Democrat . Degree of Infanticide
- Thread starter Lumpy 1
- Start date
...Try not to be so easily distracted or distracting for a pleasant change...
Lumpy 1
Diamond Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 43,859
- 18,785
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #22
How religious were these families exactly, if you're using them as an example for all Christians or for Republicans for that matter you surely must know.Sorry you don't want to hear about teenage girls get abortions even in repub and religious families..
Last edited:
tinydancer
Diamond Member
There are many today who follow in the footsteps of the great eugenics clubs of the past.
Oh they've not disappeared at all. Obama's science czar Holdren is one of these lunatics. He co wrote a book that had no problem with dispatching many people from the planet. EcoScience. Pretty sure that was the name of the book.
Made the one child policy of China pale in comparison to how they wanted to control the population of the planet.
After birth abortion policies have been around for quite some time.
"Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Dr Minerva and co-author Alberto Giubilini, a University of Milan bioethicist, argue that ‘after-birth abortion’ should be permissible in all cases in which abortion is.
They state that like an unborn child, a newborn has yet to develop hopes, goals and dreams and so, while clearly human, is not a person – someone with a moral right to life.
’In contrast, parents, siblings and society have aims and plans that could be affected by the arrival of the child and their interests should come first.
The article, After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? first addresses scenarios in which parents are unaware their child is disabled until after it is born.
Right to decide: Dr Minerva argues a young baby is not a real person and so killing it in the first days after birth is little different to aborting it in the womb
"The piece argues that, though the child may be happy, it will not reach the potential of a normal child."
‘To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole…On these grounds, the fact that a foetus has the potential to become a person who will have an (at least) acceptable life is no reason for prohibiting abortion.’
"The ethicists are also in favour of the infanticide of a healthy baby when the woman’s circumstances have changed and she no longer has the time, money or energy to care for it.
They argue that while adoption might be an option, it could cause undue psychological distress to the mother."
Doctors should have the right to kill unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person claims Oxford academic Daily Mail Online
Oh they've not disappeared at all. Obama's science czar Holdren is one of these lunatics. He co wrote a book that had no problem with dispatching many people from the planet. EcoScience. Pretty sure that was the name of the book.
Made the one child policy of China pale in comparison to how they wanted to control the population of the planet.
After birth abortion policies have been around for quite some time.
"Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Dr Minerva and co-author Alberto Giubilini, a University of Milan bioethicist, argue that ‘after-birth abortion’ should be permissible in all cases in which abortion is.
They state that like an unborn child, a newborn has yet to develop hopes, goals and dreams and so, while clearly human, is not a person – someone with a moral right to life.
’In contrast, parents, siblings and society have aims and plans that could be affected by the arrival of the child and their interests should come first.
The article, After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? first addresses scenarios in which parents are unaware their child is disabled until after it is born.
Right to decide: Dr Minerva argues a young baby is not a real person and so killing it in the first days after birth is little different to aborting it in the womb
"The piece argues that, though the child may be happy, it will not reach the potential of a normal child."
‘To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole…On these grounds, the fact that a foetus has the potential to become a person who will have an (at least) acceptable life is no reason for prohibiting abortion.’
"The ethicists are also in favour of the infanticide of a healthy baby when the woman’s circumstances have changed and she no longer has the time, money or energy to care for it.
They argue that while adoption might be an option, it could cause undue psychological distress to the mother."
Doctors should have the right to kill unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person claims Oxford academic Daily Mail Online
Last edited:
Missouri_Mike
Diamond Member
- Nov 5, 2012
- 29,623
- 23,481
- 2,405
Lumpy do you remember when the Planned Parenthood representative spoke to the Florida Legislature?
And she defended "post birth" abortions? These people are truly sick freaking puppies on the left.
link, pretty please.
No problem. Planned Parenthood was lobbying against Florida's state version of the Born Alive act.
This is what she said. Jaws dropped in the room needless to say. There's a video of her saying it as well I believe captured by the Weekly Standard and others.
After all hell broke loose, PP retracted the position. But that's bullshit because they were lobbying against the bill that would require medical care for the infant born alive.
"Testifying against a Florida bill that would require abortionists to provide emergency medical care to an infant who survives an abortion, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank:
“If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician."
Marc Thiessen Planned Parenthood defending infanticide - The Washington Post
This one?
Ernie S.
Diamond Member
The worst part about people like Minerva is that people like The Daily Mail give them a way to spread their buffoonery.
Missouri_Mike
Diamond Member
- Nov 5, 2012
- 29,623
- 23,481
- 2,405
They can get one but it doesn't change the fact they are not just un-pregnant but are now the mother of a murdered child, that they killed. I'm not sure that changes because you are one or other political party or which religion the result is the same. You are still the murderer of your own child. Why do you need to make this less than true when it's so obvious?Sorry you don't want to hear about teenage girls get abortions even in repub and religious families..
tinydancer
Diamond Member
Actually I'm thrilled every time these maniacs are exposed to the public at large.
I consider it a public service to inform joe and mary six pack that there are those who truly promote after birth abortion.
I remember talking about Holdren for example and the book he co wrote called EcoScience and controlling the world's population by a wide variety of methods.People thought I was making it up.
That crazy son of a ***** was appointed as Obama's science czar.
I don't know about you, but that appointment didn't me a warm and fuzzy.
tinydancer
Diamond Member
Lumpy do you remember when the Planned Parenthood representative spoke to the Florida Legislature?
And she defended "post birth" abortions? These people are truly sick freaking puppies on the left.
link, pretty please.
No problem. Planned Parenthood was lobbying against Florida's state version of the Born Alive act.
This is what she said. Jaws dropped in the room needless to say. There's a video of her saying it as well I believe captured by the Weekly Standard and others.
After all hell broke loose, PP retracted the position. But that's bullshit because they were lobbying against the bill that would require medical care for the infant born alive.
"Testifying against a Florida bill that would require abortionists to provide emergency medical care to an infant who survives an abortion, Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow was asked point blank:
“If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
She replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician."
Marc Thiessen Planned Parenthood defending infanticide - The Washington Post
This one?
Oh that's the one. Special jaw dropping moment in time for those legislators.
Missouri_Mike
Diamond Member
- Nov 5, 2012
- 29,623
- 23,481
- 2,405
Rand Paul sure turned this debate around. Good for him.
Actually I'm thrilled every time these maniacs are exposed to the public at large.
I consider it a public service to inform joe and mary six pack that there are those who truly promote after birth abortion.
I remember talking about Holdren for example and the book he co wrote called EcoScience and controlling the world's population by a wide variety of methods.People thought I was making it up.
That crazy son of a ***** was appointed as Obama's science czar.
I don't know about you, but that appointment didn't me a warm and fuzzy.
Lumpy 1
Diamond Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 43,859
- 18,785
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #30
He sure did, the inspiration for the OP in fact..Rand Paul sure turned this debate around. Good for him.
Actually I'm thrilled every time these maniacs are exposed to the public at large.
I consider it a public service to inform joe and mary six pack that there are those who truly promote after birth abortion.
I remember talking about Holdren for example and the book he co wrote called EcoScience and controlling the world's population by a wide variety of methods.People thought I was making it up.
That crazy son of a ***** was appointed as Obama's science czar.
I don't know about you, but that appointment didn't me a warm and fuzzy.
Holdren and Cass Sunstein both feel that abortion should be legal up to two years.There are many today who follow in the footsteps of the great eugenics clubs of the past.
Oh they've not disappeared at all. Obama's science czar Holdren is one of these lunatics. He co wrote a book that had no problem with dispatching many people from the planet. EcoScience. Pretty sure that was the name of the book.
Made the one child policy of China pale in comparison to how they wanted to control the population of the planet.
After birth abortion policies have been around for quite some time.
"Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Dr Minerva and co-author Alberto Giubilini, a University of Milan bioethicist, argue that ‘after-birth abortion’ should be permissible in all cases in which abortion is.
They state that like an unborn child, a newborn has yet to develop hopes, goals and dreams and so, while clearly human, is not a person – someone with a moral right to life.
’In contrast, parents, siblings and society have aims and plans that could be affected by the arrival of the child and their interests should come first.
The article, After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? first addresses scenarios in which parents are unaware their child is disabled until after it is born.
Right to decide: Dr Minerva argues a young baby is not a real person and so killing it in the first days after birth is little different to aborting it in the womb
"The piece argues that, though the child may be happy, it will not reach the potential of a normal child."
‘To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole…On these grounds, the fact that a foetus has the potential to become a person who will have an (at least) acceptable life is no reason for prohibiting abortion.’
"The ethicists are also in favour of the infanticide of a healthy baby when the woman’s circumstances have changed and she no longer has the time, money or energy to care for it.
They argue that while adoption might be an option, it could cause undue psychological distress to the mother."
Doctors should have the right to kill unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person claims Oxford academic Daily Mail Online
There are merely a handful of people that do believe it is up to the Doctor and the mother, even if the baby is healthy and has a chance of survival, but most Liberals do not believe if a child is born alive, AND HAS EVEN A REMOTE CHANCE of surviving... then the baby born should be killed, it should be cared for...everything in the Doc's power should be administered to the baby to keep the baby alive.
If the child was being aborted because of some rare disease that would absolutely kill the child in the mother's womb if pregnancy continued, or shortly thereafter, or kill the mother if the pregnancy continued, then if the baby was breathing, the mother should be able to hold her baby until it passes onward. (only the Doctor and the Mother would know if this is the situation)
Roe v Wade only protects the Mother's right to privacy before the baby to be, is viable and can live outside of the womb... outside of the womb, it is no longer a fetus or a baby to be, IT IS A BABY....and intentionally killing it once born is infanticide, and no, that is NOT OK.
If the child was being aborted because of some rare disease that would absolutely kill the child in the mother's womb if pregnancy continued, or shortly thereafter, or kill the mother if the pregnancy continued, then if the baby was breathing, the mother should be able to hold her baby until it passes onward. (only the Doctor and the Mother would know if this is the situation)
Roe v Wade only protects the Mother's right to privacy before the baby to be, is viable and can live outside of the womb... outside of the womb, it is no longer a fetus or a baby to be, IT IS A BABY....and intentionally killing it once born is infanticide, and no, that is NOT OK.
Similar threads
- Locked
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
NO EXIT? How will the U S be able to extricate itself from Trump's "little excursion"?- Latest: Independent thinker