Planned Parenthood argues for post-birth abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter MJE
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Obama absolutely refused to vote to protect the life of a baby who is born alive after surviving an abortion attempt. He didn’t technically vote against the Born Alive Act, but he voted “present” to make his point that he was on the side of abortionists while keeping his voting record ambiguous enough to run for president. It was a Pontius Pilate style sin of omission.
 
EVIL!!! :mad: May God have Mercy on us… I pray to God that this evil will end!!! :gopray2::signofcross:
 
The lobbyist for Planned Parenthood, at least, made herself look like a bumbling fool. Small mercies.
 
thewanderer said:
They’re just being logically consistent. 🤷 The only difference between the child before and after is location, if its ok to kill the child just moments ago when she/he was in the womb why in the world would it be any worse to kill it a minute later when it is in a different location.
Click to expand...
I think this is correct. They can’t give an inch because their whole philosophy will fall apart. It took me awhile to see it. All the rationalizations are exhausting.
 
Truly horrifying.

This is a good picture of how some of these people value life. Honestly distressing.
 
J_Peterson said:
I think this is correct. They can’t give an inch because their whole philosophy will fall apart. It took me awhile to see it. All the rationalizations are exhausting.
Click to expand...
This is just as scary, from Slate magazine.

Why Pro-Choicers Should Be OK With Sex-Selection Abortions
… let’s just remember that we are talking about fetuses. No matter how many ultrasound pics get posted to Facebook, these are fetuses with female genitals or male genitals—not little girls and little boys. If pro-choicers object to aborting because of the sex of the fetus, aren’t we then saying that abortion is “murdering” girls? Aren’t we basically arguing that a fetus is not a blank slate but a future possibility? That is not the case to make if your goal is to protect abortion rights. Gulp for a second if you must, then get over it.
Click to expand...
slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/05/31/sex_selection_abortion_and_the_pro_choice_movement_why_liberals_shouldn_t_gulp.htm

“War on women”, anyone??
 
Do we know how often this happens? I was a bit surprised at her response that she doesn’t know how prevalent it is.
 
MJE said:
Some maybe shocked today but over time they will get comfortable with this ‘right’

Florida legislators considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion were shocked during a committee hearing this week when a Planned Parenthood official endorsed a right to post-birth abortion.
Alisa Laport Snow, the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.

weeklystandard.com/blogs/video-planned-parenthood-official-argues-right-post-birth-abortion_712198.html
Click to expand...
I have spent a lot of time in the pro life movement. I have heard many, many stories of doctors and nurses IGNORING a living baby after an “abortion”: putting it aside, despite its cries or struggles. If I remember correctly (it being 30 years ago), a “medical” person spoke to us about this at one time (we were actively picketing an abortion clinic which actually closed because of our presence). So, I guess it’s true.
 
… let’s just remember that we are talking about fetuses. No matter how many ultrasound pics get posted to Facebook, these are fetuses with female genitals or male genitals—not little girls and little boys. If pro-choicers object to aborting because of the sex of the fetus, aren’t we then saying that abortion is “murdering” girls? Aren’t we basically arguing that a fetus is not a blank slate but a future possibility? That is not the case to make if your goal is to protect abortion rights. Gulp for a second if you must, then get over it.
Click to expand...
Interesting. But this is where the logic of the pro-abortion movement always ends up. There can be no qualifers, no exceptions, not even for partial birth abortion, not evem if the baby is in the birth canal, not even if the baby makes it out alive. Death was the intent, and death must be accepted. “Gulp for a second if you must, then get over it.”

It’s chilling.

The same sorts of things will be said when they come for the elderly and the disabled.
 
Yes, sex selection is the real war on women.

But according to Marilyn French in her 1992 book “The War Against Women”, it is male aggression and control on a global level. She was assistant professor of English at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, from 1972 to 1976.(Marilyn French is mentioned in the lyrics of “The Day Before You Came” by ABBA. )

On Amazon
Review from Publishers Weekly…
Men’s tendency to subjugate and abuse women operates on personal, institutional and cultural levels, notes novelist and feminist French ( Beyond Power ). Boys’ desire to dominate girls is instilled in childhood, while grown men see women as mothers owing them caretaking services, she observes. In her sharp analysis a major goal of male-conceived religious movements like Christian fundamentalism and militant Islam is to keep women subservient. Other examples of institutional suppression of women explored by French are discrimination in the workplace, biased divorce judgments and widespread rape, wife beating and male incest, a systemic pattern tolerated by society.
Click to expand...
 
MJE said:
Some maybe shocked today but over time they will get comfortable with this ‘right’

Florida legislators considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion were shocked during a committee hearing this week when a Planned Parenthood official endorsed a right to post-birth abortion.

Alisa Laport Snow, the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.

weeklystandard.com/blogs/video-planned-parenthood-official-argues-right-post-birth-abortion_712198.html
Click to expand...
This Planned Parenthood offensive is **actively **pursuing a path that Illinois Senator Barack Obama defended (that is … it was deliberately happening in hospitals passively – and he opposed legislation that would offer protections to live born babies under those circumstances). Obama was positioned on the critical committee that could pass the legislation on for a vote – and his votes and actions in that committee three times blocked consideration of the Induced Infant Liability Act (2002).

humanevents.com/2006/12/26/obama-more-prochoice-than-naral/

washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-obama-vote-to-deny-rights-to-infant-abortion-survivors/2012/09/07/9852895a-f87d-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_blog.html < Melissa Ohden, an escapee from this sort of thing (born alive - post-abortion but HELPED instead of killed) speaks on this.
When he was in the Illinois state Senate, Barack Obama voted to deny basic Constitutional protections for babies born alive from an abortion — not once, but four times. I know it’s by the grace of God that I’m alive today, if only to ask America this question: Is this the kind of leadership that will lead us forward — that would discard the weakest among us?”
— Failed-abortion survivor Melissa Ohden in an ad from the Susan B. Anthony List
Click to expand...
The testimony of nurse Jill Stanek who witnessed “live birth” abortions at Christ Hospital (:eek: !) of Oak Lawn, Illinois – so impressed all hearers of her Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) hearing revelations – that they voted unanimously (96 - 0) to pass it . At the same time an almost identical bill was being opposed in Illinois by State Senator Barack Obama. A sample of Stanek’s testimony:

freerepublic.com/focus/news/2060118/posts < (*Stanek’s testimony before Congress begins half way through this document and is presented in its entirety). *
One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down’s Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him.
Click to expand...
I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about 1/2 pound, and was about 10 inches long.
Click to expand...
He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy he had trying to breathe. Toward the end he was so quiet that I couldn’t tell if he was still alive unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall.
Click to expand...
After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our dead patients are taken.
Click to expand...
Baby’s hand grasps Doctor’s finger, from the womb

http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/...p_baby-reaches-from-womb_Facebook-620x419.jpg

theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/02/touching-photo-of-baby-grasping-doctors-finger-from-the-womb-during-c-section-goes-viral/
 
scipio337 said:
Let me try again:

slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/05/31/sex_selection_abortion_and_the_pro_choice_movement_why_liberals_shouldn_t_gulp.html
Click to expand...
I can’t make a better argument than the above photo, but followed a couple of links from Slate and found this from a woman who attended college at the time of Roe vs Wade:
"We knew that desperate women were dying from illegal, unsafe abortions. We knew that bringing a baby into the world and taking care of it when you weren’t ready was a terrible thing to contemplate. That giving up a baby that you weren’t ready to take care of was equally terrible. And that for many women, the thought of giving a child up for adoption was as terrible as were the other options.

Giving up a child for adoption is as terrible as killing him/her?

" Pro-choice was the only logical position for us. And pro-choice was not, is not, anti-life. Pro-choice is pro-life, too. Pro-life in the sense that women are entitled to autonomy and agency, that children are entitled to come into a world that is ready for them and can nurture them. Those of us who are pro-choice believe that being “pro-life” means facing life with all its contradictions, difficulties, and complications. And respecting a life that others choose even if we might choose otherwise."
kveller.com/blog/parenting/a-jewish-response-to-abortion/

So,pro-choice women want to be able to “nurture” their babies and have them all safe and secure at the “right” time. Guess that means when it’s not time to kill them!
This and the OP’s article show how sick and twisted the practice of abortion is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top