Via Gateway Pundit
Abortion/Pro-Life
Kelsey Grammer Lights Up Twitter With Pro-Life T-Shirt
Read more over at Breitbart:
Character of Our Nation ~ Carly Fiorina (*Caution! Graphic!*)
See more at BreitBart.
Ben Shapiro DARES You To Watch This Video ~ Abortion
Planned Parenthood chops up human babies and sells their body parts for cold hard cash. Sound extreme? Then Ben Shapiro dares you to watch this video.
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:
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:
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.
Matthew Chandler’s Short Video Challenging Your Senses
Excerpt taken from sermon, “The Sanctity of Human Life.”
Does ~Nancy “pick-n-choose” Pelosi~ Listen To Herself?
Via Rush:
Rand Paul VS. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Rand 1 ~ Schultz 0)
“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)
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.”
Reason vs. Emotion ~ Special Rights and the Power of the State
“If homosexuality is really genetic, we may soon be able to tell if a fetus is predisposed to homosexuality, in which case many parents might choose to abort it. Will gay rights activists continue to support abortion rights if this occurs?”
Dale A. Berryhill, The Liberal Contradiction: How Contemporary Liberalism Violates Its Own Principles and Endangers Its Own Goals (1994), 172.
Gays shouldn’t be the only one’s to worry!
Gay Patriot makes short points in regard to the above by showing some recent examples:
Emotion:
- “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!”
- “Stop Global Warming!”
- “Smash the Patriarchy!”
- “Behead those who insult Islam!”
In another post GP makes the point of the hypocrisy of those led not by reason and law but by emotion, and how the tables can turn easily on them. This is important, because when you have laws written for special interest groups rather than the equal application of all people… whomever is in charge can use or twist that law against their opponents.
You see, the winds are for a more politically-correct [left-leaning] view of cultural issues. But if the State has the power to run Christians out of business… that means the State has the power to run gays out of business depending on the prevailing winds of the body-politic. Which is something our Constitution was written to stop, mind you.
(Word of the day: femicide) Here is part of a growing issue in America as we speak, a real war on women, via National Right to Life News:
…Lu reminds us that sex-selective abortions, while most commonly associated with China and (increasingly) India and Singapore, other nations, such as Great Britain, are admitting they have a similar dilemma. [Of late we’ve written about the situation in Great Britain many times, most recently here.]
There was evidence, even before the newest study which purported to prove there wasn’t sex-selective abortions in the U.S., that they are occurring. As NRLC discussed back in 2012
Dr. Sunita Puri and three other researchers at the University of California interviewed “65 immigrant Indian women in the United States who had pursued fetal sex selection.” They wrote: “We found that 40% of the women interviewed had terminated prior pregnancies with female fetuses and that 89% of women carrying female fetuses in their current pregnancy pursued an abortion.” This powerful study discusses in detail the multiple forms of pressure and outright coercion to which such women are often subjected: “Forty women (62%) described verbal abuse from their female in laws or husbands. . . . One-third of women described past physical abuse and neglect related specifically to their failing to produce a male child.” As a result, “women reported having multiple closely spaced pregnancies with terminations of female fetuses under pressure to have a male child.” (“‘There is such a thing as too many daughters, but not too many sons’,” Social Science & Medicine 72 (2011), 1169-1176)
Another study examined American-born offspring of foreign-born Chinese, Korean, and Indian parents. According to Lu
“the really significant finding concerned third births in families who already had two daughters. Among these children, there were 151 boys for every 100 girls. Almond and Edlund drew the obvious conclusion: when expecting for the third time, a significant number of Asian parents preferred an abortion to a third daughter.”
What about the new study–“Replacing Myths with Facts: Sex Selective Laws in the United States”? It’s been hailed as bigger and better and disproving (hence the “myths” language) that there are sex selective abortions here at home. That was the “takeaway” trumpeted by the usual suspects. Only it wasn’t true.
This was obscured because, as Lu writes, the authors “bur[ied] the single most important piece of information in a forest of far-less-relevant facts, graphs, and meanderings about methodology.”
She notes
“It’s got to be frustrating when you bring together a lot of important-sounding organizations to do a big, splashy study, and it ends up confirming the piece of data that most sticks in your craw. But now that we’ve descended to throwing around accusations of racism, I think the truth should be spoken. Asian-born American parents with two daughters are significantly more likely to have a son for their third child. Combined with Puri’s qualitative study, and ample data confirming the use of sex-selective abortion in some Asian cultures, that constitutes strong evidence that it also happens here in the United States.”
Lu adds (tongue in cheek?), “My compliments to the University of Chicago for confirming this with their new, comprehensive study.”
Of course, the last thing the authors of this study and others of a similar ilk will concede is what the evidence tells anyone willing to read it. But assuming they did, what do they do with it? The options are not promising.
“America is a big country and the relevant sub-cultures are fairly small. So pro-choicers could bite the bullet and suggest that even if sex-selective abortion happens and is sort of distasteful, maybe a few hundred or thousand aborted daughters either way just aren’t that big of a deal? Hey, I’m just laying out your options, if you happen to be a pro-choice feminist.”
But the one option, Lu write, which is not available for anyone interested in truth is to permit
“further deception about what the data is really saying. Even less should we permit disingenuous attempts to dismiss the struggle against femicide as racist or misogynistic.”
This Day Choose Life (*GRAPHIC* Not Intended For All Audiences)
Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood Director, said she knows of no one surviving an abortion:
…UM…
Below are some GRAPHIC images and videos. Near the bottom is a filmed partial-birth abortion. To be clear, this needs to be seen, but if you are not the person to handle this, then this is not the post for you
The first part of this post is an import from my old blog and is a post about a conversation with a young gal in and area we called the “pit,” the specialty cheese, wine, and meat section of my old employer — Whole Foods. What took place was a glowing example of many years of work by the left-leaning establishment that is often called “higher education,” which has turned out a zombie of non-thought who would rather use the seven words in Dennis Prager’s article. Like, “what about the mentally ill or deformed kids in the womb, shouldn’t the woman have the choice to abort them?” Even at my friends site you will often here a horror story about a child not having health-care and then the label, “[you] Bush doesn’t care about the children.” These are non-statements. There is no critical thinking involved.
When talking about abortion, for instance in our “pit,” I hear some position stated and then I merely respond, “that’s fine, but that doesn’t deal with whether the ‘fetus’ is a life or not.” Then I hear some grand tail about a women’s choice, and I respond, “that’s great, but that doesn’t deal with the issue of whether the ‘fetus’ is a life or not.” That is the question. Then the “you’ll never know what it is like” line comes out, referring to me being a man, ergo, I cannot have as valid an input on the matter, to which I responded/respond with examples of people who do have the personal capability to respond. Like Norma McCorvey, who was “Jane Roe” in Roe v. Wade (1973), she wrote a book that is pictured here (as well as a DVD).
I brought up Gianna Jessen, who was herself a survivor of an abortion, her story (and book) are very compelling, and often, when young university minds are being steeped in feminist philosophies, rarely is there ever time taken to study or reflect on the other side of the issue, as I was told after I asked a this question, “so at 24-years old you have looked at both sides of the issue and all the evidence and arguments and have concluded that you are right and there is no evidence left to compel you,” the response was “yep!”
A great 40-minute video can be found here. This presentation is rational, well thought out, and rarely responded to by the Left. Another personage that I typically bring up is Bernard Nathanson, who,
He likewise wrote a book. Is he someone who would have some valuable input on the matter? Of course, his sex has nothing to do with it… unless you’re sexist. Dr. Nathanson is best known for his “Silent Scream” video (it is very dated), where a baby is shown being aborted via ultrasound images. What the video details is as the abortion procedure gets under way, the baby starts to literally scream, except there is no air to carry the cries of agony and pain. The entire video is linked above, but I will show the poignant part here. CAUTION, this video to the right is GRAPHIC as well, as it is ending a perfectly viable life… unless you are pro-choice, then this is just like any other operation — like removing your appendix, or tonsils.
I doubt the person in conversation with me has done much in the way of reading and contemplating this issue much beyond what she deems to be liberating feminist theory rebuffing the patriarchy. People who are protecting their emotional belief very rarely go out and pick up a book like Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice, by Francis Beckwith. Which is too bad.
(The above Facebook video is via THE FEDERALIST)
I mentioned Kathy Ireland and her appearance on Bill Maher’s show, Politically Incorrect, where she responded to a question (from a discussion a few years back):
Here I will again link to Dennis Prager’s article that bears on this whole discussion and hashing it out rationally and responsibly instead of using invectives to rebuff some perceived sexism or racism or some other label.
A lot of progressive liberals do not know what they mandate as legal often times, in our day and age many have to see video to know what Obama fought against banning and Clinton legalized as one of his first actions as President. One woman saw the video without realizing what she saw (this GRAPHIC video will be at the end) and describes her emotions.
1997: Obama opposed bill preventing partial-birth abortion
Obama opposed legislation protecting born-alive failed abortions
Again, here is the video… if you cannot handle a GRAPHIC MEDICAL PROCEDURE ending a HUMAN’s life that most Democrats want to legalize, then do not watch what it means to be a part of the PARTY OF DEATH! The first video is merely a presentation of the procedure in a medical class, the second is the procedure in real life.
The reader may want to familiarize themselves with Planned Parenthood and their founder, Margaret Sanger.