THE ABORTION AGENDA: Its Benefactors & What You Don’t Know

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I would not be the one selecting what they do, so you are basically supporting my argument, neither you or I or anyone

originally posted by: queenofswords

MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO BE KEPT FOR SUCH A LIVE ABORTED BIRTH. NO VITAL STATISTICAL INFORMATION IS REQUIRED TO BE COMPILED OR FILED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are no longer any rules for the disposal of the dead aborted child!!

And if you support this, regardless of your political inclination, you should really sit down and think about it again.

Did you really constructed that opinion or did somebody else put that in your head?

Having a 1 year old boy, I just don't get it how you could kill your 9 month baby...

Just... Can't...

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Never said anything about "Best Health"

who are you to determine what someone does with their own body?

Yes you did, you just don’t see it. Or maybe you just meant anyone can live as long as it doesn’t have a disability ... do I need to say what that sounds like? By the way, it was Rockefellers and Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood with the blessing of Progressives who embraced eugenics.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I would not be the one select what they do, so you are basically supporting my argument, neither you or I or anyone

No, you are supporting the right of a woman to kill her unborn out of convenience. I support the right of that new life to live. It’s not choice when the unborn have no say.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Of course it is a choice, just not the unborn's choice.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Of course it is a choice, just not the unborn's choice.

You have a point... in fact you really make my point. It’s certainly not fair and equal is it.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

No, never said that, you are projecting that false-narrative for some "gotcha" argument

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Yeah it is, you are saying YOU have the authority to tell someone if they can have an abortion or not, YOU want to play a version of God/Goddess/Spirit etc and have the moral authority to tell people what they can or can't do


I am saying, neither you NOR I NOR anyone should have that authority over someone to make THEIR decision, whatever it is

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

I looked at your linkls and didn't see any reasons to abort babies and sell their parts.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
You have a point... in fact you really make my point. It’s certainly not fair and equal is it.

They didn't ask to be conceived either.

They had no choice in either of those things and it is not fair and equal but nobody is claiming that it is.

It was interesting they were interviewing an abortion doctor who performs third trimester abortions without issue, but even she said if the mother is healthy and the baby is healthy she will refuse to do it, she says sorry I can't help you.

The line is both mother and baby are perfectly healthy, yet she decides not to carry to term for a reason that the abortion doctor feels is morally unacceptable.
The problem is there are people in this field that have the same level psychopathy as a Ted Bundy, they enjoy it.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Yeah it is, you are saying YOU have the authority to tell someone if they can have an abortion or not, YOU want to play a version of God/Goddess/Spirit etc and have the moral authority to tell people what they can or can't do


I am saying, neither you NOR I NOR anyone should have that authority over someone to make THEIR decision, whatever it is

No, by your support of a woman making that choice, you choose deleting a new life who is helpless. Ever hear of the Hippocratic Oath? I guess not. You don’t get to opt out of this unless you have no opinion. By choosing pro choice you choose death. Revelation www.google.com...=Revelation%2b3:15-16&version=KJV&interamp

Revelation 3:15-16 King James Version (KJV) 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I support the idea of autonomy

People should get abortions if that is their choice, if not, don't get one, someone should be able to give abortions if they want, and if they don't want to they shouldn't be forced into

and everyone else can be left crying into the empty wind about "morals" and quoting the bible

a reply to: Aallanonhi I have been a longtime lurker on here, and I felt like I had to reply to this thread. This is something I have read about quite alot recently and I am horrified beyond belief. I do feel like there is an hidden agenda going on here as I can't believe that this is being legalised. I gave birth 4 months ago my baby was born early at 7 and a half months as I fell seriously unwell. My baby was a fully formed strong and incredible human being who didn't even need assistance with her breathing, she was a fighter and was born with a fiery spirit that everybody admired. I nearly died but even though I was terrified I would never have thought you know what this isn't for me, let's abort. I just can't quite fathom what is happening. The reasons and circumstances they are citing as possible reasons for a mother to decide to do this are just way to casual its like they can't be bothered to even try and hide this. Are people really that disconnected from what's happening. BTW I haven't seen this on the UK news. Sorry for the life story but this makes me feel physically sick.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: eletheia


What does that have to do with the mother’s physical health as the law supposedly states?

?? I was under the impression the discussion was about babies dying (or as people

are hysterically saying being murdered) I have faith in the ethics of the medical

profession otherwise people wouldn't use them.

So who gets to decide what human gets to live or die because they might be trouble?

Did I use that word? *trouble* ...... NO i said *problem* meaning *medical problem*.....

You do realise that some deliveries however careful result a in still birth?

My grandson after a very long labour was ventouse delivered and that can cause problems.

Why not let the baby be born and put up for adaption.

Their fetus/baby their choice.

You dont sound like a person who likes being told what to do so dont

make decisions for others.

Is there that much difference between birthing a child vs extracting a dead infant at the time of dilation.

As I said before still births do occur and for many reasons. And they are

delivered not extracted.

originally posted by: Mysterychic88
a reply to: Aallanonhi I have been a longtime lurker on here, and I felt like I had to reply to this thread. This is something I have read about quite alot recently and I am horrified beyond belief. I do feel like there is an hidden agenda going on here as I can't believe that this is being legalised. I gave birth 4 months ago my baby was born early at 7 and a half months as I fell seriously unwell. My baby was a fully formed strong and incredible human being who didn't even need assistance with her breathing, she was a fighter and was born with a fiery spirit that everybody admired. I nearly died but even though I was terrified I would never have thought you know what this isn't for me, let's abort. I just can't quite fathom what is happening. The reasons and circumstances they are citing as possible reasons for a mother to decide to do this are just way to casual its like they can't be bothered to even try and hide this. Are people really that disconnected from what's happening. BTW I haven't seen this on the UK news. Sorry for the life story but this makes me feel physically sick.

Welcome to ATS. I am so glad to hear you and your baby are doing well

This is ATS and as a long time lurker you must know that many things get

hyped up. I'm sure there is much exageration going on after all the

medical profession take an oath.....

The Hippocratic Oath is an oath historically taken by physicians. It is one of the most widely known of Greek medical texts. In its original form, it requires a new physician to swear, by a number of healing gods, to uphold specific ethical standards.

My grandaughter in her final year as a paramedic student has had to

do something similar.

a reply to: eletheia

You do realise that some deliveries however careful result a in still birth?

So? Some people are killed in car accidents. Doesn’t make murder with a car right.

?? I was under the impression the discussion was about babies dying (or as people

are hysterically saying being murdered) I have faith in the ethics of the medical

profession otherwise people wouldn't use them.

The problem with the law, it can be used if the mother is in mental distress. Has nothing to do with a physical threat to the mother or baby. The problem with the new laws concerning late term abortions is they can also be used for mental distress. Is that false.

Many late term pregnancy problems that are a danger to the mother and / or child can be remedied by cesarean section. A procedure that often saves both. Is that false.

Their fetus/baby their choice.

Nobody has the right to kill a baby just because they don’t want it, or find it unfit. Is that false.

I would also hope that any women understands engaging in consensual sex with a man might result in a baby. The purpose that evolution bestowed upon sex.

Again, a premature baby has about a 90 percent chance at surviving at 28 weeks. That seems like a good benchmark that a fetus is an actual baby.

Said this before. Sorry that you don’t understand most people are WTF over democrats joyfully celebrating a barbaric means of birth control. Especially in the context of a 28 week old premature has a 90 percent chance of surviving. Over a baby matured to full term to only has its spinal cord willfully cut at the moment of birth. In light of epidurals, cesarean section, and loads of more human and responsible birth control.

I think we might be looking at this all wrong.

We have to admit our political class has knowledge superior to the average person (us); how else do they make 2 million dollars a year when their salaries are more like 2k.

So is it possible that this issue is just a thread in a larger tapestry of future events?

Here we have a political class that is trying to desensitize use from the murderer of children as far as after birth. Desensitize use from the wholesale trade of infant body parts. Desensitize us from the drinking of blood.

Why?

Maybe we are headed for some future calamity; something bad enough where we will need to be emotionally detached from the death of our offspring; where we will need to use infant body arts in medical procedures to save and prolong human life; perhaps consuming (in some sense) human blood and those infant body parts is how a few of us will be saved from this calamity.

Maybe it's even worse; maybe that calamity already happened; or is currently happening. Maybe our political class is already under going these medical procedures that require the consent input of baby body parts and human blood. As word gets around more baby parts are needed and that is why they are opening regulations on the trade of baby parts.

originally posted by: eletheia

Theres a huge hysteria going on here and on many abortion threads....
...
There was a child in the village I live in many years ago who was wheeled

about from a baby to an adult, who couldn't see communicate just lay and

made noises you couldn't fault the care given by the parents, but they gave up

their lives and the big question was ..... What would happen to their adult

child if she outlived them

BIG QUESTION

What is the moral answer

should the Doctor have used his medical discretion?

So caring for the lives of the most innocent humans is hysteria?...

You know, your argument was made by others who "the left claim to hate," but in fact people like you embrace the most radical views of authoritarian left-wing regimes.

...
Sometime early in 1939 the father of a severely disabled child wrote a petition to Hitler asking that his son should be killed.
...

Hitler authorizes killing of disabled

This argument which is devaluing human life won't end with "the murder of newborns being legal." Just like in the past, other excuses will be used by the far left to commit atrocities against those the far left deems are not worthy of life.

The nazis even used "animal rights" as an excuse to demonize the Jewish people because of their "rituals of how to kill animals that are to be consumed.

To impart this belief that "the Jewish people were barbaric, and inhuman," the nazis made propaganda films to instill this belief on the rest of the Germans and which allowed for so many atrocities to be committed against human beings. Before a movie was to start, these propaganda films would run in theaters, and before every movie.

This argument the far left is making today will include trying to legalize the infanticide of children up to a certain age, perhaps even up to 12-15 years old, because they are still not completely defined as persons. The human brain continues to grow/change up to 21 years old. Then, there is the argument that "it is more humane for old people with mental/health problems to be killed", which in the past has also led to genocide even of people who although they may have some mental disability, they can/could still function in society.

But this argument would not stop there either.

But left-wing authoritarian regimes don't stop at the intentional murder of the mentally impaired.

Political abuse of psychiatry.

Political opponents have been for decades accused of being "mentally ill" in far left-wing regimes, and these people have been subjected to the worst torture, starvation, dehydration, etc, in order to get rid of a few individuals for the good of the collective/the good of socialism/communism, or as it is being argued by the left today: for the good of the Earth."

Survivors: Cuba Has Detained Half a Million Dissidents, Still Starving Prisoners to Death

I was born, and lived part of my life in Cuba. There are still a lot of family members of mine living in that authoritarian left-wing regime. To this day atrocities are committed in Cuba against "individuals" which number in the millions, and it's all done "for the good of the collective."

China is still also committing atrocities against millions of people, for being political opponents, for being religious, etc, etc. The argument of "for the good of the collective" is also used to condone such atrocities.

Venezuela is one of the latest countries to have embraced a socialist economy and a communist regime, and atrocities are being committed against MILLIONS of Venezuelans.

The argument in favor of abortion will ALWAYS lead to arguments in favor of "genocides against innocent humans deemed as not worthy of life."

To Save the Planet, Kill 90 Percent of People Off, Says UT Ecologist

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

So caring for the lives of the most innocent humans is hysteria?...
You know, your argument was made by others who "the left claim to hate," but in fact people like you embrace the most radical views of authoritarian left-wing regimes.

...
Sometime early in 1939 the father of a severely disabled child wrote a petition to Hitler asking that his son should be killed.
...

Hitler authorizes killing of disabled
This argument which is devaluing human life won't end with "the murder of newborns being legal." Just like in the past, other excuses will be used by the far left to commit atrocities against those the far left deems are not worthy of life.
The nazis even used "animal rights" as an excuse to demonize the Jewish people because of their "rituals of how to kill animals that are to be consumed.
To impart this belief that "the Jewish people were barbaric, and inhuman," the nazis made propaganda films to instill this belief on the rest of the Germans and which allowed for so many atrocities to be committed against human beings. Before a movie was to start, these propaganda films would run in theaters, and before every movie.

This argument the far left is making today will include trying to legalize the infanticide of children up to a certain age, perhaps even up to 12-15 years old, because they are still not completely defined as persons. The human brain continues to grow/change up to 21 years old. Then, there is the argument that "it is more humane for old people with mental/health problems to be killed", which in the past has also led to genocide even of people who although they may have some mental disability, they can/could still function in society.
But this argument would not stop there either.
But left-wing authoritarian regimes don't stop at the intentional murder of the mentally impaired.
Political abuse of psychiatry.

Political opponents have been for decades accused of being "mentally ill" in far left-wing regimes, and these people have been subjected to the worst torture, starvation, dehydration, etc, in order to get rid of a few individuals for the good of the collective/the good of socialism/communism, or as it is being argued by the left today: for the good of the Earth."
Survivors: Cuba Has Detained Half a Million Dissidents, Still Starving Prisoners to Death
I was born, and lived part of my life in Cuba. There are still a lot of family members of mine living in that authoritarian left-wing regime. To this day atrocities are committed in Cuba against "individuals" which number in the millions, and it's all done "for the good of the collective."
China is still also committing atrocities against millions of people, for being political opponents, for being religious, etc, etc. The argument of "for the good of the collective" is also used to condone such atrocities.
Venezuela is one of the latest countries to have embraced a socialist economy and a communist regime, and atrocities are being committed against MILLIONS of Venezuelans.
The argument in favor of abortion will ALWAYS lead to arguments in favor of "genocides against innocent humans deemed as not worthy of life."
To Save the Planet, Kill 90 Percent of People Off, Says UT Ecologist

Your whole post is exactly what I was getting at.......HYSTERIA!!

Quoting one or two instances and relating it to whole populations ??

*one swallow dosent a summer make* *one Ted Bundy is not all men*


My daughter has an autistic adult son on the lower spectrum so needs

care for life. She is so concerned for his welfare that when her time comes

(obviously I wont be around as will few of her peers. She will take a

'cocktail' with him ........ does that make her a murderer? ..........

NOT IN MY BOOK.

You must have read about what happens to vunerable and old people in care


*care* a misnomer if ever there was.