A GOVERNMENT agency is launching an inquiry into doctors’ reports that up to 50 babies a year are born alive after botched National Health Service abortions...
“They can be born breathing and crying at 19 weeks’ gestation,” he said. “I am not anti-abortion, but as far as I am concerned this is sub-standard medicine.”
Just get one of them Whack-A-Mole mallets and bash 'em.
It's not like they're human or anything, is it?
12 comments:
....I am sorry what the hell does this have to do with guns?
Let me, let me, please!
Guns are the maintenance tools of freedom. They are the means by which we hold back the encroachment of government in the smallest corner of our lives. They are the protectors of life and treasure from government or others. As such, they are under constant attack by those that wish to kill or control others for power and treasure and convenience.
The proponents of gun control/total ban are those people that believe they should be allowed to kill or control others for treasure and/or convenience. Abortionist and pro-killing of infants advocates almost invariably fall in that group. We already see how precious they hold life by their lack of respect for it and their refusal to take responsibility for all those "choices" they made prior the choice made to kill an unborn child.
Ergo, they do not respect others' right to protect their lives, and view it as a personal threat to their own safety. Makes one wonder what they have planned that they would fear peaceable, but not helpless, persons, doesn't it? We already know what they plan for the peaceable but helpless (unborn children), don't we?
That is what the item has to do with guns. A look into the warped psyches of those would disarm us.
I'm sorry too, anonymous.
Please send me a list of approved topics and opinions I can place on MY online journal.
I'd hate to talk about something that I think relates to unalienable human rights to life, liberty and property without making sure it's something you want to read.
If you like, I'll send you your money back.
...those that, would disarm us.
left out a word, sorry.
Did I get it right, DC?
StraightArrow, I think it was a bullseye with a tight grouping on all points.
same guy.
I disagree that these two groups are (gun grabbers/pro-choicers) one in the same, but i agree that a large percentage are. We (gun rights folks) often complain that gun owners are typcast into the right wing nut-case by the media. In fact I do know many people who are pro-choice, yet are also pro-gun. albeit this article is an extreme case of abortion/infanticide, and I think the people who would agree with abortion at this level would be far and few between even in places like NYC and SF.
David - it is your blog and that is what the first ammentment is all about it was not intended to be personal attack, if that is how it came off I apologize. I have found all other posts in this blog to be well oriented to the war on guns which is why I visit it frequently. keep up the good work, but I guess we will not agree on everything.
Anonymous same guy, I will grant that there may be some pro-abortion types that are pro-gun, that is why I said "almost invariably".
BTW, I refuse to call them pro-choice. They don't honor the choices they made and accept responsibility for them. They are actually anti-life if they must accomodate the life they create. Irresponsible people are not generally self-sufficient nor imbued with the moral fortitude and physical courage to provide for their own defense and accept the consequences of those choices. Therefore, they prefer all others to be helpless, rather than meet the requirement of being a responsible adult in their own right. Sort of "I don't want to feel bad about not being all I should, so let's make everybody else less." kind of thing.
Don't get me wrong, it is not that killing unborn babies and not liking guns are related in and of themselves. It is that refusal to accept responsibility for the choices one has made and the refusal to shoulder the responsibility for one's own safety and that of loved ones go hand in hand. They are both the same dodging of responsibility incumbent on a full human. That is why "almost invariably" all of one stripe, have the other.
The same asses that have no regard for the sanctity of Human life are the same asses that are trying to take our guns. If we don't make a STAND for ALL our RIGHTS, (Such as the RIGHT to LIVE in the FIRST PLACE), then ALL will be LOST! THAT IS WHAT IT HAS TO DO WITH GUNS!
KEEP IT UP DAVID - DON'T LET THE DETRACTORS BOTHER YOU! THANKS FOR YOUR POSTS ON ANYTHING RELEVANT TO TRUE FREEDOM!
Anonymous: No offense--that's why I replied with humor/sarcasm instead of anger.
Here's the thing--and no, I don't intend to turn WoG into an abortion debate site: Ultimately, 2A is a human right. It therefore doesn't seem out of line to raise for discussion what a human is, how we define it.
Is that aborted baby--gasping for air and crying in agony--a human? And actually, it's not a rare procedure, as your reply seems to indicate--it's a rare occurrence from standard procedure.
Note I haven't really tipped my hand on any policy/ legal repercussions, as that's not the intent of my question.
Is it a human? If it is, does it have as much a claim to unalienable rights as you or I do?
One point of possible contention with straightarrow: Many libertarians who believe in an uninfinged 2A as strongly as anyone also make just as strong a "woman's right to choose" argument--so I appreciate that you qualified your generalization.
The arm of the Lord G*d is not shortened that it cannot save, nor is His ear deafened that it cannot hear, and the blood of these innocents from the ground cries out to Him. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living G*d.
There is a diffence between being a libertarian and a libertine. A libertarian extends the same rights and responsibilities to all other humans that he claims for himself. A libertine just wants to be free to do what he wants, when he wants, without responsibility for doing it.
Post a Comment