Being PRO-LIFE Is Now “Hate-Speech” ~ Office Depot vs. Babies

  • As a follow up, Office Depot ceo apologizes – agrees to print pro-life flyer after story hits drudge report.

The Washington Times started this story out:

A Chicago-area woman has accused Office Depot of religious discrimination after employees refused to make copies of an anti-Planned Parenthood flier, citing company policy that prohibits the “persecution of people who support abortion rights.”

Maria Goldstein, 42, said she was told to use the self-serve copy machines after employees at the Office Depot in Schaumburg refused to fulfill her order of 500 copies of “A Prayer for the Conversion of Planned Parenthood,” the Chicago Tribune reported….

The Daily Caller originated it:

Office Depot may face a lawsuit after refusing to print flyers that criticize Planned Parenthood, saying the flyers “persecute” people who believe in abortion rights.

Maria Goldstein, 42, of Illinois asked Office Depot on Aug. 20 to print 500 anti-Planned Parenthood fliers, but the employee refused. The flier had facts about Planned Parenthood from the organization’s annual report as well as a prayer calling for the “conversion” and “enlightenment” of those who support the organization.

“When I tell people they’re shocked because this is America,” Goldstein told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Office Depot is trying to silence my freedom of speech and my freedom of religion.”

[….]

Tom Olp, a lawyer with the Thomas More Society, said if Office Depot does not comply they will file a legal complaint.

“This seems crazy,” Olp told TheDCNF. “To say that a prayer that calls for conversion and understanding and enlightenment is persecution, to call that persecution to me is the height of intolerance.”…

The spokesperson for Office Depot mention the flyer had language to persecute people. I suggest reading it all — below (see Office Depot’s response here):

Planned Parenthood Fact Sheet and Prayer by Daily Caller News Foundation

 

The Forward Thinking of the party of Death ~ Hillary

Gateway Pundit notes the insane aspect of the above video of Hillary calling Republicans “terrorists” over abortion:

Hillary Clinton compared Republican presidential candidates to terrorists in her latest campaign speech.

Extreme views about women, we expect that from some of the terrorist groups. We expect that from people who don’t want to live in the modern world. But it’s a little hard to take coming from Republicans who want to be president of the United States. Yet, they espouse out of touch and out-of-date policies. They are dead-wrong for 21st century America.

From the woman who supports Planned Parenthood baby organ harvesting.

In Gateway’s post Jim has a picture of the Islamic State blowing off the heads of captured persons. This has more in common — literally — with Democrats.

 

Baby Parts [Still] For Sale ~ Democrats Dehumanizing Human Life

“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.” ~ Faye Wattleton, former president of U.S. Planned Parenthood

Breitbart comments:

America’s utterly useless, hopelessly corrupt mainstream media has once again been scooped by New Media, this time on a major story involving a major left-wing institution. According to undercover video released Tuesday, for anywhere from $30 to $100 a pop, Planned Parenthood is happy to adjust the way in which it murders unborn children.

You want a heart? A liver? A lower extremity? Not a problem. While butchering this child — hopefully during a late-term abortion in order to bump up the price — Planned Parenthood will be super-duper-extra-careful to murder the baby in a very specific way that keeps those organs intact.

This is happening. In America. And we’re only learning about it thanks to a group that has nothing to do with the MSM — the same MSM that has all kinds of time to fabricate racism, stir up riots in inner-cities, fabricate infrastructure problems around a train crash, and ask Donald Trump the same three goddamned immigration questions for a full month.

Why isn’t our media regularly investigating and calling for full transparency from a taxpayer-funded institution like Planned Parenthood?

Why doesn’t our media treat Planned Parenthood with even a tenth the scrutiny it does the NFL or Koch Industries?

The answer is simple: When the media targets certain institutions, there is big political and cultural upside for the Left. On the flip-side, if the media were to investigate others institutions, there is potential downside for the Left. Therefore, this is the media’s driving criteria when it comes to editorial decisions….

The Blaze makes this accurate assessment:

…Mysteriously, these “clumps of cells” are suddenly considered identifiable bodies with limbs and organs.

And with the calvarium, in general, some people will actually try to change the presentation so that it’s not vertex. So if you do it starting from the breech presentation, there’s dilation that happens as the case goes on, and often, the last step, you can evacuate an intact calvarium at the end.

In case you’re wondering, the calvarium is piece of the skull. According to Nucatola, as the abortionist is executing the child, he will sometimes “evacuate” it a certain way so the baby’s head can later be sold for money…

Gay Patriot comments on the above information:

No one who is pro-abortion should have any problem with this. After all, so long as a woman is not inconvenienced by a pregnancy, nothing else matters. Besides, those organs probably come from “communities we don’t want too many of,” as Democrat heroine Margaret Sanger or Ruth Bader Ginsburg would put it.

The following comes from my old blog dated June, 2007. It is an import perfect for the above new information.


Peter Singer is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University. Singer was the founding President of the International Association of Bioethics and, with Helga Kuhse, founding co-editor of the journal Bioethics. In his book “Practical Ethics,” he writes:

If the fetus does not have the same claim to life as a person, it appears that the newborn baby does not either, and the life of a newborn baby is of less value to it than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee is to the nonhuman animal.

If we can put aside these emotionally moving but strictly irrelevant aspects of the killing of a baby we can see that the grounds for not killing persons do not apply to newborn infants.

Remember that Peter Singer teaches ethics to generations of medical students. An ABC 20/20 Special turned up some horribly unsettling info about an industry that has come into being with the slow march towards the devaluation of human life:

ABC News “20/20” Investigation Into Alleged Trafficking In Fetal Tissue Finds Companies That Appear To Be Profiting From Selling Human Tissue For Medical Research

A three-month “20/20” hidden-camera investigation has uncovered an industry in which tissue and organs from aborted fetuses, donated to help medical research, are being marketed for hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dollars.

“20/20” has investigated one businessman whose company issued a price list charging what many call exorbitant prices for fetal tissue. In addition, ABC News “20/20” chief correspondent Chris Wallace has an exclusive interview with a whistle-blower who says two tissue retrieval companies he worked for went so far as to, on some occasions, encourage him to take fetal tissue obtained from women who had not consented to donate their fetuses to medical research. The report will air on “20/20 Wednesday,” March 8 (10:00-11:00 p.m., ET), on the ABC Television Network.

Many say that fetal tissue is vital in scientific research that may provide dramatic medical breakthroughs, and federal law permits the donation of tissue from aborted fetuses for that purpose. But the law says companies that transport fetal tissue to medical research labs may only charge a reasonable fee to recover costs of collecting and shipping human tissue. “20/20’s” investigation found some companies are charging high fees — fees that critics say are not based on recovering costs; for example, the price list for one company, Opening Lines, includes listings of $325 for a spinal cord, $550 for a reproductive organ, $999 for a brain.

How are these prices determined? One “20/20” producer went undercover as a potential investor to meet Dr. Miles Jones, a Missouri pathologist whose company, Opening Lines, obtains fetal tissue from clinics and ships it to research labs. “It’s market force,” Dr. Jones told the producer about how he sets his prices. “It’s what you can sell it for.” He says he hopes to run his own abortion clinic in Mexico where he says he could get a greater supply of fetal tissue by offering cheaper abortions: “If you control the flow — it’s probably the equivalent of the invention of the assembly line.”

“That’s trading in body parts. There’s no doubt about it,” said Arthur Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Bioethics.

Representative Thomas Bliley (R-VA), who chairs the United States House Commerce Committee, says his committee is now investigating four companies after finding evidence they may be selling tissue for a profit. He says the committee is interested in ensuring that people transporting fetal tissue only recover their legitimate costs. “It appears that it’s more than that. That it comes down to trafficking in tissue parts,” he tells Mr. Wallace. Rep. Bliley’s committee expects to hold hearings on this issue later this week. [Note: The House Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Health and the Environment has scheduled a hearing on Thursday, March 9, at 2 p.m., on the subject, “Fetal Tissue: Is It Being Bought and Sold in Violation of Federal Law?”]

Another piece to this puzzle was added with an article by Mona Charin, a nationally syndicated columnist when she wrote this in reference to another think tank article:

Body Parts For Sale

“Kelly” (a pseudonym) was a medical technician working for a firm that trafficked in baby body parts. This is not a bad joke. Nor is it the hysterical propaganda of an interest group. It was reported in the American Enterprise magazine–the intelligent, thought-provoking, and utterly trustworthy publication of the American Enterprise Institute.

The firm Kelly worked for collected fetuses from clinics that performed late-term abortions. She would dissect the aborted fetuses in order to obtain ‘high-quality” parts for sale. They were interested in blood, eyes, livers, brains, and the thymuses, among other things.

“What we did was to have a contract with an abortion clinic that would allow us to go there on certain days. We would get a generated list each day to tell us what tissue researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and universities were looking for. Then we would examine the patient charts. We only wanted the most perfect specimens.’ That didn’t turn out to be difficult. Of the hundreds of late-term fetuses Kelly saw on a weekly basis, only about 2 percent had abnormalities. About 30 to 40 babies per week were around 30 weeks old–well past the point of viability.

Is this legal? Federal law makes it illegal to buy and sell human body parts. But there are loopholes in the law. Here’s how one body parts company–Opening Lines Inc.–disguised the trade in a brochure for abortionists: “Turn your patient’s decision into something wonderful.”

For its buyers, Opening Lines offers “the highest quality, most affordable, freshest tissue prepared to your specifications and delivered in the quantities you need, when you need it.” Eyes and ears go for $75, and brains for $999. An “intact trunk” fetches $500, a whole liver $150. To evade the law’s prohibition, body-parts dealers like Opening Lines offer to lease space in the abortion clinic to “perform the harvesting,” as well as to “offset the clinic’s overhead.” Opening Lines further boasted, “Our daily average case volume exceeds 1,500 and we serve clinics across the United States.”

Kelly kept at her grisly task until something made her reconsider. One day, “a set of twins at 24 weeks gestation was brought to us in a pan. They were both alive. The doctor came back and said, ‘Got you some good specimens–twins.’ I looked at him and said: ‘There’s something wrong here. They are moving. I can’t do this. This is not in my contract.’ I told him I would not be part of taking their lives. So he took a bottle of sterile water and poured it in the pan until the fluid came up over their mouths and noses, letting them drown. I left the room because I could not watch this.”

But she did go back and dissect them later. The twins were only the beginning. “It happened again and again. At 16 weeks, all the way up to sometimes even 30 weeks, we had live births come back to us. Then the doctor would either break the neck or take a pair of tongs and beat the fetus until it was dead.”

American Enterprise asked Kelly if abortion procedures were ever altered to provide specific body parts. “Yes. Before the procedures they would want to see the list of what we wanted to procure. The (abortionist) would get us the most complete intact specimens that he could. They would be delivered to us completely intact. Sometimes the fetus appeared to be dead, but when we opened up the chest cavity, the heart was still beating.”

The magazine pressed Kelly again. Was the type of abortion ever altered to provide an intact specimen, even if it meant producing a live baby? “Yes, that was so we could sell better tissue. At the end of the year, they would give the clinic back more money because we got good specimens.”

Some practical souls will probably swallow hard and insist that, well, if these babies are going to be aborted anyway, isn’t it better that medical research should benefit? No. This isn’t like voluntary organ donation. This reduces human beings to the level of commodities. And it creates of doctors who swore an oath never to kill, the kind of people who can beat a breathing child to death with tongs.

Here is an actual price list from one of the now many companies that participate in the trafficking of human parts (more at Fathers for Life):

Opening Lines
A Division of Consultants & Diagnostic Pathology,
Inc. P.O. Box 508, West Frankfort,
IL 62896
Fee for Services Schedule

> greater than

< same or less than

  • Unprocessed Specimen (> 8 weeks) $ 70
  • Unprocessed Specimen (< 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Livers (< 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $150
  • Livers (> 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $125
  • Spleens (< 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Spleens (> 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Pancreas (< 8 weeks) $100
  • Pancreas (> 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Thymus (< 8 weeks) $100
  • Thymus (> 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Intestines & Mesentery $ 50
  • Mesentery (< 8 weeks) $125
  • Mesentery (> 8 weeks) $100
  • Kidney-with/without adrenal (< 8 weeks) $125
  • Kidney-with/without adrenal (> 8 weeks) $100
  • Limbs (at least 2) $150
  • Brain (< 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $999
  • Brain (> 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $150
  • Pituitary Gland (> 8 weeks) $300
  • Bone Marrow (< 8 weeks) $350
  • Bone Marrow (> 8 weeks) $250
  • Ears (< 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Ears (> 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Eyes (< 8 weeks) 40% discount for single eye $ 75
  • Eyes (> 8 weeks) 40% discount for single eye $ 50
  • Skin (> 12 weeks) $100
  • Lungs & Heart Block $150
  • Intact Embryonic Cadaver (< 8 weeks) $400
  • Intact Embryonic Cadaver (> 8 weeks) $600
  • Intact Calvarium $125
  • Intact Trunk (with/without limbs) $500
  • Gonads $550
  • Cord Blood (Snap Frozen LN2) $125
  • Spinal Column $150
  • Spinal Cord $325

Here is the last article dealing with this topic, and is a recent discovery the devaluing of human worth under a more socialized medicine in Europe:

HARVESTING ORGANS

Sarah Boseley, health editor

Thursday January 11, 2001

The true scale of the scandal of human organ retention by hospitals will be revealed today by the government’s chief medical officer, who will tell parents and professionals that 50,000 organs are being stored in hospitals in England alone. The number far exceeds expectations.

Liam Donaldson will say that what was done in the name of the NHS over many years was an affront to families who had lost their loved ones. Addressing a public seminar, whose audience will include top pathologists and other senior doctors:

“Some of the past practices around organ retention belong to an era where decisions were made by the NHS for patients, but not with patients. This has caused a period of immense distress for families, especially in places like Bristol and Liverpool, when they found out their children’s organs were taken without their knowledge. Something went seriously wrong in the way the health service dealt with the issue of organ retention.”

Prof Donaldson will pledge that the government “will do whatever it takes to put things right, changing the law if necessary to ensure that relatives are given the right kind of information so they can give consent in a fully informed way if they choose to do so.”

At Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool, where an inquiry will report shortly, more than 3,000 children’s organs have been discovered; other hospitals were not thought to have anything like that number.

The chief medical officer will offer an unmitigated apology and assurances for the future to the parents of the Alder Hey children and those whose children died and had organs removed at the Bristol royal infirmary who have been invited to today’s seminar. None of the parents knew that hearts, brains and other whole organs would be removed and kept after the autopsy on their son or daughter.

Ian Kennedy, chairman of the inquiry into children’s deaths following heart surgery at Bristol, published an interim report into organ retention at the hospital last May. He found that the law was complex and obscure. Different laws covered hospital autopsies – which help doctors find out about the progress of disease – and those ordered by the coroner to find out the cause of death. Prof Kennedy recommended at least a new code of practice and preferably a new law.

Prof Donaldson has issued interim guidance to hospitals, requiring them to tell parents and relatives exactly what an autopsy involves and get their explicit permission if there is any need to remove organs. Today’s seminar is part of his information-gathering process on the way to producing his final report to the health secretary, Alan Milburn. That is expected, along with the Alder Hey inquiry report, before the end of the month.

Ed Bradley, chairman of the Alder Hey parents’ support group, said more than 140 parents and relatives had travelled to London for the seminar and were glad of the opportunity to give evidence, “however, we do question how much benefit can be gained from a one-day conference where we have only been given five minutes to represent our views.” They also felt it would be more appropriate to discuss the way forward after the Alder Hey inquiry had reported.

Alder Hey hospital is generally considered a special case, because whole organ systems were found to have been collected by a consultant pathologist, Dick Van Velzen, who is facing disciplinary hearings at the General Medical Council.

Bristol parents at the seminar will be asking for Prof Kennedy’s recommendations to be implemented and questioning why there has been no action since his report was published. “It was quite clear the law was in a mess,” said Steve Parker, chairman of the Bristol Heart Children’s Action Group.

Glenn Beck Reacts To My Video Of A Late-Term Abortion

Hat-Tip: I wouldn’t have known the video was cited unless a “sojourner” in the faith mentioned Glenn citing the video.

KHVH has the following:

Glenn played some of Carly Fiorinas interview on The View and brought up the happy topic of abortion. When Fiorina shot down Whoopis point, they of course abruptly ended the interview. Whoopi couldnt believe that a large majority of people are against late term abortions. Perhaps thats because shes never seen one how horrific are they? Glenn finds out.

Here’s how the conversation went down on The View:

WHOOPI: I’m sorry. I got to ask this question.

The first part of it is: You’re running. I assume you’re a person who is very sort of pro-life and believes it. So are you going to run as a person who is going to govern for everyone, or are you running on your Christian beliefs? Because I — you said some wonderful things, and it made me ask the question: If you feel that women should have the choice, have the choices, why do you think choice is not a good thing?

CARLY: Well, look, I think that abortion is obviously a very delicate subject. I happen to believe that science is proving us right. I mean, the zygote in — the DNA in a zygote is the same as the DNA the day you die. But I understand respectfully — we don’t all agree. We do have common ground on this issue now. The majority of women, the majority of young people, the majority of Americans now think that late-term abortion for any reason at all is a problem. So what I say is, let’s go find that common ground.

The segment turned the conversation on radio towards partial birth abortion, and Glenn said that if people really understood what that was, no one would support it. After an off-air conversation, Glenn watched a video of a partial birth abortion during the show. Needless to say, he was horrified.

“I know what it is intellectually, but when you see the body of a baby moving from the shoulders down, out, and then the doctor sticking the scissors into the head and then moving. And you see the blood rush all over his hands. And then he has to pull the head out, and the head comes off the baby. My God, what monsters are we. Oh, my gosh. What monsters are we. Holy cow,” he said.

“That’s a murder. I just witnessed murder. Oh, my gosh. And you know why you won’t watch it? The reason why people won’t watch it, you won’t get Whoopi Goldberg to watch it. Whoopi Goldberg won’t say that because Whoopi Goldberg is afraid to look at it because there’s no way you can look at it and say it’s anything but murder. Why do they keep the head in the baby? So it’s still a woman’s right to choose. Two seconds later, and that baby is out, and you can’t kill it. It is — this is obscene. I know what it is. I’ve known what it is. In theory, I’ve never seen it. When you see it, it is — it is — it’s Mengele,” he said.

Watch the same video Glenn watched HERE. Warning, it is incredibly graphic….

Here is the fuller radio show segment ~ CAUTION! This includes the video:

What I posted on Glenn’s YouTube:

Thank You! This was my upload and I rarely get people to read/see this stuff… and this is exactly the response E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E should have. I cried watching your description/reaction. I try to give secular responses to many of our issues, which is why I quote Kathy Ireland’s response to Bill Maher. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT! Whoopie (and others) won’t watch this because it will change their mind… and they don’t want their mind changed.

  • “…that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that… your children may live” ~ Deuteronomy 30:19 (See: This Day Choose Life)

Glenn, there is a video (a couple) produced by Rebecca Kiessling of 12 survivors of rape talking about their blessed lives. ALSO, the book by Randy Alcorn, changed my view of this: “Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments Expanded & Updated.”

But back to the video… people have no idea… and this was the first (or one of the first) executive orders by Bill Clinton… to legalize this. It was one of Bush’s first as well, to stop it. I am about to quote some REALLY wild stuff:

➤ On the 4th day of the Clinton presidency, Jan. 23, the 20th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Bill Clinton signed, in a televised Oval Office ceremony, a series of executive orders undoing the draconian policies of the Reagan-Bush era relating to abortion, contraception, and family planning. ~ Hillary had pushed unequivocally for the orders, but Bill’s pollster argued that she was dead wrong on the timing of such a hot-button issue; by acting on abortion policy as one of the administration’s first pieces of business, the president and, worse, Hillary, would be perceived as governing from the left. But Hillary regarded the prohibitions in question as a powerful symbol of Reagan-era policies, and an opportunity to declare boldly that the Clinton era had begun. There was an additional appeal: it was fiscally neutral, monetarily cost-free, and not subject to a drawn-out legislative process. (Source: A Woman in Charge, by Carl Bernstein, p.256 , Jun 5, 2007)

[….]

➤ Opponents of a ban on partial birth abortions claimed that it was used only when necessary to protect the mother’s life. Unfortunately for that argument, the physician who is the best-known practitioner of these abortions stated in 1993 that 80% of them are “purely elective,” not necessary to save the mother’s life or health. Partial birth understates the matter. The baby is outside the mother except for its head, which is kept in the mother only to avoid a charge of infanticide. Full birth is inches away and could easily be accomplished. ~ President Clinton did, in fact, veto the bill banning partial birth abortion, demanding a vague exception for health that would have amounted to a ratification of almost all such abortions. His veto and the feminist demand for what is, in truth, infanticide underscore the casual brutality born of nihilism that is an ever more prominent feature of our culture. (Source: Slouching Towards Gomorrah, by Robert Bork, p.182-183 , Dec 16, 2003)

[source]

People have no idea.

I am happy Glenn watched it and talked about it… selfish pride/notoriety… etc. All the stuff a fallen individual can muster to “aggrandize” one-self. But, at the same time it is sad that I have to post on and upload stuff like this.

In-other-words, I am glad more people saw this, at the same exact time I am sad more people had to see this.

Does that make sense?

Does ~Nancy “pick-n-choose” Pelosi~ Listen To Herself?

Via Rush:

…Nancy Pelosi reserves for herself and her friends the right to willy-nilly end the life of a God-created human being in the womb. And she argues for that right and protests for that right and demands that right. But when it comes to “destroying the planet,” you better not take one step in that direction. The pope has just said, “We must preserve God’s creation,” quote, Nancy Pelosi: Except where you find it in the womb, apparently. 

[….]

“‘Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion,’ the encyclical says. ‘How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?'” (Gasp!) Il Papa goes on to say that “population control is not the answer” to climate change.  Fewer people is not the answer. 

Abortion is not permitted. 

Pelosi’s just stepped in it….

“Cancer” ~ Melissa Harris-Perry Kid’s First Words

(CNSNews.com) – MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry compared abortion to cancer treatment and hand amputation during a segment of her self-titled show Saturday on Alabama’s abortion law that requires minors to get written parental consent before an abortion or petition the court if they don’t.

And NewsBusters has this:

“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence…”

Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood (1997)

Tampons

Don’t be fooled by the deceptive labels and euphemisms. When it comes to “reproductive rights,” feminists have a very specific agenda—one that involves a lot more abortions, but not necessarily more choice.

Ashley Herzog, Feminism vs. Women (Xulon Press, 2008), 86.

…As Dave Andrusko (National Right to Life News) stated:

“At first blush, you might simply say, What?!” But remember this is the same woman who argued that superstar singer Beyonce could [should?] have promoted abortion at the 2014 MTV Video Music Awards program where she spoke at length…”

(I’ll add a few more examples that will make people scratch their heads and say “What!?”   There was the time where she downplayed the role that radical Islam played shortly after the Boston Bombings.  The time she linked GITMO detainees to American slaves. The time she mocked (and then shamefully apologized) Mitt Romney on his newest grandson – who happened to be black.  Or the time when she said that parents shouldn’t raise kids, communities should raise kids: “Part of it is, we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”) 

McPhilips took Harris-Perry’s irrational comment in stride, and sensibly responded:  

“Well, you wouldn’t have to, because I presume you’re well over 17, but someone 17 or younger, especially 16, 15, 14, having an abortion or having a baby could have great consequences. And at their age and stage, they can’t enter into any contract legally in any state anyway, and the rules of civil procedure in Alabama and in most states allow for the appointment of a guardian ad litem to protect the property interests of an unborn child. And we reason if the property interests of an unborn child can be protected, why not the life interests, because without the life, you can’t have property. …

“But I will say this: I want to raise the consciousness of people out there that there’s much at stake, great life itself. The only problem with pro-choice is it’s absolutely no choice for the one life that’s really at stake.

Melissa Harris-Perry once asked “When does life begin? I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents. A powerful feeling – but not science”; and spoke of an unborn child as a “thing” that “might turn into a human.”

…read more…