[wmtravelservice]

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/201...00411.abstract

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. This is coming from the Journal for Medical Ethics. Can you believe this? Actually arguing for the killing of a new born baby. SICK.

[irresseni]

A followup paper should discuss the ethics and merits of performing retroactive after-birth abortion....on the authors.

The number of abortions exceeds of the number of deaths during childhood by 6-fold. This is de facto evidence that abortion is being used primarily as a means of population control. This will come as no surprise to thinking individuals.

The power elite have done their job well.

[TNgqZhLR]

Must be money involved. Money and ethics are like oil and water.

[citicroego]

dang. that's just morally reprehensible, imo.

i can't understand when adoption isn't an option? there are so many people/couples out there that so badly want to adopt. the government makes it very hard to do this.

no comprende....

[vNQmO2BF]

retroactive after-birth abortion....on the authors.

This.

[Erawise]

What's the difference?

1 month after conception. Living in uterus.

8 months after conception. Living in uterus.

10 months after conception. Living in playpen.

4 years after conception. Living in parents house.

50 years after conception. Living in own house.

80 years after conception. Living in nursing home.

Two out of these six are currently fair game. There seems to be a push to make killing two more acceptable. How long until it's OK to kill all six?

[maliboia]

So, using the logic of the authors, if Casey Anthony would have killed Caylee immediately after birth instead of waiting two years, we would have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in court costs, and no one would even know who she is.

[nvmrfgopyy]

Ever heard of pater familias?

It's certainly not a new concept to hold the power of life or death over one's offspring into adulthood.

[AttableBewNaw]

After-birth abortion

[rowneigerie]

It's typical. The Death Cult's Abortion industry is working toward turning abortion into a religion itself. I am currently reading "Demonic Abortion" by Father Euteneuer, and he provides proofs of this. His book (As well as his book on Exorcism) led to him being disrobed of his "Catholic Priest" status and a smear campaign.
This is because he does not mince words, and calls out the 2nd vatican council for weakening the Rite of Exorcism unnecessarily, and accuses 2ndVC of attempting to "glamorize the Ritual" (paraphrase) in his Exorcism book, which was forced to be taken out of print after only 4 months of being on the market.

In Demonic Abortion, he has an appendix in which the zealous lobbyists for murder actually use religious terms in their speeches to promote abortion. The Medical industry, Abortion industry, Feminism industry and many others are all in cahoots, trying to create a culture that considers conception an unwholesome burden.

One of my missions in life now is to make an electronic file of both books to get them out on the web.





Some quotes of these disguised satanists:

Mary E Hunt, disguised as a Catholic Christian, in a newsletter for "Catholics for a free choice", called "Conscience" of all things...

Women's right to choose is what I, as a Catholic, dare to call sacramental. .....Reproductive choice is a sacred trust and women are more than equal to the task. Bringing this to public expression, "Praising our choices" as poet Marge Piercy has said, is something that a just society will celebrate as sacramental

Tess Kolney, member of "Giain activist Church of all worlds", in "Green egg magazine"

The issues that control freaks bring up - Is the fetus alive? - Is it morally right to kill? etc. - are non-issues. I don't think there's even a question for most of us that life is life, fully divine. The issue is: our religious creed is "Thou art Goddess". Do we mean it or not? Is it true or not?...Are we willing to deny anyone else the right to interfere in our choices as Mother/Goddess about how we handle our sexuality and our fertility and our motherhood because we assume 100% responsibility for all of our actions and their consequences? Are we Goddess, or do we try in vain to abdicate the responsibility?

That quote I find funny in a sad way. Indeed, she has asserted that she, as a "goddess", assumes all responsibility and consequence for her actions. I don't think she understands what she is committing herself to, when she stands before judgement.



Patricia Baird-Windle, former owner of 3 abortuaries:

Abortion is a major blessing, and a sacrament in the hands of women..... At the very crucible of the sacrament of abortion work is that some women have an abortion out of love for the baby, (See her admit that she is aborting BABIES, not just a blob of cells - Awoke) out of love for the children they already have and are having a hard time feeding.

Anne Nicole Gaylor, founder of "Freedom from religion foundation", FFRF

Birth control and abortion are our greatest steps forward in social and moral progress since we freed the slaves. A womans right to control her own reproductive life is a blessing, a blessing for her and a blessing for society. There is no reason to be bashful or apologetic about supporting women's freedom to choose abortion; there is every reason to be ashamed of supporting a religion that opposes that freedom.

Women certainly DO have the right to control their own reproductive life. Try not copulating. That works.



Nina Churchman (Sounds like a 5th column crypto name to me - Awoke), Episcopalian "priest".

God, unlike what the Liturgy states, also rejoices that women facing unplanned pregnancies have the freedom to carefully choose the best option - birth, adoption or abortion - for themselves and for their families.

Whoa! Unlike what the liturgy states? Another one who doesn't know what she's getting herself into. She is a supposed "priest" who is to lead people towards God.


Anyways, there must be a hundred quotes like that, and I never even cherry-picked the best ones. Those were just the fisrt few I turned to.

[gogoleanylinkfo]

Welcome to the slippery slope. It all started when they changed the Hyppocratic oath to the Hypocritic oath.

[rowneigerie]

Just posting a link to a relevent thread on the Jaffe Memo.

[wmtravelservice]

Seriously, Did anyone actually download the pdf and read it? It is 1000000% times worse that the headline.

PDF here: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/201....full.pdf+html

From page 2

"Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal". You see, just because you are a human (Read: A child of the Creator) does not mean you have a divine Right to life. Only the Communist STATE can declare whether you have any Rights or not. Just more justification of exterminating human life, under the guise of already public acceptance of such atrocities.

On page 3

"It makes no sense to say that someone is harmed by being prevented from becoming an actual person. The reason is
that, by virtue of our definition of the concept of ‘harm’ in the
previous section, in order for a harm to occur, it is necessary that
someone is in the condition of experiencing that harm.

If a potential person, like a fetus and a newborn, does not
become an actual person, like you and us, then there is neither
an actual nor a future person who can be harmed, which mean
that there is no harm at all. So, if you ask one of us if we would
have been harmed, had our parents decided to kill us when we
were fetuses or newborns, our answer is ‘no’, because the
would have harmed someone who does not exist (the ‘us’ who
you are asking the question), which means no one. And if no one
is harmed, then no harm occurred.
" You see you are not an 'actual person' until you have grown up and decided to serve the Communist STATE. Only then can you suffer any type of harm, according to these MARXIST Eugenicist.

And if they decide to kill you before you are old enough to be programmed, then no harm has occurred.

[RjkVwPcV]

Abortion is defined as the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo prior to viability.[note 1] An abortion can occur spontaneously, in which case it is usually called a miscarriage, or it can be purposely induced. The term abortion most commonly refers to the induced abortion of a human pregnancy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion


To hell with there wording...................there is only way to desribe what they are talking about and that is .........after- birth MURDER

[Old-old-Ivy]

If someone, who is idiotic enough, wants to remove their offspring from the genetic pool no matter the dependants age, I am all in favor of that.

Yeah I know sometimes the apple falls far from the tree but usually not.

[Flalafuse]

So, using the logic of the authors, if Casey Anthony would have killed Caylee immediately after birth instead of waiting two years, we would have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in court costs, and no one would even know who she is.

No-no... Casey claims Caylee was born from date rape... so after birth abortion was OK...

Pretty much anytime a child is unable to survive without the care of an adult, abortion should be an option... A kid only qualifies for human rights when s/he is able to scavenge and survive without aid, somewhere between 4-6 years old...

[arindiruppyr]

It seems that "after birth abortion" is merely a question of access. Be careful what you wish for. Soon the state will claim the right to declare anyone they wish to be a "non person," which means that, since no "person" will be "harmed," killing them isn't homicide.

[Flalafuse]

Pretty much anytime a child is unable to survive without the care of an adult, abortion should be an option... A kid only qualifies for human rights when s/he is able to scavenge and survive without aid, somewhere between 4-6 years old...

At which point they should be ripe for child prostitution rings...

[RjkVwPcV]

We are NEXT........

[Calluffence]

fucking monsters.