All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

At heartbeat, it is a baby

The New York Times is aghast, writing, "The Alabama Senate approved a measure on Tuesday that would outlaw almost all abortions in the state, setting up a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the case that recognized a woman's constitutional right to end a pregnancy."

Buried in the story was the reason: Once a baby's heart beats in the womb, it is indeed a human being residing inside another human being.



Of course there is no constitutional right to an abortion. The word does not appear in the original or in any of the amendments.

The Roe v. Wade decision was a lie based on a lie. Neither plaintiff was gang raped. They were not raped.

Dividing the right into trimesters was based on bad science. The court recognized that after the sixth month, a baby was viable outside the womb and did not protect abortion.

But fifth month babies are now viable.

And ultrasound has shown even before that, the woman is carrying a baby with arms and legs, and feelings. Babies smile and laugh in the womb.

How phony of a court that worries that a cold-blooded murderer may feel a little pain during execution has no problem with executing babies for being inconvenient to the mother.

Alabamians already passed a constitutional amendment which declares the “public policy of this state is to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.”

If the Supreme Court does not recognize this right, then Alabama should declare itself a sanctuary state that refuses to allow doctors to kill babies in the womb.

The rule is simple: if you do not want to be a mother, take birth control or abstain.

The Washington Post reported, "Contenders for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination on Wednesday sharply criticized the Alabama Senate's passage of the country's strictest abortion ban, casting it as a severe blow to women's rights."

The last time Democrats were this worked up, they all supported the right to own slaves. I suspect the same outcome electorally 160 years later on this issue.

18 comments:

  1. The Democrats stepped in it big time with their statements, and laws, supporting post-birth abortion. Americans, even non-religious Americans, were horrified. I want to thank the State of NY and Ralph Northam for galvanizing the pro-life debate in our country.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I live in Alabama and have been listening to this non-stop for two days. Alabama intends to go to the Supreme Court - it's the whole reason for this law. But I'm not sure they will make it. The intent is good but it will probably take 2-21/2 years to get there. With no guarantee that the SC will hear it. But that's the plan. We'll see what happens.

    The upcoming debates will be just like all the other debates since Trump won. Emasculation by dumocrats and not anything by Repubs that matters. Apparently killing babies is a normal, OK, "natural" right of the Constitution to lefties. They will get set back in Alabama. There's even a few of us hoping the Antifa buttheads show up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sweet Home indeed, Tom. Turn it up!

      Delete
    2. At least your state is trying to take action. There will be ultimate accountability after this life and America will have to account for all the babies that have been killed. Alabama is the one state that may escape that judgment. God bless Alabama!

      Delete
  3. Oh come now, Don. You know a woman's right to kill her baby is sacred. It is enshrined in the Bill of Rights and the Ten Commandments. Get with the program.

    ReplyDelete
  4. An ultra Lib blood relative’s defense of Ralphie Northam’s Baby Murder position is that Trump will kill them if the abortionist doesn’t. This person is not well. Scott Adams says he stays completely away from this issue because he’s not a woman. Fine. Step up, ladies. You make the call. (BTW, the original sponsor of this bill is a woman.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, Big D, another freakin super post. Thank you, brother.

      Delete
    2. Apparently, too many people missed basic reproductive biology back in the day. Since it's now Sexual Promiscuity Training, we have idiots everywhere. REAL science tells us it's a human baby, not a pig or goat. To convince people otherwise isn't just a lie... it's extraordinarily evil. Yet, I consistently run into 'Christians' who won't address the issue publicly. Because... confrontation bad! Sick of the hypocrites, sick of lying Godless fools, sick of cowards. Abstinence works every time... and women control the 'port of entry' 99% of the time.

      Delete
  5. Does it never occur to the media to mention that women can travel to a neighboring state to get an abortion?

    Does it never occur to the women that they can easily avoid unwanted pregnancies? Do they only talk about women with testicles in sex ed these days?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh come now, Don, they got just as worked up over Donald Trump getting elected over Felonia von Mao Jacket.
    Better a mill stone....

    ReplyDelete
  7. Between common sense and moral decency (abstinence) and birth control there are very few reasons to have an unwanted pregnancy. I have always thought that women who want an abortion should get one for free - by killing the mother. They are usually the proximate cause, and getting rid of them will undoubtedly eliminate many future problems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Abstinence? Are you suggesting that women declare an Alyssa Milano sex strike prior to marriage?

      Delete
  8. Seems that in the '70s we stopped orphanages and started aborting.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Let's see. The 14th amendment was passed after the American Civil War, and addresses the equal protection and rights of former slaves. In addition to equal protection under the law to all citizens, the amendment also addresses due process, which prevents citizens from being illegally deprived of life, liberty, or property. So liberty somehow became privacy for all women's reproductive rights/abortion and now gay marriage. That is why many people like me believe in original intent as the governing basis for interpreting the Constitution. In the 14th it is not hard to figure that out since it says it addresses former slaves rights.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This issue has never been about science. It has always been a philosophical issue and what rights are given or inherent in a new human life.

    Today, we are seriously considering allowing infanticide. Our past president argued for infanticide.

    Over 2000 years ago, Aristotle observed little human feet and arms, etc, from miscarriages. He formally documented such observations.

    Today, we know an entire new life begins after fettization and when cell division begins.

    Yet, it is demanded we allow the killing of the new life in or outside the womb.

    If it was only about the health of the women, we would not be having this conversation because it would be extremely rare and that includes rape even though the baby is still a new human life who did not asked to be conceived.

    So, here we are. Women have vast god-like powers to declare what is or what is a new life and society appears to be the worse for it.

    Thankfully, when my mother was 16, it was illegal to have an abortion. My 4 children would not be here if that had occurred.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks to technology, the science is settled.

    ReplyDelete
  12. When a heart stops beating that person is dead. So a new heart beating means it is alive. There may well be reasons the mother does not want it however by aborting it it is still killing a live person no matter how young.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Wait ... women have sex after marriage? That's news to me.

    ReplyDelete