sexual identity, which is bound up with their politics,” as James Taranto observed.
The Duggars are the “stars” of the TLC network reality series, 19 Kids and Counting. Predictably, our friends on the left hate them: see Jezebel and Jenna Karvunidis and Bitch Magazine (check out the comments!) and, of course! Amanda Marcotte. It’s pretty simple: if your choices aren’t their choices, then your choices are wrong, illegitimate, and societally harmful. It’s not like they are actually killing anyone, and the Duggars are self-supporting, taxpaying Americans; they aren’t on welfare.
RH Reality Check thinks that it’s horrible, horrible! that Mr Duggar referenced the Holocaust, and you know, I agree: Holocaust references by pro-life groups are inappropriate. After all, the Holocaust killed only six million people, and is nowhere in our abortuaries’ league when it comes to dealing out death.
It is shocking how fanatically devoted some people are to the “right” of abortion. Doug Hagin at Daley Gator explains:
I used to try to talk sense to pro-abortion people on message boards. . . . I found out they too believe it is a baby, and they revel in the “right” to destroy it. To them, a woman is not whole unless she can have her baby executed in the womb. How depraved are they? Well, consider many of the regularly compared unborn babies to parasites, and cancerous tumors, yes really.
Such unspeakable hatred toward human life is rooted in a radical ideology that views the culture and institutions of traditional morality and family life as part of an oppressive bourgeois capitalist system which they — the feminists — must destroy.
It is not just marriage and motherhood, but also religion, patriotism and all notions of virtue, honor and decency associated with those concepts which are the targets of cultural destruction by feminists and the larger radical movement to which feminists belong. You might think there is some reasonable limit to what feminists would endorse in pursuit of this agenda, but hate is irrational and radicalism knows no limit. So when a Canadian provincial government publishes “Children’s Sexual Behaviours: A Parent’s Guide,” which tells parents that it is “natural and healthy” for young children to “touch the ‘private parts’ of familiar adults” and to look at “nude pictures on the Internet, videos, magazines,” we get the expected reaction from feminists: Crickets chirping.
Why the silence? Because the Left is willing to “normalize pedophilia” as part of its “ongoing effort to rid the world of Judeo/Christian influences,” as Matt Ross says. The failure to understand the Left’s revolutionary ambitions leads to a sonambulant indifference to the Left’s declarations of its beliefs, its methods and its purposes.
“Childlike innocence is an invention of the bourgeoisie of early capitalism.”
– Olaf Stüben, German pedophile activist, 1981
While advocating the perverse, abnormal and deviant as “rights,” the Left simultaneously attacks the wholesome and decent, so a married Christian couple like the Duggars must be stigmatized as part of the Left’s larger project, which one of their leaders described as “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
Every day brings new headlines heralding the Left’s success at destroying the moral foundation of our nation’s culture.
That’s a good question: Why would the University of Oregon bring anotorious anti-Christian speaker like Dan Savage to campus?
Why not bring the Duggar family to campus instead?
MSNBC would never say the Duggars are “doing wonderful, important work,” because the Duggars are Christians and MSNBC hates Jesus.
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Demonrat Senator Thinks There Should be no Time Limit on How Late You Can Rip a Baby out of the Womb
Sucking a baby from the womb and tossing it in the trash, nah, nothing extreme about that.
Via CNS News:
Sen. Patty Murray (D- Wash.) criticized the proposed Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act on Thursday, calling it “unconstitutional” three times while speaking on the Senate floor. “So we’re here today to make one thing abundantly clear and that is that this extreme, unconstitutional abortion ban is an absolute non-starter,” Murray said.
Murray continued, “The truth is the drumbeat of politically driven, extremist and unconstitutional laws continues to get louder. And apparently some of our colleagues on the other side of this aisle want to make some noise about this so that their adoring audience of right wing radio-hosts and activists are satisfied.”
“Women who continue to believe that their healthcare decisions are theirs alone are not going anywhere,” Murray said. “And by the way, the Constitution is not going anywhere and therefore this bill is not going anywhere.”
All Species Shall Live Forever (Except Us)
Why do we care about the giant panda birth rate? Why do we want them to reproduce?
What does it matter if they go extinct? Well, because they’re cute, I guess. And they inspire mediocre animated DreamWorks films. And because — whether it’s pandas or seals or sloths — we never want to see any species fade out of existence. Any species except our own, of course. For all our efforts to increase the Earth’s supply of furry woodland creatures and adorable arctic mammals, we still continue to view our own human fertility as an unfortunate medical condition that requires regular treatment, if not corrective surgery.
From American Digest: http://americandigest.org/
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Pretty simple, Wendy, you and Gosnell both think it’s OK to kill babies 23 weeks into a pregnancy.
Via Weekly Standard:
Texas state senator Wendy Davis has become the most prominent defender of a right to late-term abortion. So following a speech on Monday, I asked Davis to explain the difference between an abortion 23 weeks into pregnancy and killing a baby born at 23 weeks into pregancy, for which Philadelphia doctor Kermit Gosnell was charged with murder.
Davis dodged the question. “I don’t know what happened in the Gosnell case,” she said. After (implausibly) claiming not to know basic facts about the Gosnell murders, Davis then said she did know one particular detail: “I do know that it happened in an ambulatory surgical center. And in Texas changing our clinics to that standard obviously isn’t going to make a difference.”
In fact, according to the Gosnell grand jury report, Gosnell’s clinic was not regulated as an ambulatory surgical facility, but it should have been.
Brace yourself — the ad below by Heroic Media was regarded as too controversial for publication by the Chicago Tribune, USA Today, and LA Times:
By “controversial,” the information gatekeepers mean they find innocent human life and the idea that we might want to defend it offensive.
Our liberal ruling class regards corruption as good, so why wouldn’t it see innocence as evil?
On a tip from G. Fox. Hat tip: The Right Scoop.
Thanks Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
No matter how hard Davis and her fellow late-term abortion fanatics rant and rave, more Americans are opposed to sucking the brains out of an unborn baby.
Via Washington Times:
Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Sunday that state Sen. Wendy Davis’ attention-getting filibuster notwithstanding, the Legislature is going to approve restrictions on abortion when it gavels in another special session this week.
“We’re going to pass some restrictions on abortion,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Texas is a place where we defend life. I mean, that’s the powerful message here and that’s what we’re focused on and politics will take care of itself.”
“People have relayed to me that never in the history of Texas [have] they seen that type of mob rule come in and discombobulate a legislative session,” he continued.
Mr. Perry clarified that he was not referring to Ms. Davis’ filibuster, but rather the decorum of the Senate chamber during the debate as “mob rule.”
He also defended remarks he made recently at the National Right to Life Conference, where he described Ms. Davis as “a teenage mother herself” who eventually graduated from Harvard Law School and serves in the Texas Senate.
“It’s just unfortunate that she hasn’t learned from her own example, that every life must be given a chance to realize its full potential and that every life matters,” he said.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
The Pervert Party: Democrats for abortion had
a Texas girl hold a sign declaring: ‘If I wanted the
government in my womb, I would f*** a Senator.’
Liberalism is like a Swiss Army knife, a versatile tool that makes it valuable as a substitute for whatever its users otherwise lack. If you are stupid, but espouse liberalism, you will be praised by liberals as intelligent merely for so doing — Joe Biden and Al Sharpton, for example. If you are immoral, all you need to do to receive acclaim for your virtue is to become a liberal, as Ted Kennedy’s entire career attests.
This belief that every liberal is the moral and intellectual superior of others merely because he is a liberal has a profound effect not only in politics, but also within those fields of endeavor — journalism, academia and the entertainment industry — where the authority of liberalism has become hegemonic. Nothing else can possibly explain how an idiot like Chris Matthews remains on the payroll of NBC News, or why “Women’s Studies” departments stain the campuses of major universities, or why Joy Behar has a show-business career.
Liberals will themselves occasionally acknowledge this truth. WhenMona Eltahawy went off on Max Blumenthal this week, she made the point that Blumenthal “does nothing but Tweet” — he is not, nor has he ever been, a prolific writer. Blumenthal certainly has never shown any merit that would recommend his work except that he is a liberal. Andrew Breitbart was right on target when he said that the only thing Blumenthal has ever done is use “Alinksy tactics” in his efforts to “destroy people” — cheap political “gotcha” journalism that serves no other purpose than to smear the Left’s chosen enemies.
In this, however, Max Blumenthal is not particularly unusual. Outfits like Think Progress and Media Matters employ scores of “journalists” who have never done any “reporting” other than to accuse conservatives of sexism, racism and/or homophobia. It’s as if they were seeking the Pulitzer Prize for finger-pointing and name-calling.
So when Mona Eltahawy denounced Max Blumenthal as a useless drone, an untalented do-nothing, that indictment encompassed many more such practitioners of progressive journalism. Max is not unique among those whose only real qualification as journalists is that they are liberals.
Conflating liberalism with virtue is an idea that has consequences, and among those consequences is the moralistic hubris of liberals. Believing that advocacy for liberal causes is synonymous with virtue, they are prone to an ends-justify-the-means rationalization of unethical tactics and even criminal violence in support of what they believe to be The Greater Good. This was how, after all, the 1960s “peace” movement gave rise to the hateful fanatical terrorism of the Weather Underground bombers — social justice as a license for murder.
And speaking of murder, why do liberals never pause to wonder how abortion became the sine qua non of their worldview?
Bela Kun and the Politics of Perversion
Ann Coulter was never more accurate than when she said in her bookGodless that abortion is the sacrament of the Church of Liberalism. We beheld a bizarre testimony to this truth when pro-abortion protesters at the Texas Capitol began chanting “Hail Satan.”
What was going on was that the Texas legislature was considering a bill to ban abortion after 20 weeks, a proposal that should not really be controversial. Advances in medical science have made it possible to save the lives of premature babies, so that the criterion of fetal viability would certainly justify banning the murder of babies in utero who might be able to survive if they were delivered. The vast majority of abortions (more than 95%) are performed before the 20th week of gestation, so that the Texas law would do relatively little to limit the exercise of “choice.” Yet it is on this dubious battleground that Texas Democrats have, to nationwide applause from liberals, chosen to make their stand.
No one outside Texas had ever heard of Wendy Davis until the Democrat legislator decided to filibuster this legislation, a stance so wrong and unpopular that even a liberal Democrat like Kirsten Powers was moved to remark, “It’s amazing what is considered heroism these days.” And speaking of amazing . . .
Pro-life activists who supported the bill banning late-term abortions were at the Texas Capitol in Austin and began to sing “Amazing Grace,” a timeless and much-beloved Christian hymn:
I once was lost, but now I am found,
Was blind, but now I see.
Let’s ask: How could anyone be offended by this? What kind of person hates God so much they would object to “Amazing Grace”?
It is one thing, after all, to say that you do not share someone else’s particular religious belief, but quite another thing to say that their expression of belief is offensive to you. I may believe that Buddhists are fools and that Scientologists are deluded devotees of a charlatan, but I don’t run around deliberately starting arguments with them. Somehow, though, liberals have decided that Bible-believing Christians are their mortal enemies, and I think Matt Ross has properly located the historical origins of this anti-Christian animosity:
In 1919, Georg Lukacs became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary. He immediately set plans in motion to de-Christianize Hungary. Reasoning that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among children, then both the hated patriarchal family and the Church would be dealt a crippling blow. Lukacs launched a radical sex education program in the schools. Sex lectures were organized and literature handed out which graphically instructed youth in free love (promiscuity) and sexual intercourse while simultaneously encouraging them to deride and reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy, and parental and church authority. All of this was accompanied by a reign of cultural terror perpetrated against parents, priests, and dissenters.
Through the intellectual influence of the Frankfurt School’s cultural Marxism (Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, et al.) this attitude has been steadily woven into the ideological tapestry of the Democrat Party over the past half-century. The hegemonic dominance of liberalism within academia, journalism and the entertainment industry means that this radicalism — the embrace of perverse licentiousness and an implacable hostility to Christian faith — has been so widely diffused throughout our society that many Americans no longer even notice it, let alone question its original motives and purpose.
No one under 40 has any memory of when the Democrat Party did notstand for abortion, sodomy and socialism (not necessarily in that order) and the advance of political correctness within our educational system has deprived the young of the historical knowledge by which they might understand or critique modern liberalism. It is therefore remarkable — although seldom remarked — that mere opposition to the Democrat Party agenda is now classified as “hate,” as if buttf–king and baby-killing were synonymous with love.
Father of Lies, Party of Death
Rather than pursue that philosophical digression further, however, let us return to the scene Tuesday at the Capitol in Austin, where pro-lifers sang their hymn, for here we find an answer to the question: Who hates God so much that they are offended by “Amazing Grace”?
Abortion is wrong and its advocates are evil, and if their chants were meant in jest, there is truth in humor: Democrats want to kill babies, and thereby they make themselves servants of Satan.
BTW, Democrats chanting “Hail Satan” is no big deal. He is, after all, the spiritual founder of their party.
We may again digress briefly to note that the process by which Democrats became The Party of Death™ was fairly rapid. In 1960, when the Democrats nominated John F. Kennedy, his Catholicism was sufficiently controversial that Kennedy had to avow that he would not be taking dictation from the Pope. Ten years after JFK’s assassination, in its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling the Supreme Court manufactured a fictitious “right” to abortion, but this was not a partisan matter, and many Democrats strongly opposed it.
By 1992, however, the Democrat Party’s commitment to killing babies had become such a cornerstone of their national agenda that Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey was not permitted to speak in opposition to the party’s radical pro-abortion platform. Pro-lifers have since been purged, as Daniel McConchie explained last year:
If you tuned into the Democratic National Convention . . . and were momentarily confused as to whether C-SPAN was actually covering a huge abortion rally, you are not alone. The high-profile roles given to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan, Sandra Fluke, and Caroline Kennedy are the capstone of a two-decade-long effort to eradicate anti-abortion Democrats from the party. It is an effort that is nearly complete. An event hosted by Democrats for Life during the convention failed to attract a single politician currently in office.
Thus, in scarcely more than 50 years, Democrat have gone from being feared as too Catholic to being The Devil’s Own Party, whose adherents cheerfully offer their praise to Satan as they stand firmly in favor of killing the innocent unborn. And as every Christian knows, Satan is the “father of lies,” which brings us to Elspeth Reeve.
Ms. Reeve first came to public notice as a handmaiden of falsehood, and it is a testimony to liberalism’s influence in the field of journalism that someone so closely connected to an infamous act of dishonesty could still be employed by any reputable publication. Her disgraceful debut involved the notorious “Baghdad Diary” episode:
On August 2, 2007, the editors of The New Republic disclosed what they had learned in their July 26 chat with Beauchamp — that the “crypt keeper” episode didn’t happen in Iraq at all. They revealed also that Beauchamp had first made contact with The New Republic through one of the magazine’s yearlong researcher-reporters, Elspeth Reeve, who happened also to be Beauchamp’s girlfriend. . . .
Reeve left The New Republic just about the time (July 2007) it became evident that Beauchamp had fictionalized his atrocity tales, and one might have thought that the shame she had helped bring upon the profession of journalism would have rendered her radioactive, permanently persona non grata, as was the case with such liberal liars as Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair.
Nevertheless, The Atlantic has attempted to rehabilitate Elspeth Reeve, a fact I mentioned last year with a passing reference to her as the World’s Least Reliable Fact-Checker™ and now, in the case of the Texas abortion protests, she has disgraced herself anew.
Dishonesty, a Valuable Skill for Liberals
After video of the “Hail Satan” chant went viral Tuesday, Reeve presumed to fact-check it and generally deride conservatives who cited it “as proof of the depravity — or at least stupidity — of the pro-choice activists.” Before proceeding further with our inquiry into Elspeth Reeve’s competence as a fact-checker, let’s ask a few questions:
- Why is it that only conservative sites oppose abortion?
- Why do the words “liberal” or “Democrat” appear nowhere in Elspeth Reeve’s article? Is it really impossible to classify the general political orientation of those who think it necessary for abortion to be legal under all circumstances?
- Who assigned Elspeth Reeve to patrol the Internet, presuming to “debunk” messages on conservative sites?
You perhaps see the point: Reeve is doing the same kind of Alinksyite work as Media Matters and Think Progress do every day, and she seldom does anything else, because she has no “skill” except her liberalism. And in Swiss Army knife fashion, the universal tool of liberalism is made to serve as a substitute: If you are a habitual liar, being an outspoken liberal is accepted as proof of your honesty.
Reeve labels conservatives but does not label liberals, even though everyone knows that the only kind of people so evil as to protest in favor of abortion are liberal Democrats. However, Elspeth Reeve refers to them only as “pro-choice activists,” as if their political and ideological loyalties were unknown. But we need not be so mystified: The people who want to kill Texas babies are Democrats.
There are no Democrats who oppose killing babies, because Democrats have purged everyone who disagrees with baby-killing, and describing this policy agenda as “choice” is a purposeful deceit.
KILL BABIES! HAIL SATAN! VOTE DEMOCRAT!
Sodomy is still just an optional item on the Democrat agenda, but it’s probably only a matter of time before they make it mandatory.
Elspeth Reeve derogated conservatives for calling attention to the “pro-choice activists” who used a Satanic chant to mock pro-lifers, saying that only a handful of the “activists” took part in the chant, but one imagines that if a handful of Tea Partiers started chanting racial slurs, this would have been deemed newsworthy. Not content with dismissing the “Hail Satan” chant as trivial and insignificant, however, Elspeth Reeve thendisputed the authenticity of the photo (shown at the top of this post) of
bloodthirsty pro-abortion fanatics Texas Democrats having a young girl hold up a nearly pornographic protest sign:
However, it’s a fake. Or at least, it’s not from the Texas demonstrations. The photo was posted on a message board in December 2007. The anti-abortion crowd will have to stick with its five Satanists.
Oops! The World’s Least Reliable Fact-Checker™ strikes again: The photo is legit; Elspeth Reeve had read the date wrong on the message board; and she was forced to acknowledge her error.
Did I say “error”? I meant lie, because when you are engaged in a dishonest political propaganda campaign (which is all Elspeth Reeve’s “journalism” career has ever been) and you publish falsehoods in service of your deceitful purpose, this is scarcely an accident.
Liberals lie routinely, because they know if they ever told the truth, no honest person would support their wicked agenda. And if we fail to defeat them, it is because we do not boldly speak truth, or because we have let ourselves become confused by liberal lies.
Let me close by saying that the Texas legislature will convene again on Monday, as Thomas Umstattd Jr. says:
Where are God’s soldiers? Who will volunteer in the Army of the Lord?
From Robert Stacy McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
There’s a better chance Michael Moore will pass on seconds than Pelosi condemning abortion.
Via Daily Caller:
A pro-life group called on California Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi to “exercise your duties as a public servant and a Catholic, or have the honesty to formally renounce them,” in a widely-circulated open letter Wednesday.
“Public servants are supposed to be able to tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public. Apparently, you can’t,” wrote national director of Priests for Life Father Frank Pavone. “Otherwise, you would have been able to explain the difference between a legal medical procedure that kills a baby inside the womb and an act of murder.”
Pavone’s letter was written in response to the Minority Leader’s argument with a reporter — The Weekly Standard asked Pelosi to clarify her position on abortion in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell case during a press conference Thursday.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Alternate headline: Chelsea Clinton wishes she was never born.
New York, NY (CFAM) — From the stage at the recent Women Deliver conference, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s daughter Chelsea revealed that her much-admired maternal grandmother was the child of unwed teenage parents who “did not have access to services that are so crucial that Planned Parenthood helps provide.”
Chelsea’s grandmother was born of an unintended pregnancy. And new research shows that her family is not alone in treasuring a person who – if Planned Parenthood had been successful – would not have been born.
From Weasel Zippers:http://weaselzippers.us/
Surely You Don’t Think the Murdering Commie Bastard Would let Anything Get in The Way of Killing Babies Did You?
The reason the media conspicuously played down the lurid and highly newsworthy Kermit Gosnell baby abattoir trial is that it is heavily invested in the political success of Barack Obama. Don’t get the connection? Maybe this will help:
Despite passing the U.S. House of Representatives, a bill to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy faces an uncertain future as President Obama’s administration has suggested that he will veto it.
“(S)cience is on our side,” Representative Marsha Blackburn, (R- Tenn.) told MSNBC in an interview.
Blackburn joined other pro-life representatives, including Michelle Bachmann (R- Minn.) and Virginia Foxx (R- N.C.) in defending the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy and later, based on science indicating that unborn children can feel pain by this point. Exceptions in cases of rape, incest or a risk to the mother’s life were included in the final House version of the legislation.
This moral no-brainer passed the House 228-196, but now has to get through Harry Reid’s Democrat-controlled Senate — and if it does:
The Obama Administration has said that should the legislation gain the approval of both the House and Senate, the president’s “senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill.”
Why wouldn’t he? As State Senator, Obama repeatedly fought to deny medical attention to babies who survive botched attempts on their lives by abortionists.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who introduced the legislation, argued in a June 13 statement that “(k)nowingly subjecting our innocent unborn children to dismemberment in the womb, particularly when they have developed to the point that they can feel excruciating pain every terrible moment leading up to their undeserved deaths, belies everything America was called to be.”
Franks should have said, “everything the human race was called to be.”
Anyone who approves of tearing babies to pieces, even knowing they feel the pain and presumably the horror, will not hesitate to do the same to you when they have the political leverage. Losing to liberalism is not an option.
On a tip from St. Gilbert.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Yeah, he really said that.
(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday it is “morally outrageous” to ban abortions after five months of pregnancy.
“It is morally outrageous, frankly,” Nadler said about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797), a bill that would ban abortions 20 weeks post-fertilization, or five months into pregnancy.
“Here we go again,” he said. “Every single year we have to go through the same nonsense with the same morally presumptuous, morally arrogant attitude that we know better. ‘We know better than women and their doctors. We know better about their health care. We know better about their moral choices in very personal decisions.’”
The House is set to vote Tuesday on the bill. Pro-abortion Democrats gathered on Capitol Hill to oppose the measure.
“This bill is particularly morally outrageous,” Nadler said. “It is also particularly unconstitutional.”
You know, because who cares if a baby feels pain as it is being murdered?
. . . In an interview this morning, after Melvin said the evidence that the unborn feel pain before the third trimester is “limited,” Representative Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) explained to Melvin that the bill dealt with pregnancies at the 20th week or later, and went on to liken unborn infants at this developemntal stage to “tiny little preemies” in a neonatal unit who respond to “the pricks and the prods and the pain.” She also pointed out that surgeons operating on fetuses use anaesthesia. Melvin interrupted her explanation to say, “I don’t want to get bogged down” with the issue. “I think a great deal of people would agree that science and that public opinion is on your side,” he said, before moving to another topic.
Later in the interview, Melvin interrupted Blackburn again to ask whether the bill before the House that would ban almost all abortions after 20 weeks was “purely pandering.” The congresswoman took offense, asking, “Is saving the life of women and babies ‘pandering?’ Absolutely not, I can’t believe you would say something like that.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
One day when we get a conservative in the White House bills like this will become the law of the land.
The House Tuesday passed a bill that would ban most abortions nationwide after 20 weeks.
The most far-reaching abortion legislation in the House in a decade was approved 228-196, mostly along party lines.
The vote is largely symbolic: The bill will be dead on arrival in the Senate. And the White House has already threatened to veto the “fetal pain” legislation, which is based on the controversial assertion that a fetus can feel pain at that stage of development.
But Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), the bill’s sponsor, didn’t find that discouraging. He pointed to the last time Congress passed a bill of this scope, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. That bill fell short and faced court battles before it finally became law.
“I think if you hearken back to partial-birth abortion, … everybody said, ‘You know, it’s not constitutional; it can’t pass; it can’t go anywhere,’ and it took time to do that, and it even had to succeed a presidential veto. But it eventually did,” Franks said.
Found at Mad Medic:http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Race-based abortions, how progressive.
PHOENIX (AP) — Civil rights groups on Wednesday sued Arizona to block a 2011 law banning abortions based on the race or sex of the child that makes it a felony to knowingly provide a sex- or race-based abortion.
Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona said the law unconstitutionally singles out Asian and black women based on stereotypes and the sponsors’ beliefs that Asian and black women may choose an abortion because of race or the baby’s sex. Arizona is the only state that bans race-based abortions, although others bar abortions because of sex.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of two civil rights groups and wants an injunction blocking the law, which makes it a felony for anyone to knowingly perform or provide financing for an abortion sought based on race or gender. The law also requires doctors to question patients and file an affidavit swearing that’s not the reason for the abortion.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
This thing gets more unbelievable by the hour.
Via Washington Examiner:
IRS officials refused to grant tax exempt status two pro-life organizations because of their position on the abortion issue, according to a non-profit law firm, which said that one group was pressured not to protest a pro-choice organization that endorsed President Obama during the last election.
“In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent ‘Ms. Richards’ told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood,” the Thomas More Society announced today. “Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Found at Theo Spark
Live Action’s undercover “Inhuman” series continues to deliver stunning video that adds to the perception that the murderous allegations against Dr. Kermit Gosnell may be unfolding in other abortion practices across America. The third clip was captured at Family Planning Associates Medical Group, a Phoenix, Arizona-based clinic. In it, pro-life advocates charge that a clinic counselor named Linda can be observed claiming that medical professionals would not resuscitate a baby born alive during an abortion.
When an undercover investigator went into the clinic with a hidden camera, she was given information about the procedure by at least two staff members – both are featured in the video. Linda, the counselor, noted that a digoxin injection into the belly is the best way to stop the baby’s heartbeat and to prevent suffering during the procedure, although she told the pregnant investigator that having the abortion without the drug is also an option. If the expectant mother chose the latter option, Linda said that the “there could be movement” on the part of the baby.
The undercover mother continued her questioning about babies born alive and there’s no doubt that the counselor’s responses will likely be disturbing to pro-lifers. Of particular note, the medical professional admits that some children do come out alive during the procedure.
“Sometimes they are [alive], yeah. But it doesn’t – it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will come out whole,” Linda explained. “Cause they use suction, plus they use instruments so sometimes the fetuses don’t come out – you know, it’s not complete…”
From there, the investigator asked, “But if it does come out whole… I mean, are – will they resuscitate it? Like, will I have to take care of it?” It was at this point that Linda responded, “Uh-uh… No… They will not resuscitate.”
While some outlets have taken this to mean that the baby would not be cared for if born alive, the term “resuscitate” is multifaceted and somewhat problematic. In a sense, it seems to indicate that the baby would not be brought back from apparent death. If taken from the mother dead, though, then it would appear the clinic is not in violation if it refuses to “resuscitate.” But if born alive with complications and a need for assistance, the requirements would obviously be different.
Perhaps the more problematic dialogue is captured is depicted below, as it seems to indicate that life sometimes persists after birth – and the natural question is: What does the clinic do to try and save the baby’s life at that point? (we don’t get an indication either way based on the dialogue):
Counselor: Well, if they don’t use the digoxin, they’ll just, uh, suction the baby and it’s possible that there may be movement as they’re taking out the fetus.
Investigator: Like, movement after?
Investigator: And then what happens?
Counselor: Well, then usually it stops on its own.
During the woman’s interview with another individual at the clinic, Dr. Laura Mercer, it was made clear that the preferred option and intention is to “induce a demise – an intrauterine demise.” This would mean that the child would be killed before undergoing the removal portion of the procedure.
“We do the injection, which is a quick poke through your belly, um, and that stops the fetal heart, so that makes it so, if you were to deliver, there shouldn’t be movement,” the doctor explained. “There shouldn’t be any of those things.”
Mercer also warned the woman not to go to an emergency room if she goes into labor during the multi-day abortion procedure. Rather than going to a hospital – where they will treat the baby as though it is wanted alive by the mother – she said that the clinic should first be called.
“They would intervene and do all kinds of crazy things that you don’t need to have done to you,” the doctor said of how a hospital would treat the pregnancy.
Watch the shocking video below (warning: graphic content and themes):
. Live Action founder Lila Rose believes that the clinic is in violation of federal law, purportedly the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002,” which defines a “‘person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’” to “include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.” It mandates the protection of those babies who are born alive. Again, though, the issues mentioned above do leave some questions unanswered.
“The testimony we’ve documented in this abortion facility strongly suggests that staff there are committing infanticide,” said Rose of the most recent clip. “The Family Planning Associates Medical Group needs to be investigated immediately, and delicensed. Women are at risk during these brutal procedures, and this is a matter of life and death for these children.”
This investigative video comes after a Washington, D.C.-based abortion doctor said that he, too, would not help a baby born alive and similarly-troubling comments were made at a Bronx, New York, doctor’s office as well. These revelations come as the jury continues to deliberate in the Gosnell abortion case (full coverage of that can be found here).
In the past, TheBlaze has explored the journalistic standards and ethics surrounding undercover videos. The central question is: Is it ever permissible to lie to get the truth? While some would quickly answer affirmatively, it’s a challenging dynamic – and one that deserves scrutiny.
Experts have a variety of opinions, but the general consensus is that, unless deceit is the only option to retrieving information of monumental importance to the public, lying to obtain it is not ethical journalistic practice. There are, of course, differing ideas on how this dynamic unfolds. In 2011, Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard told TheBlaze that these rules do not apply to those outside of media.
“It’s dishonest for anyone in journalism to pretend to be someone they’re not. This rule doesn’t apply to folks outside the profession,” he said at the time.
But not everyone agrees with this assessment. Poynter has developed a list of standards for when it is – and is not – appropriate to use undercover tactics. And read more about TheBlaze’s exploration of undercover journalistic standards here.
April 30, 2013 (LiveActionNews.org) – During the breaking “Inhuman” investigation, Live Action investigated the Washington Surgi-Clinic where Cesare Santangelo performs late-term abortions in Washington, D.C. Santangelo revealed several horrors involved with late-term abortions that America needs to know.
1) Babies are purposely suffocated or otherwise cruelly killed to ensure their deaths.
“Um, I cut the umbilical cord first, wait for the baby to expire, and then we do it that way.”
Of course, we all know that the umbilical cord is a baby’s means of receiving the vital oxygen her body needs to survive. The umbilical cord also conducts blood to the baby’s body. In order to ensure that a baby does not survive a late-term abortion at his facility, Santangelo purposely suffocates the baby and stops her vital blood flow.
And did we catch the word “wait”? This is a process – suffocation, that is. It does not happen instantly. What terror and pain does an almost-born baby experience through this process? [...]
4) Hospitals and medical professionals who save infants after attempted abortions are “stupid.”
This admission by Santangelo may just top the iceberg. (Taking the cake just isn’t an appropriate analogy here.)
First, Santangelo acts as though women should not be calling a hospital – they should only be calling him, the master of death. (Remember, no babies have ever survived in his clinic.) Apparently, women should not panic, they should not deem their pain necessary of a hospital’s intervention, and they should definitely not change their minds about the abortion.
Santangelo then goes on to claim that when a Virgina hospital helped women to deliver their babies (and saved them after an attempted, partially-completed abortion), “the hospital helped them to deliver, which was the stupidest thing they could have done.” He went on to claim that the hospital “did everything they shouldn’t have done, which was help them to deliver…”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Abortionist Monster Slit Necks Of Born Babies; Told Assistant: ‘That’s What You Call A Chicken With Its Head Cut Off’
According to a Pennsylvania grand jury, Dr. Kermit Gosnell, the wealthy Philadelphia abortionist now on trial for seven counts of murdering babies who had survived his late-term abortions, repeatedly sliced the necks of born babies in front of a teenage employee, and once told his long-time assistant (the teenager’s mother) that a writhing born baby whose neck he had just severed was like a “chicken with its head cut off.”
“Ashley Baldwin also saw Gosnell slice the neck of moving and breathing babies,” said the report of the grand jury that recommended charging Gosnell with multiple counts of murder.
Baldwin’s mother, Tina, worked for nine years as Gosnell’s assistant. The teenager herself went to work for the abortionist when she was a 15-year-old high school sophomore.
“Although Ashley was just a teenager and still in high school, Gosnell had her assisting with procedures, performing ultrasounds, intravenously sedating patients, and assisting patients as they delivered in Gosnell’s absence,” said the report. “Gosnell claimed to her mother that allowing the teen to essentially practice medicine was legal, through a ‘grandfather clause’ which permitted him to train workers and avoid certification requirements. Ashley worked as much as 50 hours a week, into the early morning hours, while a full-time high school student.”
On multiple occassions, this teenage girl saw the abortionist slit the necks of living babies after they had been born.
“When asked how many times Ashley had observed babies being delivered that were moving or breathing or crying and the doctor cut the neck, she answered: ‘Most of the second tris that were over 20 weeks,’” said the report. “She said this happened probably dozens of times, maybe more. She described at least 10 babies as big enough to buy clothes for, to dress, and to take care of.”
In her grand jury testimony, Ashley Badlwin had the following exchange:
Question: “And what happened to those ten babies that came out from their mother, that were big enough that you could put clothes on and take home and take care of, that moved around, what did you see happen to them?”
Ashley Baldwin: “He killed them.”
Question: “Who killed them?
Ashley Baldwin: “Doc.”
Question: “How did he kill them?”
Ashley Baldwin: “He cut the back of the neck.”
The teenager told the grand jury that Gosnell told her this was normal.
Ashley’s mother, Gosnell’s longtime assistant, told the grand jury about a gruesome remark Gosnell made after severing the neck of a baby that had survived one of his abortions.
“Tina Baldwin,” said the report, “told the jurors that Gosnell once joked about a baby that was writhing as he cut its neck: ‘That’s what you call a chicken with its head cut off.’”
The grand jury charged both Tina Baldwin and Gosnell with corrupting the morals of a minor for their treatment of Ashley.
“We charge Gosnell and Tina Baldwin, his employee, with corrupting the morals of a minor,” said the report. “Gosnell hired Tina’s 15-year-old daughter as a staff member. She was required to work 50-hour weeks, starting after school until past midnight, during which she was exposed to the full horrors of Gosnell’s practice. Bad enough that he expected grown-ups to do it.”
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/