Whoa, I was browsing Facebook and this popped up:
Okay, nevermind the fact that Allen Blakemore, general consultant to Sen. Dan Patrick likes this. Yuk.
Let me ask you to think about this: Wendy Davis thinks that this depiction of her as “Abortion Barbie” is disgusting.
I mean, yeah, I don’t think that this is the best way for Republicans to defeat her in November.
But…disgusting? Really? Just what the heck does she think about late term abortions? You know, her signature issue? A poster is “disgusting” but the reality of ripping babies apart in the womb because they are “only” five months old is….what?
Who in their right mind would vote for this woman?
Just what the heck does Wendy Davis think about late term abortions? She opposes them except in extreme circumstances. Truth matters
http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2013/oct/22/texas-right-life/davis-says-she-opposes-late-term-abortions-certain/
Yes, truth matters. That’s why it’s important to note that Davis, during her filibuster, called the 20-week limit itself a “substantial burden” on the “right” to an abortion. That’s also why it’s important to note that when she’s asked for specifics about the late-term abortions she thinks should be stopped, she says only that she “supports federal law”—presumably meaning Roe v. Wade (which bars regulation of abortions in the first trimester) and Doe v. Bolton (which prohibits restrictions on abortions that are done to “protect” the mother’s health, which the Doe Court defined as abortions OK’d by a physician in the exercise of the physician’s “medical judgment … in the light of all factors—physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age—relevant to the well-being of the patient.”)
But, hey, she told a Politifact reporter that she’s “pro-life,” so that’s obviously true.
Leif, Surely you obfuscate. Wendy Davis clearly stated that she opposes abortions after twenty weeks except in a few extreme cases. She believes that those few cases should be decided by the mother and her doctor not the state.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20140211-wendy-davis-backs-20-week-abortion-ban-that-defers-to-women.ece
I would be more inclined to accept that proposal if there were someone to represent the interests of the child involved. . . . .
Don’t you think the pregnant woman has generally considered all the options in a late term abortion? Can you explain why you think it’s any of your business what decision a woman and her doctor decide is in her best interest?
Ross,
The decision whether to abort may be made by a woman and her doctor, but it affects a third party, the unborn child. He has a right to be heard and represented, and if not by his mother, then by the government, which must stay the hand of the abortionist.
It is a flawed solution, because government is hardly a trustworthy party, but that is the main reason people leave the state of nature, where life is cruel, nasty, brutish and short, and form governments – – to protect their lives from others, including your own mother.
The voters for Wendy Davis are not crazy or out of their minds. They are in their right mind, and I know many who are very intelligent and accomplished, but they have embraced evil. They have no moral compass, and insist on the extermination of inconvenient, unwanted and unaffordable babies.
So, if anyone who is inconvenient, unwanted or unaffordable may be killed, then who is safe? At some point in our lives, most of us fall into those conditions, at least in the opinion of someone, and sometimes that someone may wield the power to terminate us.
The unconditional killing of unborn babies is an existential threat to all of us.
Ed, I am tempted to ask you at what point in fetal development abortion becomes a sin, Twenty weeks? Ten weeks? Ten days? Ten hours? Ten hot seconds? But I won’t because either you will say that any life, from a zygote forward to a newborn baby is precious and should not be aborted, or you will say that abortion is ok in some circumstances, thereby rendering your previous statement disingenuous. I’ll just assume the first. Suffice it to say to that line of thinking,, you can’t put a diaper on a zygote. I find your statement “the unconditional killing of unborn babies is an existential threat to all of us” somewhat more interesting. Let’s assume that you really do believe that ALL abortions should be outlawed and that any abortion is an existential threat. Are you still with me Ed? Good. Existentialism is the notion that existence precedes essence. In other words, the most important consideration for individuals is that they act as responsible conscious beings. Human beings, through their own consciousness create their own identity instead of how others would label, categorize or identify them. You have categorized those of us who would allow limited abortions, nay, ANY abortions, as EVIL, no matter the circumstance or stage of fetal development.. Thus, Ed, it is you who are the individual doing the labeling and categorizing. YOU are the existential threat.
Lauren,
Life begins at conception, and should be respected. There may be exceptions in the case of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother, but unrestricted abortion constitutes murder.
Even disabled fetuses, with Down’s syndrome, Spina Bifida or the like, should be respected. They most of all remind us of the precious nature of life, and provide an example for us to live our lives in a worthwhile manner, with the blessings of a healthy body.
The existence of life, broken and deformed as it may be, is a defiant challenge to those who would embrace sin and death.
Loren, I believe that the burden of proof should be entirely on YOUR shoulders. In other words, you (and others who support the “right” to abortion) should be required to state (and prove) that at whatever arbitrary point you’ve chosen, a mass of cells becomes a human being. Where is it? is it at 3 hours? Three days? Three weeks? Or (as Ms. Davis seems to believe) is it when the baby has entered the birth canal? Maybe you go even further as Melissa Perry-Harris does and you believe that a baby isn’t really a baby “until the parents believe it is” and until then it’s still fair game.
So, Loren, when is it? Is there a point at which we can determine that “yes, this is a human child”? And, if there is how do you justify that point from any other point except on the basis of convenience.
It is remarkable that abortion is not mentioned by either Wendy Davis or Greg Abbott in their campaign strategies for Texas Governor. Both call themselves “pro-life”. Greg Abbott is endorsed as “pro-life” by Elizabeth Graham’s PAC Texas Right to Life while Dan Patrick and Davis are not. Wendy Davis said she could support a ban on abortions after five months but not Milla Perry Jones’ and Abbott’s Hb2. Due to its ambulatory surgical or outpatient million dolar cost tag and thirty mile radius priviledges mandates Hb2 will close most “abortion mills” which account for 90{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of all abortions in Texas. These closings, most notably Rosenfells Womens’ Clinic which does forty to sixty first trimester abortions a day six days a week are indeed happening just as Wendy-Abortion Barbie- dreaded.
However, Houston’s own Kermit Gosnell- Dr. Dougals Karpen- was exonerated of infanticide by a Key Man Grand Jury (Karpen’s lawyer Chip Lewis was the “Key Man”) orchastrated by AG Abbott and pro-Wendy Davis, pro-choice Perry appointee Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson. Wendy, nor Abbott who proclaim themselves pro-life against abortion after five months have said a word about Karpen’s exoneration. Nor wil they ever say anything about the exoneration of Karpen for infanticide. Abbott orchastrated it.
CIA double speak Dave Dewhurst did mention it. Dewhurst demanded the infanticide investigation after hearing from twenty state legislators and hearing about Karpen twisting the heads off of new borns on You Tube. He congradulated Devon for a job well done in protecting Texas woman and the unborn from potentially unlawful abortionists through the exoneration of Karpen. Abbott got Karpen exonerated so Gov. Perry and his lobbyist sister Milla Perry Jones partial ownership of Karpen’s Aaron Clinic through shares in United Surgical Partners which made both Karpen’s and Planned Parenthood I-45 ambulatory surgical would not become known.