I Am Overwhelmed by 55 Million Babies Killed Since Roe v. Wade by Kristan Hawkins | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 1/22/13 11:40 AM
What can I say that hasn’t already been said about today?
Yesterday evening, I was sitting in my living room working while watching my sons play. I began to think about what my life would have been without them. How different I would be. How their lives have already made this world a different place since they were born. How much I would hurt if I had chosen abortion.
Then, I thought of the more than 55,000,000 lives that have been taken in the U.S. since 1973, and I became overwhelmed at the tragedy. Tragedy for the babies, their mothers, their fathers, families, and us.
Who is our nation missing? What price is our society paying for the ultimate deceit of abortion?
40 years ago today, seven men on the Supreme Court decided in favor of a case presented to them from a 27 year-old, unknown, post-abortive lawyer, Sarah Weddington. That case was Roe v. Wade and, along with its companion Doe v. Bolton, it legalized abortion in all 9 months of pregnancy, for any reason, in the United States.
Today, this 27 year-old is writing to you as a survivor of that decision. The undeniable fact is that nearly a third of my generation is missing. We are missing brothers, sisters, cousins, friends, husbands and wives.
You see, Miss Weddington’s generation got it wrong. In attempting to correct gender inequality in the workplace and in our society, they set into motion the ultimate act of discrimination – abortion. Instead of glorifying motherhood, they pitted the mother against her child, creating an endless cycle of selfishness, pain, and deceit........................>>>>.......................>>>>.......................http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/22/i-am-overwhelmed-by-55-million-babies-killed-since-roe-v-wade/
Kristan Hawkins sounds like she loves her sons and no doubt, she was raised by parents WHO WANTED HER. She wonders about those aborted and who they would have been had their mothers not made that decision... They would have been UNWANTED CHILDREN. Who would have raised those kids? Certainly not the Conservative Rabid Right who wants to force those UNWANTED CHILDREN, on UNWILLING MOTHERS.
Would those Conservatives raise those UNWANTED KIDS? The Conservatives who force women to give birth to the child of their rapist, their iincestious father, brother or uncle; would those Right Wingers raise these UNWANTED CHILDREN? OF COURSE NOT. The Right bristles at any payment to these mothers once they have been forced to give birth to an UNWANTED CHILD. Who would feed them, cloth them and educate them??? Not those who forced their birth.
When the Right, who force this child to be born, comes up with a plan to take care of that UNWANTED CHILD, then they can complain about abortion. I haven't heard one word from the Rabid Right about caring for this UNWANTED CHILD... once it's born, they accuse the mom of being a drain on society, lazy, as they condemn her for the life that THEY FORCED ON HER.
One Final Point: Roe V Wade didn't begin abortions in the United States. Abortion has been around in this country since before it's inception... The RICH had always had safe, doctor assisted abortion. What Roe V Wade did was to stop women from dying at the hands of an unqualified abortionist. That was the real victory of Roe V Wade 40 years ago.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Might want to check the facts on that one because it is simply not true, hundreds of women have died during the procedure or from complications afterwards. So with this picture I can assume the rest of your posts on this subject are bullshit as well.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
President Obama on Wednesday marked the 41st anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision with a statement calling on the nation to "recommit" to the principle "that every woman should be able to make her own choices about her body and her health."
"We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her constitutional right to privacy, including the right to reproductive freedom," Obama said. "And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children. Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams."
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
They would have been UNWANTED CHILDREN. Who would have raised those kids? Certainly not the Conservative Rabid Right who wants to force those UNWANTED CHILDREN, on UNWILLING MOTHERS
President Obama on Wednesday marked the 41st anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision with a statement calling on the nation to "recommit" to the principle "that every woman should be able to make her own choices about her body and her health."
What garbage...Obama's government henchmen would throw a convenient store clerk in jail if they sold a bottle of wine to a 19 year old woman that wanted to put it in her body. But...It's a-ok for a 15 year old girl to have an abortion...because a woman has a right to her body.
Yeah...Keep on believing...You have a right to your body. You don't have a right, the government just gave you PERMISSION under this one circumstance.
What garbage...Obama's government henchmen would throw a convenient store clerk in jail if they sold a bottle of wine to a 19 year old woman that wanted to put it in her body. But...It's a-ok for a 15 year old girl to have an abortion...because a woman has a right to her body.
Again, Cissy's posts are not quite factual:
Quoted Text
If you are under 18, your state may require one or both of your parents to give permission for your abortion or be told of your decision prior to the abortion. In most states with these requirements:
You can ask a judge to excuse you from getting permission or telling your parent or guardian. (This is called a "judicial bypass.") A legal guardian can give permission or be notified in place of a parent. If you meet legal rules showing that you are independent of the care and control of your parents or a guardian, you do not need to get their permission or notify them. In some states, you can be excused from involving a parent without going to a judge if you are the victim of abuse or neglect and you or your doctor report this to the appropriate authorities.
Cicero's example also forgets that in most states, parents are allowed to give alcohol to their underage kids. States Rights!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cicero's example also forgets that in most states, parents are allowed to give alcohol to their underage kids. States Rights!
A 19 year old isn't a kid, they are legal adults, not juveniles. So explain to me again how parents(an adult) can give their adult children permission to consume alcohol(you know, do what they want with their bodies)?
A 19 year old isn't a kid, they are legal adults, not juveniles. So explain to me again how parents(an adult) can give their adult children permission to consume alcohol(you know, do what they want with their bodies)?
A 19 year old is a legal adult... but is still restricted, at age: ~ 35 Minimum age to run for President of the United States ~ 21 May Drink liquor ~ 21 May Enter Gambling establishment, Gamble ~ 21 May Purchase firearm
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
A 19 year old is a legal adult... but is still restricted, at age: ~ 35 Minimum age to run for President of the United States ~ 21 May Drink liquor ~ 21 May Enter Gambling establishment, Gamble ~ 21 May Purchase firearm
Yes, thank you. The "right to you body" is bullshit. You are permitted not free. C'mon box, follow along here. I know the "right to your body" is a good narrative, up until you see the restrictions the state puts on your body.
Yes, thank you. The "right to you body" is bullshit. You are permitted not free. C'mon box, follow along here. I know the "right to your body" is a good narrative, up until you see the restrictions the state puts on your body.
"Right To Your Body"? Is that something you made up? I can't find it in the US Constitution.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"Right To Your Body"? Is that something you made up? I can't find it in the US Constitution.
You are right. Then why do supporters of the Roe v Wade decision always use that to defend the decision? That's why the ruling of Roe v Wade is in itself a legal abortion. It created an enumerated right that never existed. Very good box.
Your life is your property, if you create new life that life is no longer your property but its own.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
You are right. Then why do supporters of the Roe v Wade decision always use that to defend the decision? That's why the ruling of Roe v Wade is in itself a legal abortion. It created an enumerated right that never existed. Very good box.
"Right To Your Body" isn't in the US Constitution... ya just made it up to further your argument.
Here are some FACTS that might help you understand:
Quoted Text
1. Do abortion laws that criminalize all abortions, except those required on medical advice to save the life of the mother, violate the Constitution of the United States? ~ Yes. State criminal abortion laws that except from criminality only life-saving procedures on the mother’s behalf, and that do not take into consideration the stage of pregnancy and other interests, are unconstitutional for violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
2. Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution protect the right to privacy, including the right to obtain an abortion? ~ Yes. The Due Process Clause protects the right to privacy, including a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy, against state action.
3. Are there any circumstances where a state may enact laws prohibiting abortion? ~ Yes. Though a state cannot completely deny a woman the right to terminate her pregnancy, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman’s health and the potentiality of human life at various stages of pregnancy.
4. Did the fact that Roe’s pregnancy had already terminated naturally before this case was decided by the Supreme Court render her lawsuit moot? ~ No. The natural termination of Roe’s pregnancy did not render her suit moot.
5. Was the district court correct in denying injunctive relief? ~Yes. The district court was correct in denying injunctive relief.
Quoted Text
The Court held that, in regard to abortions during the first trimester, the decision must be left to the judgment of the pregnant woman’s doctor. In regard to second trimester pregnancies, states may promote their interests in the mother’s health by regulating abortion procedures related to the health of the mother. Regarding third trimester pregnancies, states may promote their interests in the potentiality of human life by regulating or even prohibiting abortion, except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.
Sorry Cissy. Your "Right To Your Body" phrase may fit your purposes but isn't part of the discussion involving the legality of Roe v Wade.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
