How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4:17 (NIV)
Reaction to the “abortion” decision
On Friday April 20, 2007 the Peoria Journal Star published a short article on page B5 entitled “Activists speak out about abortion ban.” Actually only two people were referenced in the article. One supported the decision of the Supreme Court and one opposed the decision. The one who opposed the decision was identified as the president and CEO of the local “Planned Murderhood” organization for the Central Illinois area.
Quoting from the article, the president of “Planned Murderhood” declared the decision is “‘a very serious threat to women’s health in the long term.’” (The article does not give an explanation why ending such an obscene procedure is a “very serious threat to women’s health in the long term.”—my addition)
“’It is a frontal assault,’ Harant said. ‘This is beginning the slope that says women are not in control of their bodies and that their health’ is secondary.”
“’Now the Supreme Court has said that evidently politicians can make medical decisions and not licensed physicians looking to the interests of their patients,’ she said.
Harant pegged the decision to court appointments made by President Bush, which she said makes it possible to begin ‘chipping away’ at the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion.”
I quoted the supporter of the murder of unborn babies because out of their own mouths the evidence is given of how corrupt their reasoning is. Remember, these are people who are trying to justify their argument that the murder of unborn babies is a right bestowed upon women. To justify such utter, barbaric nonsense, it is necessary to lie and distort the truth at almost every turn. And lie they do.
The first lie is that the murder of unborn children is a health issue. It is not now and has not been since the obscene decision of the Supreme Court over thirty years ago. A woman under the court ruling does not have to go to a doctor and have a serious medical discussion on whether or not murdering her unborn baby would improve her health. A baby by definition is not a health problem! All a woman has to do is walk into a “Planned Murderhood” establishment and declare “remove my baby” and the baby is removed. Where is the doctor’s medical decision in this obscene practice? The control is the woman’s; not the doctors! In fact, the “Planned Murderhood’s” mouthpiece admits as much in her next quote when she trumpets that “’This is beginning the slope that says women are not in control of their bodies….’” The murder of unborn babies is not a health issue; it is a control issue and a convenience issue.
The second obscene lie in this article is the absurd, scientifically invalid declaration that the baby is part of the woman’s body and not a separate, distinct person. Yet, the only way the baby could scientifically be a part of the woman’s body is if the baby has the exact same DNA as the woman. We know that is not true! If it is true, then no test could be used to determine who the father of the baby is because the father would also have to be the mother. The DNA of the baby is always different than the mother’s DNA. Therefore, the baby can not be part of the body of the mother. Another obscene lie to try to justify an obscene act of murder!
The “Planned Murderhood” supporter is right about one thing. The two appointments to the Supreme Court by President Bush did make a difference in the decision of the Supreme Court. In admitting this however, she demonstrated that the original abortion decision was exactly what she was also complaining about. Politicians (in this case, the original Supreme Court members who, of course, were not medical people but lawyers politically appointed to the Supreme Court) making a decision that was not only outside of their realm of expertise but also contrary to the Constitution of the United States that they had sworn to uphold. How can she now complain about a political decision when the decision to allow the murder of unborn children was a political decision? Again, the only way to possibly defend an obscene decision is to repeatedly parrot obscene lies.
It is way past the time to end this obscene practice of murdering our unborn children for the convenience of the mother! A mother has no more right to murder her unborn baby than you and I have to murder one of our own children. MURDER IS NOT A RIGHT!!!
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4:17 (NIV)
Reaction to the “abortion” decision
On Friday April 20, 2007 the Peoria Journal Star published a short article on page B5 entitled “Activists speak out about abortion ban.” Actually only two people were referenced in the article. One supported the decision of the Supreme Court and one opposed the decision. The one who opposed the decision was identified as the president and CEO of the local “Planned Murderhood” organization for the Central Illinois area.
Quoting from the article, the president of “Planned Murderhood” declared the decision is “‘a very serious threat to women’s health in the long term.’” (The article does not give an explanation why ending such an obscene procedure is a “very serious threat to women’s health in the long term.”—my addition)
“’It is a frontal assault,’ Harant said. ‘This is beginning the slope that says women are not in control of their bodies and that their health’ is secondary.”
“’Now the Supreme Court has said that evidently politicians can make medical decisions and not licensed physicians looking to the interests of their patients,’ she said.
Harant pegged the decision to court appointments made by President Bush, which she said makes it possible to begin ‘chipping away’ at the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion.”
I quoted the supporter of the murder of unborn babies because out of their own mouths the evidence is given of how corrupt their reasoning is. Remember, these are people who are trying to justify their argument that the murder of unborn babies is a right bestowed upon women. To justify such utter, barbaric nonsense, it is necessary to lie and distort the truth at almost every turn. And lie they do.
The first lie is that the murder of unborn children is a health issue. It is not now and has not been since the obscene decision of the Supreme Court over thirty years ago. A woman under the court ruling does not have to go to a doctor and have a serious medical discussion on whether or not murdering her unborn baby would improve her health. A baby by definition is not a health problem! All a woman has to do is walk into a “Planned Murderhood” establishment and declare “remove my baby” and the baby is removed. Where is the doctor’s medical decision in this obscene practice? The control is the woman’s; not the doctors! In fact, the “Planned Murderhood’s” mouthpiece admits as much in her next quote when she trumpets that “’This is beginning the slope that says women are not in control of their bodies….’” The murder of unborn babies is not a health issue; it is a control issue and a convenience issue.
The second obscene lie in this article is the absurd, scientifically invalid declaration that the baby is part of the woman’s body and not a separate, distinct person. Yet, the only way the baby could scientifically be a part of the woman’s body is if the baby has the exact same DNA as the woman. We know that is not true! If it is true, then no test could be used to determine who the father of the baby is because the father would also have to be the mother. The DNA of the baby is always different than the mother’s DNA. Therefore, the baby can not be part of the body of the mother. Another obscene lie to try to justify an obscene act of murder!
The “Planned Murderhood” supporter is right about one thing. The two appointments to the Supreme Court by President Bush did make a difference in the decision of the Supreme Court. In admitting this however, she demonstrated that the original abortion decision was exactly what she was also complaining about. Politicians (in this case, the original Supreme Court members who, of course, were not medical people but lawyers politically appointed to the Supreme Court) making a decision that was not only outside of their realm of expertise but also contrary to the Constitution of the United States that they had sworn to uphold. How can she now complain about a political decision when the decision to allow the murder of unborn children was a political decision? Again, the only way to possibly defend an obscene decision is to repeatedly parrot obscene lies.
It is way past the time to end this obscene practice of murdering our unborn children for the convenience of the mother! A mother has no more right to murder her unborn baby than you and I have to murder one of our own children. MURDER IS NOT A RIGHT!!!
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 6:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home