We Wrestle Not Against Flesh and Blood

partial-birth-abortionOut, Damned Spot!!

A mother is in her 9th month of pregnancy. Actually, she is about three days from giving birth. She goes to the doctor and the doctor tells her that her pregnancy has become dangerous to her life and that either she or the baby is going to die if she continues her pregnancy. They have to kill that baby pronto!!! He suggests getting an abortion. Under the laws of our land, this is a legal option. The labor-inducing chemical is administered, and the live-saving abortion is scheduled. After several hours (Is the baby steadily killing the mother in these hours?) the labor-inducing chemical begins to effectively work. The endangered woman shows up to her appointment, is prepped for the life-saving procedure, and the abortion begins. As her labor begins, the mother’s womb begins contractions and the baby moves toward the birth canal. As some labors take a long time, she may be hours in this procedure, all the while “at risk” (?) of this baby killing her in these last 3 days of her pregnancy. At some point after this, the doctor reaches up into the mother’s womb, and turns the baby around so that his feet, body and hands present first, as opposed to the head (Creating what is called a “breach birth” position – a situation life-giving mothers and doctors try to avoid because it is dangerous for the baby and for the mother.) Once all of the baby’s body is outside of his mother’s body, except for his head, then, according to the power invested in the doctor’s hands by the government, the baby can be killed via a fatal procedure to the brain (see illustration). Having done this, the dead baby’s body is fully removed, and the life of the mother is saved. Hurrah!! (Seems to me the same thing could be accomplished if the doctor would just let the baby be born head first – like normal – completely out of the womb, and then strangled, or something like that. Seems like much less work, and definitely less awkward, right? Oh, then it would be murder, I forgot.) This is the scenario Hillary Clinton conjured up the other night as far as a reason to uphold Roe v. Wade. She said that she has known “many” women who had just this situation to deal with and that’s why, she says, she wants to keep abortion legal.

That is not why she wants abortion to stay legal, and no one believes her, not even those who are going to vote for her. We all know that she wants to keep abortion legal because she is a selfish, utterly wicked woman who hates babies, and yes, hates women, and, ultimately, hates God. (“Repent ye, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.” Acts 3:19) Regarding her scenario, there are so many holes in it that it would be exhausting to point them all out. I will just say the following and let the reader do the research on the “need” for abortion because of death-of the-mother situations. If a pregnancy is truly life threatening to a mother (as was the case for a friend of mine) in the last tri-mester (as was the case for my friend), labor can be induced (as was the case with this friend), the baby can be born (as was the son of my friend), and made to thrive (as this now 13 year-old does), NOT DIE. In my friend’s case, her labor was induced 3 months early. Her life was saved, as well as her son’s.

The scenario (of scheduling an abortion 3 days before the due date) on which Hillary was “basing” her advocacy for abortion, is beyond ridiculous. Partial birth abortion is about the sickest phrase I can think of. Even IF partial birth abortion was made legal to, so-called, protect the life of mothers who have “risky” pregnancies, we all know that this law is used prolifically to simply end lives that have become bothersome or to garner monetary gain.

Abortion is killing, whether in the first tri-mester, the second tri-mester, or the third tri-mester. Only those who have had their consciences seared believe otherwise, and their hands are stained with blood, like Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth.

Advertisements

Out, Damned Spot!!

Aside
In the World But Not of the World

Black Lives Matter

Black lives matter. Yes, I totally agree with that. But does Hillary Clinton? Do the representatives of the African American community agree as well? Do the adherents to the BLM movement agree? Or is it just a catchy slogan to gain political traction and attention?

WHICH black lives matter? I say, they ALL do. Do you think Hillary or the above mentioned groups agree with that?

“Black lives matter” is a very dramatic statement and was constructed to immediately evoke emotion and agreement. But it was also designed to challenge. He who dares to disagree with this pithy, righteous statement has got to be prejudiced to the very core. And this cannot be tolerated.

(Toleration. Here is an interesting word. It evokes the idea of a sustained lack of active disagreement to a distasteful (to us) idea or a person or a situation. Well, here’s the thing. The BLM supporters do not tolerate those who disagree with them, but we are supposed to tolerate rioting, etc.).

Many BLMers actively carry a grudge (designed for them) and a virtual banner that shouts of the unfair treatment of blacks by law enforcement. Some of them riot, block major highways and kill police officers. They get involved in these activities all in the name of black lives matter. I have often wondered how many black lives they are negatively affecting when they riot, destroy stores, block major highways and kill police officers. I have some questions for the BLMers:

  1. Do you really know the facts regarding Hillary Clinton and her views on blacks?  If she really believes that black lives matter, why does she support the abortion of little black babies who could have grown up to be black citizens?
  2. Do you really know the facts regarding those (community organizers, representatives, etc.) who urge and promote discontent and violence in the black community?
  3. Do you know who Margaret Sanger was and what her philosophy toward blacks and any other “undesirables” was?
  4. Are you aware of Hillary Clinton’s admiration for Margaret Sanger?

If you happen to know any BLMers, give them the following facts :
– Margaret Sanger hated blacks and thought they were a lesser race. Margaret Sanger was a racist. To her, black lives did not matter.
– Margaret Sanger strongly advocated for the aborting of black babies so that this “inferior race” would be diminished. To her, black lives did not matter
– Margaret Sanger started an abortion “service” to rid the world of these “undesirables” which was eventually called Planned Parenthood
– In 2012, blacks made up 12% of the nation’s population, and 40% of all abortions performed in the United States were performed on black babies. As of 2016, 1452 black babies lose their lives every day in America via abortion. (huffingtonpost.com) Though Margaret Sanger is dead, her desired reality lives on. To Planned Parenthood and to others who perform abortions on black babies, black lives do not matter.
– Hillary Clinton was nominated for and received the Planned Parenthood Federation Margaret Sanger Award in 2009. Here is an announcement regarding this award: “Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) will present its highest honor, the PPFA Margaret Sanger Award, to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at the PPFA awards gala in Houston, Texas on Friday, March 27. Secretary Clinton will receive this award for her unwavering support of women’s health and rights throughout her public service career. Actor America Ferrera will co-host the event with PPFA President Cecile Richards. The awards gala will take place at the George R. Brown Convention Center on 1001 Avenida de las Americas in Houston.” (saynsumthn.wordpress.com) Hillary Clinton openly admires Margaret Sanger for her philosophy and efforts: “I admire enormously her courage, tenacity, her vision…” To Hillary Clinton, black lives do not matter.

Instead of pointing out the real victims of racist abuse (those little black babies in the womb), politicians create a false group of victims. One of the easiest things to do is make someone feel sorry for themselves and then to make them believe that no one but you has their best interest in mind. It is commonly known that a favorite counseling technique in the world of psychology is to have the client cast about in his mind for someone on which to blame his problems. Once that person is identified, the ultimate end result is that the client never takes responsibility for his own actions or reactions. No problems are solved and bitterness for being a victim just festers and grows, and often the psychiatrist (whether they mean to or not) has a client for life.

Politicians will use that same ruse, tapping into the part of our human nature that wants to feel sorry for ourselves and blame our problems on someone else. Politicians will treat their black constituents in this manner, so that their emotional appeal will have the two desired result: continued reliance on their (unfulfilled) promises to better the lives of their black constituents (a lifer); and their reelection. Politicians will openly lie and mislead their constituents. For instance, in regards to the BLM mantra, they will not reveal that 93% of blacks killed in America are killed by other blacks (of course, this does not take into account the number of blacks killed by black abortionists). To these politicians, black lives do not matter. But a good slogan does.

Black lives matter. I totally agree. Do you? Please check out the facts and graciously seek to inform others.

Black Lives Matter

Aside