Posts Tagged ‘abortion’

Is it human, or isn’t it?!

May 11, 2014

This is my reaction to a Reason article defending “guilt-free” voluntary abortion:

“We understand that a fetus at, say, 10 weeks is very different than one at 20 or 30 weeks”

What we “understand” is that a fetus that you can look at of 20 or 30 weeks looks a lot more human.

But if you go frame by frame backwards from 20 weeks in 24 hour intervals, it’s not only NOT “very different”, it’s very much the SAME. The *reason” being, that it IS the same creature there, the same human creature.

Is a caterpillar not the earlier stage of a butterfly??

Here in the days of “Reason”, when people who think themselves “reasonable”, have no trouble imagining that eukaryotes and prokaryotes, in their own mature “adult” stages, are their own ancestors, it is most laughingly unreasonable to reject thinking of the youngest of human creatures as if they are only what, wait, part of the mother’s own body??#@!! This is “reason”?

Take a DNA sample from the little pre-tyke. Only HALF that DNA came from the mother, and HALF from the father, and I’ll bet you donuts to dollars that the resulting epigenetics will express the inherited motherly genes differently than in the mother’s body.

Hell’s bells, with much frequency, we know that on occasion the baby’s blood and the mother’s blood are even *different types*!

How is that the same “body”? It’s one body inside another.

I saw one comment by a self-professed witch who was at least more honest in the acknowledgement that it was a little human, but justified killing it by calling it a parasite.

Shame on libertarians who are NOT Nazis in general but who do the same thing in an arbitrary situation, and simply say it’s okay to kill a certain class of human being because it’s not a human being.

As much as pro-abortion defenders want to convince themselves, there’s a reason mothers feel guilty when they let their fathers and their boyfriends hustle them into doing what the maternal instinct screams out at them is wrong.

You don’t have to be a Christian to oppose prenatal infanticide. In fact, most of the time I’ve heard Christians talking about it even on the Establishment Christianity media (whom are mostly despicable in their neo-con opinions), the arguments are secular in nature:
http://www.godlessprolifers.org
http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9546.htm
http://www.godlessprolifers.org/members.html

It’s just a little easier to see clearly on some issues for somebody who really believes in a just God that will require a little bit of TRUE reasoning, some good *logical* reasoning for their ethical choices.

As to guilt, Christ offers the *only* guilt-free answer to post-abortion syndrome. After all, he said, “I came not to condemn the world”, and there is also Isaiah 1:18:

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.”

 

 

Advertisement

“Reproductive rights” — Orwellian Newspeak — because it’s about the BABY

October 26, 2013
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, known as a "King o...

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, known as a “King of abortion”, would later be an active member of a pro-life organization. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This goes out in reaction to Tibor Machan‘s opinions as expressed in the following link:

http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/34690/Tibor-Machan-Communitarianism-and-Reproductive-Rights/

I think humans should respect the rights of girls inside the womb, not just the one with the body outside the womb.

How many more women to die? Never mind that Bernard Nathanson (“The Silent Scream“) video, who testified in Roe v Wade, has repented after watching ultrasound later on, and in answer to a question about the 10,000 women who died in “back-alley” abortions, he said they just “made it up” (his words) because it sounded like a really big number.

So who knows, really. But meantime there is a killing field of little girls (let’s remember the boys, too okay?)

CIA World Fact Book says China has a population from 0 to 14 years old of 124,773,577 male and 107,286,198 female. This means a ratio of 1.163:1 of boys to girls. The natural ratio is something like 1.05 to 1.00. God arranged it that way because males die at a higher rate of death during the earliest years, and normally it balances out. This pattern is seen in statistics I’ve looked at for the U.S.A., too…

That means for a population of that many young males, calculating from the ratio, a “normal” number of females would be 124,773,577. Subtracting the number of girls in their actual census, that means that 11,545,780 girls are missing. They are victims of abortion, a side effect of the one-child policy. And that’s not even counting the number you get if you calculate out the number corresponding to the boys that are also killed in the womb.

Those are real girls who are killed then too, in scalding, burning salt solutions, or their little limbs torn apart inside, or in partial-birth abortion their brains are sucked out from their head through a tube after the rest of the body is kicking outside the womb already.

The militant anti-Christian opinion-setters and propagandists want you to think this is just a Christian cause. Do a Web search on the words “pro life atheists” and there are a bunch of links to “godless prolifers” (as in www.godlessprolifers.com). The fact is, it is a human life.

An important libertarian principle is that individuals are morally and objectively responsible for the consequences of their own actions. Once you have been confronted with the obvious fact that the baby inside the womb is a human being, you have a responsibility to avoid murdering it. This is a fact of innate knowledge in “expectant” mothers, in fact, as so many women in the Silent No More movement have said. They are only “expectant” in the sense they are “expecting” the birth of the baby, in which the baby emerges from inside.

The BIG LIE is to try to talk about abortion (ending the life of the baby inside) as “reproductive rights”. This is Orwellian newspeak, and it is amazing to watch minds adapt this terminology –like Tibor Machan– who in other contexts see through them. After all, he is more intellectually honest than most libertarians in some of his writings that make clear that the fall of socialists –sometimes “with a vengeance”– is all the fault of the CIA.

We all know now that when you have sex, often a conception occurs of a new human being. We all know as well that there is no 100% sure contraception. Babies often happen in spite of these measures. If you engage in the sex, and a baby grows within, then the obligation to respect the non-aggression principle applies. This is not just a “duty” to save a life, something Walter Block has argued against quite effectively.

In fact, due to the dependency that a baby has, I’ve read libertarians argue that the woman has a duty to find an adoptive couple (or even person) if at all possible before killing it. I argue from the principle of consquences that becoming a parent involves positive duty.

This might be seen as requiring a positive right of the baby as individual. That may be, but this is one area were the individual responsibility for the consequences is a special case, since the parent bore that new life and that new human life requires some amount of care in order to merely survive to an age where he can make decisions for himself. The parent is responsible for the baby’s existence, the parent made it happen.

You broke it you bought it, says a sign in big letters easily visible as you enter the china shop. You’re on the shop owner’s property, you follow the rules. It’s a comparable idea. You conceived it (talking about the father too) you “own” it but anything you do that purposefully endangers that baby’s life is an aggression, and therefore is not acceptable.

So now let’s address the REAL issue in these discussions about abortion.

Abortion apologists all KNOW that the debate from the pro-life side is about the BABY. That’s why it’s always “reproductive rights”, as if killing the baby had anything to do with reproduction anyway. The Germans had no “reproductive right” to kill even one Jew for being a Jew, or a Gypsy, or the millions of Christians he did in.

But to women who have done this, there are lots of women who have found their way back to peace and now warn other women, younger women (This is relevant to the debate because women have a natural compulsion within themselves to protect their babies, and it is indoctrinated out of them by depopulation engineers. Or sometimes other factors drive them.)

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

www.silentnomoreawareness.org/‎

“Death with dignity” or “Useless Eaters”? Power and paternalism says “Go ahead and die!”

May 27, 2013

The title to the article found at the following link is a propaganda piece itself and a tendentious accusation, and the author is not stupid. She KNOWS that it is not true, because without even checking other articles, we know that she accuses pro-lifers of religious motivation. I don’t know, maybe she switches personalities depending on the issue. Her title: “Assisted dying isn’t contested on religious grounds – it’s about power, paternalism and control”.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/05/assisted-dying-isnt-contested-religious-grounds-its-about-power-paternalism-and-con

On that site, they claim that the lay people of almost all religious self-identifying persuasions favor “assisted suicide”, and they point out that the clergy and other leaders oppose. They love to use a majority opinion when it suits their purpose, while saying a judge is “legally” correct in pointing out that a poll majority is no basis for law, they immediately contradict the concession by making it still sound like an elite imposition on the majority.

Polls have lost credibility a long, long time ago. Especially for making any argument for anything. I have been polled myself. The wording of the question, asking leading “questions” to change the mind of the respondent. They inflicted the same question upon me in three different ways in that poll. The “surveyor” only stopped because I stopped the questioning. They assured me my answers would count anyway.

Did they count my responses in their “results”? I’ll never know, and neither will you. The results of that poll were publicized in the obvious direction the pollsters were supposed to evoke, but they are usually useless. They certainly are real arguments for nothing at all. “Approval ratings” are also bogus, believable only when there isn’t too much at stake. Not only useless, they are in essence frauds meant to play with the public mind. Propaganda tools.

I do not have a big clergy salary or position, work as easily reporting to woman bosses as to men bosses, I hate control as a mostly anarcho-capitalist  libertarian, and I don’t think anybody should have cultural sanction to kill another person. That’s finality in the control category, killing somebody, and that’s exactly the problem that inflicts so many PATHOLOGICAL killers. No emotion at killing somebody.

Now we have advocates of “mercy” killing.  They do not deny their emotions, but here comes the “for your own good” rationale beating down on common sense.

Oh, but that stage is maybe to follow. The powers that be that are pushing this theme are not yet going to admit that their real goal is the elimination of what Hitler called “useless eaters”. For now it’s a “compassionate” [sic] concern for the desires of the suffering.

For now, they say they only want to “help” those who are of “sound mind” who want to go. Presumably who also suffer from terminal disease. That’s their main argument anyway.

Kid you not. “Help them” die instead of talking them out of suicide. Hello? Rational logic calling! Come back!

In this “Brave New World” drowning in drugs and the commercialization of pleasure and hedonist philosophies, instead of improving techniques for improving the lives of the suffering, they want you to think of just letting them die. What a psych trick to say “Death with dignity” rather than a “poor quality of life”. There is no “dignity” in either killing yourself, and there is a lot less dignity in helping someone you say you love to kill themselves. Or instead of talking them out of it, nod your head, knowing that it is your partner’s pride that does not want to be dependent for life.

The compassionate thing is to make them know that their lives are important to you, making them know that they are more useful to you alive than dead.

(Meantime, many of the same powers that be advocate dependency on strangers from government for the poor).

Not the new twist in the psych of that title. They added a new Doublespeak to the Newspeak dictionary, calling it “assisted dying” instead of “assisted suicide”. Suicide has a bad name. Suicide is a bad name. That’s because suicide is a very bad thing.

If you kill somebody else, it’s called murder. If you kill yourself instead, that’s called suicide. To some people that makes all the difference. But it is still somebody killing somebody. If it’s bad to kill somebody, it’s bad to encourage them or help them kill themselves.

But in the real world of rational discussion, the thing that makes it bad for somebody to be killed at the hand of another, is just as tragic a death if somebody is killed at their own hand.

The worst aspect of this is the degenerate drop of moral pretense here. While arguing in moral terms, the Powers That Be that want this expose themselves in that they show that they care not about life over death. They have other plans for you.

This is Pandora’s box. Their game is over, their gig is up, it’s going to start winding down. There will be some blowback from the Powers That Be that want to hold the power of life and death over the rest of us. People are beginning to wake up to their oppression, in spite of their tendency to hide in the shadows and behind secret societies, old boys’ networks and the like.

This paternalistic ruling clique wants us to believe that we the people have demanded the “right” to kill ourselves and get a doctor to turn upside down help us die instead of help us live. But there is a twist to this, just like with a “woman’s right to choose”. With a “woman’s right to choose”, it really becomes an invitation for a man’s “right to choose”.

A few women do jump into hedonistic behaviors and abortion is their “safety” net for avoiding motherhood (so they’ve been told). But nature tells them in the back of the mind and in the region of the heart that having a baby in the womb makes them a mother. The desire is there and the “Silent No More” movement of women who publicly confess and denounce their own abortions is a demonstration of this, along with the fact shown in surveys of the symptoms of post-abortion syndrome.

In one pro-abortion movie, in fact, it made light humor of one young girl bragging that she had told FIVE different guys that it was their baby so she could get the money not only for the abortion but a trip to Hawaii. Real funny.

A few women do jump into hedonistic behaviors and abortion is their “safety” net for avoiding babyhood (so they’ve been told). But surveys have shown that in the majority of cases, the women “choosing” abortion did it under pressure of a father, a mother, an uncle, or the boyfriend.

So it is a lie that abortion is simply a “choice” for women. It has made them more vulnerable to the demands of men, in fact. It has added pressure for them to approach sexuality in the same way as men. The long-term blowback is felt by the older feminists who yearn for motherhood. Connie Chung is one of the most famous of these, not exactly a “feminist”, but one who bought into the myth that a woman could have a fulfilling career same as a man without the naggings of motherhood. Too late, she sought motherhood. It is not paternalistic to understand this.

Denying your nature, denying who you are, denying the physical and natural testimony of your physiology, this is not a simple matter of “choice” or “law” or “decree”.

There is one more road to hell here, whether you want to think it’s paved with good intentions or not.

In a moral society, we expect doctors to heal us when we’re sick, alleviate our pain, and help us avoid death as much as possible. Doctors enter the profession with this orientation in mind. Part of the horrors of the Axis powers during World War II was the turning of this on its head. Medical knowledge was applied to death instead.

To legalize this will end the universal expectation of doctors. Some have already been indoctrinated by the fact of death in the baby-killing business, as in the Gosnell case in Philadelphia. Not even playing the race card saved him from the horrified reaction even from the partial-birth abortion advocates. Unsaid in the coverage was the fact that now President Obama uttered one of his few voiced opinions in the Illinois State Senate against strengthening the penalties for the kind of things that Gosnell did as a matter of course.

May God save us from this pro-death propaganda. That’s what it is.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: – Deuteronomy 30:19

 

 

Abortionists praying for more abortions: Echos of “Baby Ponds”

April 21, 2012

Found, surprise, at the Washington Post web site:

A prayer for abortion?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/religious-right-now/post/planned-parenthoods-abortion-prayer/2012/04/18/gIQABL46RT_blog.html

Pro-life advocates have long complained that Planned Parenthood, the country’s largest abortion provider, worships at the altar of abortion, but did you know that the abortion industry actually prays for abortion?

Perversely reminiscent of 40 day pro-life prayer vigils, Planned Parenthood in Humboldt County, Ca., is promoting it’s own “40 days of prayer,” March 18th through April 27th, for abortion. This is not their usually disguised promotion of abortion as “preventative care,” “family planning,” or “contraceptive services.” No, they throw those typical euphemisms out and directly pray for abortion.

It seems as though they feel confident enough now they can unveil the spiritual connection to pagan rituals of infant sacrifice, and to tell people of faith how to believe, bring them into lockstep conformity to how they are told to think by the self-appointed “Guardians of the Planet”, so they title it.

I’m not talking about the poor women who are exploited by these architects of depopulation, generally they know not what they do, and it’s very rare that the ones who’ve undergone such a thing, very rare they are proud of or brag about it.

At least even those who do it don’t talk about the ones they’ve done. Don’t let them tell you they’re afraid of fundamentalists, another lie, because if there were a Muslim fatwa issued on them they would certainly act differently, plus they know that in this country babies do not have realistic legal protection.

Baby ponds were the scourge in pagan China where “unwanted” babies were thrown to drown by mothers and others who didn’t want them. One report tells of a Christian missionary who attended an ecumenical conference in the first decade of the 20th century in Chicago, who literally begged the Christians to shun any statement of equivalence of religions.

Jesus Christ and his followers brought to the world  the idea of respect for the neighbor’s rights, because they considered it a duty to love others with the love that God had loved them and gave his only Son for them. They adopted the babies in Greece that were left on hillsides, they gathered under bridges to catch them as they were thrown down, and eventually mothers began leaving their babies at their doorsteps knowing they would have good lives.

Today, instead of promoting adoption for poor mothers’ babies, now they want to make it a “holy sacrament”, and it will be an “unholy sacrament”. By the way human sacrifice and child sacrifice is a blatant “sacrament” among Satanists, bluntly put.

Reminds me of an old lefist folk song I just heard earlier today, that the rich are eliminating poverty by killing the poor.

So they’re pulling off their masks and maybe they figure they have Christians sufficiently marginalized to be able to push the envelope even further.

But we will be okay, no matter what state we wind up in, because we have the very Creator of the Universe for us, and if God be for us, who can be against us? Abounding and abasing, David’s Mighty Men became the heroes of history.David was a protector of the poor:

And every one [that was] in distress, and every one that [was] in debt, and every one [that was] discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.

And remember, even though the Beast of the Mark will establish a world government, he will have his own world full of trouble himself, and the people that are preparing the world for him. There will be all kinds of anti-anti-christs, an apparently hostile army coming toward Jerusalem from the East, and he has a poor ending:

And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him. – Dan 11:45

Also remember that where sin doth abound, there grace doth much more abound, and God will abundantly pardon:

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

 

 

Abortion IS a war on women!

April 10, 2012

From women who were victims of the induced abortions, sometimes willing victims: http://www.silentnomoreawareness.org/testimonies/

One of the biggest women’s issues organization in the country: http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp

It’s hard to find trustworthy data about abortions, here’s a source: http://adoptionstatistics.us/articles2.html

There is a waiting list for adoption, and it would be millions longer if there was not so much paperwork and hassle and government agents inspecting every corner of your house for perfect and to see if they like you. So it is a lie that any pregnant mother’s baby is “unwanted”.

There is another lie about this too.

Abortion is a war on women because it gives the MEN an excuse to go deadbeat easy, and some surveys suggest most women say that would prefer to keep the baby but they can’t because.. and fill in the blanks, and often there’s either a man involved or some bad man or can’t trust men…

Best thing that every happened to deadbeat dads

Brilliant tyrant strategy: Get the infirm to off themselves for you, and get mothers to off their babies

April 10, 2012
Abortion Memorial

Aborted Baby Memorial (Photo credit: DrGBB)

Convincing women to kill their own babies IS a war on women!

Obama’s attack on health hurts women more than it does men!

Convincing the infirm that their life is not worth living IS a hateful thing to do to them!

Abortion is about the BABY IN THE WOMB, it’s NOT about the mother!

“Assisted suicide” is for the selfish living, it’s not “helping” the victim!

 

Adoption is a win-win-win for mother, baby and loving parents

March 18, 2012
Português: Bento XVI durante encontro com os j...

Brazilian youth for life (Image via Wikipedia)

Soviet poster circa 1925. Title translation: &...

Adoption by Choice, Erie, PA (Image via Wikipedia)

Adoption by Choice, Erie PA

Adoption by Choice, Erie PA (Photo credit: hbimedialibrary)

If you know a  young woman (or not so young) considering induced abortion, let her know she can put the baby up for adoption to one of the thousands of couples on waiting lists and so still have “her” life, and bless the baby and bless two loving parents who would like to have a child, and avoid the emotional wounds and pain and regrets and the increased health risks for an artificially induced termination:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Choices/otherways.htm

Tell Stan to have ready this for the co-worker to pass on to this niece in case of remorse, which happens frequently:

http://www.silentnomoreawareness.org/

It is a web site put up by women and for the tens of thousands of women who repented of their abortions, and plead with those considering induced abortion to reconsider for their own sake, as well as for the sake of the baby in the womb.

The web site links to the horrifying experience of Julia Holcomb, who was coerced into a saline abortion at 17, result of a dalliance with the Aerosmith lead singer.

If the champions of “choice” and “women’s reproductive rights” and “sexploitation” would demand an end to the force abortions in China and would work harder to expose the cases of heavy-hand of male pressure on women to terminate their babies’ growth inside, they would leave themselves less exposed to the obvious charge of hypocrisy and false flag ideology. They assault women’s rights every time.

Pictures of babies in the womb here (a rose by any other name):
http://www.abortiontv.com/Growth/window_to_the_womb.htm

The baby has a heartbeat at only 18 days from conception.

The feminist case against abortion:

http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/Feminism.htm

+===>  DAUGHTERS OF RAPE AND ADOPTION

More, four stories that represent tens of thousands of others across the country, just among pro-life activists, who are adoptees that were conceived in a rape:
http://www.all.org/article/index/id/ODY5NA/

One is Laura Tedder, whose biological mother made several attempts to abort her and who suffered from birth as a result from a form of cancer that lost her one eye, plus a number of surgeries and treatments. The birth mother dropped her off at two days old at her brother’s house, who adopted her, and she said this:

When Laura was able to speak with her birth mother years later, she told her, “I’m just calling to thank you so much for giving me to your brother. What a wonderful life I’ve had! I just want to thank you so much for giving me life; God bless you!” Though Laura’s birth mother has repeatedly rejected her efforts at reconciliation, Laura said in her online testimony, “I have forgiven her and harbor no resentment. Any people in similar circumstances with a parent should let go of their resentment sooner so they can reconcile before it is too late.”

Nobody, absolutely nobody, has been able to tell me what is different about a baby that is two inches apart from point A to point B where killing it at point B is killing a baby and at point A it is a “choice”.

+===> ABORTION AND BREAST CANCER

Open letters from women who have had abortions and want to encourage other women who are pregnant:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/Volunteers.htm

The link between abortion and breast cancer has been shown in several medical studies:
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/medicalgroups/index.htm

“MasterCare International an international group of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists was presented with the evidence of the link between abortion and breast cancer at its international conference in Rome in October 2004 by Dr Joel Brind’s research group.  The medical explanation and the epidemiological evidence convinced our  group that there is a significant increase in breast cancer risk after induced abortion, especially before the first full term pregnancy.  This evidence has been denied by the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) and other researchers.  Recently ten studies have been published in an attempt to discredit Brind’s conclusion.

“In turn Brind has examined these ten studies and in a peer reviewed paper published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (Vol 10, No 4, Winter 2005, <http://www.jpands.org>) he  has shown that they have serious methodological weaknesses and flaws and therefore do not invalidate the conclusion that there is a increased risk of breast cancer.

“Women have a basic right to know of this increased risk of breast cancer and it is unacceptable that the information should be denied to them by the medical and cancer research  establishments. MaterCare International as an organization of women’s health specialists  recognizes its responsibilities in this matter and will do all it can to publish this evidence.”

When does a human life begin?

March 13, 2012
Six day old human embryo implanting

Six day old human embryo implanting (Photo credit: Rebecca-Lee)

The only independent and scientific way to define the beginning of the life of a human being is at conception, because that’s when the construction starts. There is no other natural cut-off point. Try as they will, breathing oxygen atmosphere directly instead of absorbing it through the placenta does not work in any way that is intrinsic to the “human organism” itself: Defining it as beginning at birth is a function of the external environment.

The heart beats at 4 weeks of conception. It grows rapidly in there.

To say it’s not “life” is ludicrous, because (1) the one cell has all the design necessary for the human adult including puberty, adolescence, and reproductions.

To say it’s not “human life” is ludicrous because it has 23 pairs of chromosomes, 50,000 from each parent, but in a unique new combination.

To say it’s not a “person” is to redefine “person”. To deny “personhood” to the baby, or to take brain waves, or breathing air, or location with respect to the womb, linguistic sophistication, all these are arbitrary, subjective judgments, and that includes this new outrage from . The courts can no more make a robot, or a chimp, or a corporation, into a real person any more than they can make a Jew or Gypsy into a non-person. Whether they abuse nature by treating them as such or not.

Banned on Facebook: What an abortionist does. Okay with Facebook: Do It Yourself

February 18, 2012
Abortion Memorial

Abortion Memorial (Photo credit: DrGBB)

What an abortionist does, censored by Facebook, a movie we’ve seen a thousand times, while they claim they believe in free speech:

http://bryankemper.com/2012/02/15/abortionist/

Facebook censors pro-life image, allows DIY abortion instructions which encourage women to lie to Pharmacists

Facebook has apologized for censoring a post by Dr. Rebecca Gomperts in which she gave instructions for a do-it-yourself chemical abortion. The popular social media site decided it was OK for the international abortion provider to teach women and girls how to do an abortion themselves at home using Misoprostol, even telling them to lie to a pharmacist to get the necessary drugs.

But Facebook has removed a graphic that shows the aftermath of an abortion: An eight-week fetus torn limb from limb and decapitated.
This week, Bryan Kemper, Youth Outreach Director for Priests for Life, and Andy Moore of abortionwiki.org created a version of the popular “What They Think I Do” graphic that have been going viral on Facebook. Their graphic was entitled “Abortionist,” and the final frame was a photo of a baby killed in an early abortion.

This image received thousands of shares and comments in a matter of hours. But this morning, Kemper found a message from Facebook explaining that the image was removed, and ordering him to remove it from any other place he had posted it on the site.

“It amazed me,” said Kemper; “Facebook will allow girls to learn how to do an abortion themselves at home with no doctor’s supervision, and encourages them to lie when obtaining the drugs necessary. But they will not allow them to see what an abortion looks like.

“I guess it is only considered censorship if you censor the pro-choice side; it’s perfectly fine in our culture to censor the pro-life message.”
Kemper has posted the image on his website at http://bryankemper.com/2012/02/15/abortionist/ and has given permission for anyone to repost it on their blogs or websites.

He also is urging all pro-lifers to contact Facebook to protest the site’s lopsided censorship. https://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=ui_other

Click here for the DIY abortion instructions. https://www.facebook.com/womenonwaves

“I have long said that America will not end abortion until it sees abortion,” said Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life. “But those who support and profit from abortion work very hard to make sure America does not see abortion.”

Rn Paul could not understand why pro-life organizations did not support his move to constitutionally overturn Roe V Wade (without the Supreme Court).

Women are the strongest and loudest pro-life force

February 6, 2012

It’s a commonly heard myth, a lie of promoters of abortion (prenatal infanticide):

“If men got pregnant abortion would be a sacrament and birth control pills would be communion wafers.”

Pro-life memorial in Bytom, Poland. Translatio...

Image via Wikipedia

Yeah, that’s why millions of women are pro-life and Concerned Women of America is one of the biggest and loudest organizations on any issue.

Prenatal infanticide is MUCH more dangerous for the female of the human race than it is for men.

Abortion kills more girl babies than boy babies, by the tens of millions.

And it’s the GUYS that push the women into abortions because the GUYS don’t want the responsibility. But there are also a lot of men who are also victims, robbed of their desire to be a real father by the mother’s abortion, often at the hand of the overbearing Dad of the pregnant mother.

Here’s a web site of an association of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of women, who have had abortions and are warning other women away from their errors.

http://www.silentnomoreawareness.org/

Featured is a good example of why it is WOMEN leading the charge against prenatal infanticide.

When Julia Holcomb was 16 years old she became the legal ward of Steven Tyler, lead singer of the rock band Aerosmith and current American Idol judge. At age 17, when she was 5 months pregnant with Tyler’s first child, and engaged to marry him, she barely survived a fire that burned their apartment. While still in the hospital recovering from smoke inhalation she was coerced into a horrific saline abortion. She is the author of the memoir The Light of the World – the Steven Tyler and Julia Holcomb story, published on Life Site News and credits her faith in Jesus Christ as the life-line that helped her rebuild her life after her abortion trauma.

She writes, “I pray that all those who have had abortions or have participated in any way in an abortion procedure may find in my story, not judgment or condemnation, but a renewed hope in God’s steadfast love, forgiveness and peace. Marriage and the family are the building blocks of all virtuous societies. I pray that our nation may find it’s way back to God’s plan by respecting the life of unborn children and strengthening the sanctity of marriage.”

Today Julia is happily married to her husband of 30 years and together they have 7 children. Julia is also an accomplished artist, having studied painting at the University of Houston and the Toronto Academy of Realist Art. She specializes in iconography, portraiture and landscape.