Why is federal funding of abortion wrong?

Imagine if you will a Republican majority in Congress that decided federal funds should be used to prevent homosexual couples from adopting children. Republicans are generally opposed to homosexuals being allowed to adopt, and Democrats are generally supportive of it. Democrat’s conscience tells them that this is discrimination and that it’s wrong, and they CERTAINLY shouldn’t have THEIR tax dollars going towards such an initiative.

Hmmmmmm.

Republicans, and more importantly, Christians, believe that abortion is murder of a baby. In fact, ALL scientific fact and evidence supports this belief. There is not one single scientific argument that could ever be used to prove that a “fetus” is NOT a baby. Separate blood types, DNA, heartbeats, brainwaves… fetuses don’t share any of those things with the mother. It’s a seperate entity. And by genetic definition, it is HUMAN. If it’s a seperate HUMAN entity scientifically speaking, then how can anyone think it’s ok to kill?

Well, that’s irrelevant to the Democrats, because they’ve made it a PRIVACY issue, something that has virtually nothing to do with anything. We can’t prevent abortion because that violates the mother’s privacy? What? So by that logic we shouldn’t be allowed to prevent animal cruelty or serial killing so long as it’s occurring on private property.

Regardless, abortion goes against the conscience of a MAJORITY of Americans. THUS, we shouldn’t have to PAY for it.

End of argument.

Whatever else can be said about the foolhardy healthcare reform bills they are planning to vote on at 1:00 AM the week before Christmas when everyone’s asleep (hmmm again), we can say for sure that it will change our country forever.

Those of you who are for it, are you REALLY confident that this cloak-and-dagger bill is going to make things BETTER?

When Tiller was killed, the White House was “outraged” and quickly “condemned the cowardly act.” When a white supremacist with love for all things socialist killed two people at the Holocaust Museum yesterday, the White House was “saddened.”

WTF White House?!

Can we at least be outraged and condemn BOTH of them?

Even if you think killing Tiller was a hate crime, you should at least be able to acknowledge that killing people because you hate “Jews and Negros” is equally bad… Every stinking politician and political action group condemned Tiller’s killing. Where are all those people now?

Was it worse to kill Tiller because he was an advocate for the left, a doctor, and a well-known national figure? Is that worse than killing a security guard just trying to do his job? Apparently so, based on the reaction.

I was baffled by the lack of media coverage of the two soldiers killed the same day as Tiller by a jihadist Muslim wacko, and I’m equally confused by the reaction to yesterday’s shooting. The inconsistency is ridiculous and laughable to anyone with critical thinking abilities.

When Tiller was killed, it was the top story for a week. Earlier today I couldn’t find the Holocaust Museum story on CNN’s website. For the record, it’s there now, but geez…. where was it? They only put it back up to the top because they had new information. Tiller’s story was up for a week and didn’t change at all.

Anyone who still thinks the media isn’t in the tank for the left is a moron. Yeah, “we” have Fox News, but you have EVERYTHING ELSE.

It’s front-page news when a “doctor,” a person who delivers the head of a baby and sucks out his or her brain, is shot to death.

Pro-choice people are appalled and want to paint the entire pro-life movement as “violent” and “lawbreaking.” Pro-life people think pro-choice people should have been appalled by the doctor’s violence, can’t help feeling glad that he’s dead, but are forced by the way the debate has been framed to issue statements condemning the act.

Here’s the problem.

A democracy, in the form of a representative republic, is perfectly designed to deal with serious, divisive, controversial issues like abortion. Democracy may yield a variety of answers and significant compromise, but this will be accepted because it was arrived at honestly and openly with everyone having a say – and because there will always be a chance to change it further.

But on this issue, there is no democracy, there is no representation, and our republic has morphed into a monarchy.

When Roe v. Wade was “decided” in 1973 and became the “law of the land,” seven unelected lawyers wearing robes and meeting in secret wiped out the abortion-related laws in all 50 states. Some of these laws were prohibitive, some were restrictive, but all of them had been passed by elected representatives and signed into law by elected governors.

When this question was removed from debate in the public arena, pro-life and queasy-about-abortion people no longer had any democratic way to weigh in on the issue. They were unilaterally stripped of their rights. Yes, they could “write their congressperson,” but what good would that do? It had been taken out of their hands as well. They could protest, but the kings on the supreme court were totally removed from public sentiment and pressure. They could practice non-violent civil disobedience, and they did. They were arrested and jailed and financially ruined, but still no change occurred because the supremes don’t have to listen.

Democracy provides an outlet. When something important to tens of millions of people is taken out of their hands, when no matter what they do they can’t get at the dictatorship and make any dent in an arbitrary, law-abolishing “decision,” when they think justice has been turned on its head, it’s inevitable that something is going to bubble over into an “eye for an eye.”

Controversial decisions left to the supreme court have a very poor record. They voted 7-2 in Dred Scott that black people were property and not equal human beings. That led to a bit of violence – the Civil War and 600,000 dead. The majority voted in favor of segregation of blacks, exclusion of Asians, and “relocation” of Japanese-American citizens to concentration camps during World War II. Liberals winced when they “voted” 5-4 to make George W. Bush president in 2000. One of the common threads in all of this is that nobody voted for any of these “justices.”

Abortion needs the light and heat of democracy. Abortion has been a controversial topic for millennia, and was so in various ways in America before the 1973 judicial fiat. The reasons for this controversy should be obvious to any thinking, open-minded person:

• First, we’re talking about a living being. Framing this issue around the question, “When does life begin?” is absurd on the face of it, because everyone acknowledges that the fetus (Latin for “little one”) is alive. Biologically speaking, there is no other answer.
• Second, we’re talking about something human. This fetus may grow up to be many different things, but un-human won’t be one of them. It’s not a question of religion alone – it’s a question of DNA.

So points one and two create half of the controversy – however small and vulnerable, we’ve got a living human being here. The first two questions, “Is this a living being?” and “Is it human?” are the starting point of the debate. The answers – clearly “yes” – should be enough to guarantee protection of this vulnerable life. If we could ever see a video of George Tiller performing a partial-birth abortion – and it’s interesting that we haven’t in a nation where you can see everything – abortion would instantly end.

And then there’ the other side:

• Third, people get pregnant who don’t want to, who tried not to, or who thought they wanted to and changed their minds. This can create anger, guilt, depression, and a host of other issues for the mother and other people involved.
• Fourth, children are challenging. It’s challenging to have them keep them, raise them, or give them up for adoption. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Points three and four create the other half of the controversy – however we got this “thing,” it’s a huge personal problem. We don’t want it and we don’t want to think about it. So another question, a different criterion, was added by “pro-choice” advocates facing points three and four: “When is the life viable?” or “When is this a viable being?”

But this is a trumped-up question that defines the word “arbitrary.” When is this fetus, this baby, viable? Birth? 12 weeks? 20 weeks? 28 weeks? At delivery? If we define “viable” as “able to function on its own outside the womb,” then no 3-year-old (or probably 10-year-old) is “viable.”

But others could take a different position. And that’s the beauty and power of democracy and debate and wrestling to common ground. We need to get this question back to the congress and president and states. We need to resolve this the American way.

The supreme court put the gun in the hand of the person who did to George Tiller what many states would have done to him before 1973. We need to put the guns away, by taking the biggest gun of all out of the hands of 7 arrogant people who thought they knew better than 300 million.

Alas, they missed my entire point, even when I posted a clarifying comment. My point was that I am filled with joy that so many babies will not be murdered today at his hands. I’m still filled with joy about that fact. The means by which he is no longer killing babies is virtually irrelevant to my feelings. I would have been equally filled with joy had Tiller realized the error of his ways and VOLUNTARILY stopped doing abortions. That result would have been better in almost every way, because it would have showed that even a hardened late-term abortion advocate can listen to his conscience. The man who murdered Tiller will and should be charged with murder and put in jail. As a society, we can’t allow people to take justice into their own hands. Even if what Tiller was doing WAS illegal, he deserved a jury of his peers to determine his fate.

It is not my place, nor is it the murderer’s place to judge this man’s heart or soul. Yeah, I said it. I don’t want any comments today saying “it’s not my place to judge” or “Pete, you’re evil for celebrating murder.” If you read everything I wrote, you can’t come to that conclusion. You might conclude that I’m splitting hairs, and that’s OK. And frankly, your judgment of me for my emotions isn’t going to change my emotions and it isn’t going to make me stop talking about it. I’m a big boy, and I have no problem taking responsibility for what I say and what I believe. In your comments, be fair (don’t put words in my mouth), and don’t be anonymous.

The fact is, when evil men have fallen (either by removal from power, execution, or whatever), the world has rejoiced. I think if you look back on our country’s own history, you would not find anyone crying over Hitler’s death. What Hitler was doing in Germany was “legal” by their standards, since Hitler basically WAS the law. Yet, Hitler was a mass murdered, and he got exactly what he deserved. (Great, now I’m going to be responsible for killing all the Jews because I said that…) Tiller didn’t kill 6 million babies (at least I don’t think he did), but he was a major advocate for late-term abortion… most called him an activist, and his activism influenced people all over the country. He personally performed tens of thousands of abortions, and he “specialized” in late-term abortions, where almost without exception the baby was nearly full term and could have lived.

When I said yesterday that Tiller reaped what he had sowed, I was indeed quoting scripture, but it’s not entirely accurate. Had Tiller actually reaped what he sowed, he would have either been injected with saline and chemically burned to death, or he would have had his skull cut open and his brains sucked out… all while awake.

I’m not saying that for the shock value. I’m saying it because I think proponents of abortion, particularly late-term abortion, somehow delude themselves into either thinking it’s not a baby, thinking the baby can’t feel anything, or thinking that it’s “necessary” for some reason. However, all modern science agrees that babies past 8-12 weeks DO feel pain.

“A Realtime ultrasound video tape and movie of a 12- week suction abortion is commercially available as, The Silent Scream, narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title.”

Only the thalamus is needed to feel pain, and the thalamus develops at around 8 weeks. That’s irrefutable science. By the third trimester, the entire brain is developed, and the baby (“fetus”) will feel everything that YOU would feel if someone sucked your brains out while you were awake.

“Far from being less able to feel pain, such premature newborns [as are killed by partial-birth abortion] may be more sensitive to pain”…that babies under 30 weeks have a “newly established pain system that is raw and unmodified at this tender age.” P. Ranalli, Neuro. Dept., Univ. of Toronto

Can I be happy that Tiller is no longer doing what he was doing without condoning his murder? I think so, and if you’re not capable of having complex emotions and beliefs, I am sorry to confuse you with the facts. To close, here are a couple of interesting scriptures:

Proverbs 6:16-19 says “”These six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren.”

Regardless of the justification of Tiller’s murder or the fact that murder is murder, from this verse I could have predicted that Tiller would eventually be killed – Genesis 9:6 ““Whoever ?sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; ?For in the image of God He made man.”

Dr. George Tiller Shot to Death

This morning as he entered his Wichita church (what kind of church allowed this man to be a part of it boggles the mind), Dr. George “Killer” Tiller was shot and killed. No one is yet in custody for the murder. (UPDATE – 51 year old suspect is now in custody – and for the record, should be charged with murder. Although I might hyperbolically say “two wrongs make a right,” I don’t believe in vigilantism.)

I don’t condone violence, but Dr. Tiller got exactly what he deserved, it’s just a shame it that if it was going to happen, it didn’t happen 20 years ago because that could have saved thousands of lives.

For the past several decades, Tiller operated his clinic, one of only 3 that did late-term abortions on healthy “fetuses” who were already past the point of viability. Tiller is responsible for the government sanctioned killing of tens of thousands of innocent unborn babies (and yes, when a baby is in the third trimester, it’s a baby, dammit, no matter how hardened you are).

Tiller is also one of only a couple of abortionists who would do late term abortions for ANY reason, including gender preference, “inconvenience”, etc.

He has more blood on his hands than any serial killer that’s ever lived.

Expose’ of Tiller and his Clinic
Stunning Facts About Tiller
GRAPHIC LINK – Tiller “Partial Birth Funeral”

A voice was heard in Ramah: wailing and great mourning. Rachel was crying for her children. She refused to be comforted, because they were no more.” – Matthew 2:18

Rev. Jeremiah, good old “GD America” himself was on the board of directors of Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois. At this particular hospital (as was widely done), babies born alive after a botched abortion were put into a supply closet and left to die. Registered nurse Jill Stanek worked at that hospital, and reported to Obama in 2001 that these babies often lived for up to 8 hours and were not given any medical care, attention, or even a blanket.

Obama suggested a “comfort room” where instead of sticking the baby into a supply closet that instead they’d have a room devoted to letting these babies die with a blanket instead of dying cold. The comfort rooms would even allow someone to hold the baby until it died, however no medical treatment was allowed to be rendered. In committee meetings, Obama stated that these comfort rooms were sufficient, and that medical care should not be offered.

Keep in mind that many if not all of these babies could have lived had they been given basic medical attention. These are babies that have already survived an abortion attempt – so we know they’re tough.

In 2002, Obama voted against the Illinois Induced Infant Liability Act that would have given medical care to babies surviving an abortion. He stated that he feared it could undermine Roe v Wade. His position was so extreme that when a similar bill was introduced in the US Senate in 2002 (the Born Alive Infants Protection Act) it passed 98-0. Even the most leftist baby-killing extremist in the Senate was less extreme than Obama. The fact we needed legislation in the first place tells you just how depraved these abortion doctors really are.

He also voted in 2007 against the ban on partial birth abortion, the practice of partially delivering a full-term baby and then crushing its head as it’s coming out. 70% of Americans are against partial birth abortion. Does that help put it into perspective?

According to a 2005 Gallup Poll, only 23% of Americans believe that abortion should be legal for any reason (including convenience). 12% said it should be legal in most cases. 40% said it should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother. The other 25% think it should be illegal in all circumstances. So there are as many people who are totally against it as there are people who are totally for it. In the middle, the people who want it very limited far outnumber those who want it somewhat limited. Public opinion on abortion is not nearly as skewed to the left as the press and government officials would lead you to believe.

70% in the same Gallup Poll think that girls under 18 should have to have parental consent to get an abortion. However, the Planned Parenthood lobby overrode the public and now a 12 year old can get an abortion without her mother knowing.

You may think I’m extreme in my belief that all abortion is wrong, but I’ll bet you don’t come anywhere NEAR as extreme in your opinion as Mr. Obama – BabyKiller Nelson.

Way to go America. You elected someone who can’t comprehend that we should take care of babies born alive.

Back on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, as happens EVERY SINGLE YEAR (in the bitter cold of January) since its passage, the pro life community held a gigantic protest in Washington DC. This year, there were more than 300,000 people in attendance. There were also pro choice protesters there, but most reports say it was less than 100 people.

Well, guess what was in New York newspapers?

An archive photo of PRO CHOICE protesters… Read this: “In an article dated January 23, Gannett’s Democrat and Chronicle ran a report on a pro-life advocates attending the March for Life rally with the headline, “Rally Supports Roe v. Wade.” In addition to the slanted headline, the newspaper report began with a focus on pro-abortion demonstrators, who were far outnumbered by the pro-life supporters taking part in the March for Life. The article made mention of less than a dozen people who lined a Rochester street, holding signs supporting abortion.”

And the Washington Post, another biased rag not suitable for use as toilet paper did the same thing – a photo of 5 feminists holding pro-choice signs and an article that only mentions “thousands of abortion opponents” instead of using the actual numbers estimated by the police department.

This rally has occurred every year for 34 years, and I’ll bet you’ve never heard of it before you read my post here.

The media does more than slant stories, they show their bias by what they choose to report and what they choose not to report. My hope is that you’ll all remember that there’s never a single source of news that tells the entire story – they all have their agendas. Make sure you read widely and draw your own conclusions.

Even if you’re a liberal (Andria), you should read Drudge and O’Reilly as counterbalance to what MSNBC and ABC report. You can believe I read the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and even watch MSNBC. My primary source of news is CNN, not Fox as some of you might have thought. However, I always cross check my facts and make sure I have as much of a complete picture as possible.

It’s really stunning how overt the media bias is against conservative Christians in America.

Here’s a good article that goes into more detail about this specific event: Newsbusters Reports on March for Life Media Bias.

I believe that unborn babies are babies. Thus, I believe it’s wrong to kill them. If you believe they’re not babies, then you’re entitled to your incorrect opinion, and your desire to let them be killed makes sense. If you believe they ARE babies and still think abortion is okey dokey, then you are a sick person.

But how does my belief that unborn are babies make me a right-wing extremist with potential to be a terrorist? Sure, back in the 80’s a couple of nutjobs bombed abortion clinics. Interestingly, the only portion of the clinics ever bombed were the lobby, and it was later discovered that some of them were done by PRO abortion activists and even staff of the clinics to give the pro-life crowd a black eye.

How does my belief that we should protect our borders from ILLEGAL entry into our country? I don’t have a problem with legal immigration! In fact, some of the smartest people I’ve ever met are LEGAL immigrants into the US. I’m proud to have them as my friends. How could it be EXTREMISM to think we should protect our borders from ANYONE being able to wander in – including REAL TERRORISTS!?

DHS has backed off their stance that vets coming back from Iraq are potential terrorists. Apparently that didn’t fly too well. However, they aren’t backing off their attack on conservative Christianity. It’s a blatant ideological attack on Christianity and conservatism. Blatant.

What about all the LEFT-WING nutjob extremists. How come they aren’t on the list? There are plenty of leftist activist groups that happily voice their discontent.

This may be the most blatant attack on Christianity in America ever. Believe what you will. Think Christianity is stupid and wrong. Think abortion and open borders are ok. But don’t think for one second that it’s ok to quash the voices that oppose your beliefs. That’s the most un-American thing you could ever do.

God help us all.

THAT SAID…

After Fox was diagnosed with cancer, he became the poster boy for fetal stem cell research. And not just any fetal stem cell research – TAX funded fetal stem cell research. He talks about how the right has forced their morality on him and is ruining countless lives. Yet he wants his amorality forced on US by making us pay taxes into a system that then funds something we find immoral. So how is he any better than those who oppose it?

Fox was a vocal critic of Bush’s ban on fetal stem cell research (which basically banned federal funds from being used). However, during the ban, there were several hundred existing stashes of fetal stem cells available to researchers that were exempt from the ban.

During the ban, multiple stem cell therapies were discovered using adult and cord stem cells. The number of treatments and cures EVER discovered from fetal stem cells? ZERO.

As a Christian, it’s impossible for me to accept that the ONLY way to find a cure for diseases is to destroy human life. PETA freaks out when we do tests on lab rats, yet somehow we think it’s ok to use a FETUS (Latin meaning “little one”) which is HUMAN. We have to have ethical boundaries in medicine, don’t we? Can we harm a few for the good of the many, or is that something we’re better than here in America?

If scientists agreed that we could cure Alzheimer’s by doing some destructive testing on gay people, do you think it would be ok? What if it only hurt or killed a dozen gay people but it saved millions from degenerative diseases? Fetal stem cell research is every bit as ridiculous as that example.

Fox has zealously pursued the fetal stem cell TAX funding question for years. He finally got his wish with President “No Fetus Left Alive” Obama. So that’s great – what does that give us?

Well, let me list off a few things:

- Christians with a moral problem with abortion are now helping to fund what we consider human testing
- We may or may not ever discover any cure whatsoever using fetal stem cells
- We have blurred the ethical line forever about using humans for testing

Fox clearly only cares about himself. He is understandably selfish because its his own health that is driving his decisions. However, he’s insisting on what HE wants at the expense of what many others don’t want. I fully agree with funding medical research that is ethical, but this doesn’t qualify. It’s easy to say say that those of us who are “born” are more worthy of life than those that aren’t born yet. That’s merely because the unborn don’t have a voice.

Let me preempt the question I’m positive someone will put in my comments. No, I would not accept treatment that hinged on destruction of human embryos, even if it meant my alternative was dying. Expedience and selfishness are not good ways to make decisions in life.

One of my favorite quotes was from G.K. Chesterton. He said “Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions.” I can’t tolerate such an unethical practice, even if it does end up helping people. There has to be a different way to help sick people.

As I like to do once the parties have selected their nominees, I will now summarize the pros and cons of each candidate in my completely non-biased manner so that you may select properly. I realize that this particular set of chuckleheads is so similar that it’s hard to remember which is which. Fortunately, that means when you residents of Florida who can’t mark the correct candidate on the card won’t have any noticeable affect on the country.

I will not be endorsing either candidate at this time, because the thought of backing either of them makes me barf in my mouth.

We’ll do age before beauty:

John McCain

Pros

• Not a huge wussie – other countries know that if they mess with McCain he won’t hesitate to slap them silly, in the nuclear sense.
• Wants to kill earmarks, which is good because if every Senator puts in 100 million in pork a year, that’s 5 billion dollars. And we all know there’s way more than 5 billion in pork each year – you do the math. Your tax dollars at work.
• Will appoint constructionist judges (he claims), which is good because constructionist judges are judged who try to interpret the Constitution in the historical context rather than trying to extrapolate stuff
• He doesn’t think it’s cool to kill American citizens just because they aren’t born yet.

Cons

• Likes that we’re in Iraq – proving that even the most experienced person is still capable of brain damaged behavior. We are spending billions of dollars a week in that god-forsaken country, and heck, we don’t even buy oil from them.
• Has a history of political compromise and wussiness, wrote the Kennedy-McCain Import Non-English-Speaking Democrat Voters Act of 2007 which was fortunately killed, and also wrote the McCain-Fiengold Campaign Finance Act which made sure that goofy, spacktarded organizations like moveon.org could funnel money into campaigns but that normal rich people couldn’t.
• He’s old – and lord knows being POTUS ages a guy like crazy.

Barack Obama

Pros

• Wants to end the war in Iraq, proving that even if he’s doing it for the wrong reasons, at least he’s doing the right thing.
• He’s fun to listen to and he’s dead sexy – who wants to listen to a nasal old dude mumble around when they can hear Obama’s JFKesque speeches that give you chills (albeit speeches written by professional writers, not Obama).
• He has a great education

Cons

• Being a 5 year old kid in another country does not equal “foreign policy experience” and if he’s elected president, we’ll almost certainly have another terrorist attack – just to test him and see if he has any cahones.
• He apparently flunked high school economics, where they teach you that taxing companies and giving the money to lazy people who don’t work is very likely to mean the companies will produce less and thus all prices will go up….
• He voted to keep partial birth abortion legal – the procedure where they take a baby AS it’s being born, pull the head out with forceps, gouge a hole in the baby’s head, then suck the brains out with a vacuum… literally. Anyone who supports such a procedure is not qualified to be jack freakin squat.

So, do you want a guy whose economic policies are going to make prices even higher (Obama) or a guy whose stupid war is going to make prices go even higher (McCain)?

Do you want a guy who has a stated policy of supporting the killing of newborns (Obama) or the guy who is anti-abortion but probably impotent on the issue (McCain)?

Do you want freedom to choose where you go to the doctor (McCain) or do you want “free” healthcare that means higher taxes and even crappier service than we already get (Obama)?

I may have to vote against both of them – McCain for the war and Obama for abortion.