Huh, whaddayaknow… Abortionists suddenly find they have scruples:
If you believe a fetus is not a human life, the fetus becomes no different from any other unwanted appendage on a woman’s body. There is no moral difference to removing it than there is to removing an unwanted mole, or an unsightly wart. It’s just a bunch of flesh, with no human soul or spirit to it, so what’s the difference?
To the “My Body, My Choice” crowd: Make up you’re frickin’ minds — you’re either pro choice or you’re not.
***
And why has the abortion gender issue suddenly popped up in Canada?
From “Sassylassie” in the comments here:
Gendercide another great multicultural policy brought to us from inferior cultural practices, thank the Feds who have no backbone.
***
Welcome Square Mile Wife readers!
{ 7 comments }
I was reading about this the other day and Joyce Dinglenuts or whatever her last name is, head of the abortion crowd here in Canada, stated that her anti-baby crowd didn’t care what gender it was, as long as it didn’t interfere with their right to get their jollies out of sticking a fork into the font, and dragging the baby out of the womb.
Must be pretty common if the BC government is forbidding doctors in BC to tell the gender of the baby until late term. I think it cost more taxpayer money if the pregnancy is further along, they have to use more saline to burn and kill the baby. Not that that would stop any of the inferior cultural types. Just gives you the heebie jeebies that there are wannabe potential parents out there that are that twisted.
Sick and twisted is right.
The difference between a pro-life and and anti-life, is that pro-life carry babies and anti-life carry fetuses. You would never catch a pro-life rubbing her belly and calling her baby a fetus. I often wonder if it gives anti-lifers a thrill knowing they can kill their fetus at any moment up until the moment of birth. When they fell their babies kick in the womb the quickening as it is called, are they pissed off about the inconvenience of being pregnant? Normal females I can tell you from experience, are so excited, and a knowing comes over them at just how special this time is, and how dependent that little life growing inside them is. Pro-life mothers never hate the baby for that, they look at it as a gift.
Just to open a dialogue, I guess I agree with you that some of we conservatives may be morally ambiguous on the issue of abortion. But that is how we deeply feel, because some moral concepts are inherently in conflict!
I really do not object to what the doctors are doing because I agree that one should not abort by sex, and this is a tradition in some immigrant communities. As well, I am mostly pro-choice in several circumstances, and for many years, I think this no-law environment has benefited Canadian women. To me it is is not a totally moral issue; it is a practical one, with a bit of moral Canadian values input. I think most Canadians do despise abortion by sex, so this subtle practice works. A lot of we conservatives actually want women to be able to choose. And we do not want girls aborted. It is a controversial compromise that works.
The BC government has no credibility, just so you know.
L, but to be concerned about the gender is turning the unwanted mole as they like to think of it, into a human being. That information goes straight past the self deceiving to the brain. The abortion lobby can’t deal with that, as they can’t see themselves as killing people for a myriad of reasons, mostly convenience. They see themselves as hero’s fighting poverty, crime and disability before it even happens.We have been taught in the western world, it is wrong to kill innocent humans, and we put value on human life. For the abortion lobby to have to consider, it really is a human being they are killing, might upset the profitable industry.
The abortion lobby has to come right out and say yes we kill humans, and we don’t care. They would never gain respect for that, but it would cut the crap of pretending they were doing the world a favour.
I’m not morally ambiguous about it at all — I’m not pro-choice.
The whole reason for McParland’s column was to point out the hypocrisy of the pro-choice crowd, who support a woman’s right to choose with the slogan “My Body, My Choice.” If you really believe it’s a woman’s right to choose to abort, then it doesn’t matter for what reason — and McParland mentions some of those reasons: “because she doesn’t feel like going through the process; because it might interfere with her career plans; because she doesn’t like children in general; or because she loves Starbucks and someone told her she’d have to give up caffeine during the pregnancy.” Withholding information is interfering with the woman’s ability to make a choice. Hence, the hypocrisy.
As I said: I’m not pro-choice, so I’m not being hypocritical and morally ambiguous. Taxpayer funded abortion on demand for destroying healthy babies that could have been born to healthy, though irresponsible, mothers is offensive. If you’re mature enough to choose to have sex, then you accept all the responsibility of the potential consequences of the act. Only the very immature and selfish would choose abortion; responsible and selfless women who can’t raise a child would choose adoption.
Know how to really screw up the abortion crowd? Tell them that the fetuse today that you killed could have grown up to become the new Marx, or Lenin, or Castro. You murdered him!
Comments on this entry are closed.