Trump just did one thing the Left is going to absolutely hate

57

Abortion is responsible for the murder of millions of unborn baby boys and girls.

President Trump has declared he wants to put an end to that.

And he just did one thing that the Left is going to absolutely hate.

During the Faith & Freedom summit, President Donald Trump took to the stage to discuss a number of topics, including the right to life.

As President, he’s been unafraid of declaring his opposition to abortion, stating his belief that lifeis precious.

And to prove his commitment to his pro-life views, he called out to Katie Shaw from the stage.

Shaw was born with Down syndrome, and is a vocal pro-life advocate.

Trump met with her in the Oval Office this year, much to the ire of Planned Parenthood and the rest of the Abortion Lobby.

LifeSiteNews reports:

Calling on a pro-life advocate he hosted around the time of the March for Life, Trump thanked Katie Shaw of Indiana for her presence at the conference. “We had a great meeting — right? — in the Oval Office. Thank you, Katie. You look well, really well. Thank you very much. Thank you. So nice. She was in the Oval Office and really made a great impression on everybody.”

Trump said of Shaw, “She was born with Down syndrome and now works at a local store, does afantastic job; volunteers in her community; and has testified before lawmakers. As Katie said, ‘It’s a wonderful life. I’ve made the world a better place.’ And, Katie, yes, you have. You have.”

To the applause of the audience, Trump said, “Our nation is uplifted by incredible Americans like Katie who fight for the dignity of all humanity. My administration has also taken historic action to protect Americans’ rights enshrined in the Constitution.”

It’s significant that Trump praised somebody with Down syndrome.

Many abortion clinics, like Planned Parenthood, will encourage parents to abort children who are diagnosed with Down syndrome, instead of giving them a chance at life.

Are you pro-life? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

57 COMMENTS

  1. my wife and I could not have kids of our own so we did the next best thing. We adobopted two. They are bother and sister natual, My wife and I now have 7 grand children and 1 great grandchild. How good is that!!

    • Congratulations! I’m a pro-lifer and a big advocate for adoption. There are so many couples like you and your wife who are unable to have children, but who would love to adopt children and would provide these children with a loving home and family. I hope people will read your comment and decide that adoption is ALWAYS the better alternative to abortion. God bless you!

    • I am proud of both of you two Precious Human Beings Ms. or Mrs. Sue and You Mr. Frederic J. Juel And Family, I am a Pro-Lifer Also! I Hope Both Of You Human Beings Will Have A Wonderful And A Blessed Life!

    • Awesome, God has blessed you abundantly! I truly believe what the Bible reads; “Children are a blessing from God and our inheritance!”

  2. I am pro life for sure.thank God first for life then thank our mothers who choose to have us. May Jesus Christ be received, accepted, and praised!

    • Hey, jan. Either should INSANITY, yet that Blond Haired, Brainless, Oval Office ORANGUTAN APE, mr. White House WORTHLESS WORM Himself!, has No Trouble with Such Verbal INSANITY every time he opens his Big, Fat, Stinking, Stupid Mouth!

        • I would re-name her Batty because she truly is. Obviously she is an irresponsible person who will or would not take any responsiblity and screwed whoever and never took precaution and had abortions. That is the main problem. Birth control is so readily available over the counter but these lazy people cannot seemed ot be bothered in the heat of the moment of their 3minute rendevous and then they think it is just fine to go instead to have an abortion instead of being cautiious and have take the pill or used other means that would take a few seconds. NO, that might be adult responsibilty which they could not care less about. So, Batty, you are a pos who has no sense of responsibility just like most liberats.

      • Betty, what is your problem? What are you so miserable about that you say such awful thinks about our President? When you do, you are insulting all the Americans who voted for him. Now, so many conservatives had no love for BHO, but we endured. Never insulting him with curses, as you used. We recognized that God is ultimately the one who places all those in power. We endured with our mouths shut; your turn!

  3. Humans make mistakes, right? This can apply to abortions as well. Just imagine where we would be today if the mothers of Obama, Hillary, Uncle Joe, AOC and, yes, even Jesus had abortion available to them and opted for it. Give it a thought.

    • Hey, old man coyote. Just consider, How Wonderfully Unmessed Up the USA would be right this very minute if d. trump’s mother had followed though on an Available Abortion Choice she might have had Seventy Years Ago. Too Bad She Couldn’t!

      • Batty, you would be a slave in Veneuzela and just a whore for the ms13 there. How does that sound to you? That is where you would be because of your grown up theories. Delusional much?

      • Gosh, nothing but cursing coming from your mouth. It is God who gives us speech, please use it wisely. For what measure you use, God will measure it backed to you.
        “If wisdoms ways you truly seek, five things observe with care; to whom you speak, of whom you speak, and how, and why, and where!”

  4. It seems that it often starts with one capital sin , fornication /adultery and then escalates to another,
    abortion , infanticide ; call it what you will but can’t the murder part be avoided with a simple GIFT to an adoption center resulting in the answer to someone else’s prayer or dream of having a child through the agency’s wonderful services.
    It’s not litter the pending mother is disposing of ; is it not a heart-beating little treasure anticipating the union with one of the greatest gifts the good Lord gave humans : a MOTHER .
    Can’t be retrieved once you’ve dumped him or her .

  5. I was adopted at birth.
    My biological parents couldn’t afford a second child. They gave me away.
    My adopted parents were the best.
    I was never without.
    Private school from K – College.

    3 month trips with them on summer vacation to anywhere I wanted to go.
    Europe, Mexico, Germany etc

    I loved them very much and, they lived me.
    At the time of my birth, my adopted dad was 60, and mom was ,45.
    They were older but, very active.
    Dad passed at age 93 in 1p993, mom passed at 85 on October ,31, 2000

    • What a great life they gave you, how blessed you were! And, they did a good job as you have been raised up by them, and now you call yourself blessed! So much better to bless than to curse. If only others would speak that to their hearts!

  6. Perhaps if the president and pro-life people continue their anti-abortion actions, the left will continue to devolve to a further state of hysteria and unabated hate and anger, and will seek the professional help they are so in need of.

  7. I have a sister with Down Syndrome and a nephew with Downs who was adopted by another sister , I have have Asperger’s Syndrome and am Dyslexic yet I have a
    B. S. In History Education, a minor in Political Science and am 12 hours from Masters of Divinity in Christian Apologetics. I am pro-Life, and proud of it.

    • And, his family will rise up and call themselves blessed! So, God Bless you and all your achievements; you do your family proud!

  8. I’m pro-life. You’d think the unborn-right-to-lifers would immediately understand the animal-right-to-lifers! The case for animal rights should be readily understandable to the millions of Americans opposed to abortion on demand.

    “Although I may disagree with some of its underlying principles,” writes pro-life Democrat Karen Swallow Prior, “there is much for me, an anti-abortion activist, to respect in the animal rights movement. Animal rights activists, like me, have risked personal safety and reputation for the sake of other living beings. Animal rights activists, like me, are viewed by many in the mainstream as fanatical wackos, ironically exhorted by irritated passerby to ‘Get a Life!’ Animal rights activists, like me, place a higher value on life than on personal comfort and convenience, and in balancing the sometimes competing interests of rights and responsibilities, choose to err on the side of compassion and nonviolence.”

    Although dominated by secular progressives valuing personal autonomy, privacy and civil liberties, the animal rights movement, representing a cross-section of mainstream secular American society, is NOT “officially pro-choice,” but IS divided on abortion. In a 1992 interview on Dennis Prager’s conservative talk show, when specifically asked about the animal rights position on abortion, Ingrid Newkirk, co-founder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), admitted, “We’re divided.”

    Former television game show host Bob Barker is a conservative Republican and an animal activist. Tony LaRussa of the Animal Rescue Foundation is a political conservative. Vegan labor leader Cesar Chavez was pro-life. Vegan civil rights leader Dick Gregory was pro-life. Former Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy, a devout pacifist, has expressed opposition to abortion, and in the 1980s was critical of Reverend Jesse Jackson for having changed sides on the issue.

    Dixie Mahy, past president of the San Francisco Vegetarian Society, has been vegetarian for sixty years, vegan for forty of those sixty years, and identifies herself as pro-life-and-pro-animal Matthew Scully, a conservative Catholic and former speechwriter for George W. Bush identifies himself as “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life.” Catholic Concern for Animals is pro-life-and-pro-animal. Reverend Frank & Mary Hoffman’s http://www.all-creatures.org Christian vegan website is pro-life-and-pro-animal Compassion for animals is a fundamental tenet of the Baha’i faith, which endorses vegetarianism, says abortion is more a matter of individual conscience, but concludes, without taking a position on abortion, life should not be destroyed.

    John Stuart Mill wrote: “The reasons for legal intervention in favor of children apply not less strongly to the case of those unfortunate slaves — the animals.”

    Animals are like children. Henry Bergh, founder of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), successfully prosecuted a woman for child abuse in 1873, at a time when children had no legal protection, under the then currently existing animal protection statutes. This case started the child-saving crusade around the world.

    In Christianity and the Rights of Animals, the Reverend Dr. Andrew Linzey writes: “In some ways, Christian thinking is already oriented in this direction. What is it that so appalls us about cruelty to children or oppression of the vulnerable, but that these things are betrayals of relationships of special care and special trust? Likewise, and even more so, in the case of animals who are mostly defenseless before us.”

    When told the animal rights movement is divided on abortion, Serrin Foster, Executive Director of Feminists For Life, said understandingly, “The Children’s Defense Fund is also divided on abortion.” Feminists For Life has many vegetarians and vegans. Serrin identifies herself as a vegetarian.

    From 1992 through 2003, James Dawson, raised Catholic and now a Buddhist, published Live and Let Live, a pro-life / animal rights / libertarian ‘zine. The ancient eastern reincarnationist religions Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism all predate Christianity, all oppose abortion, all teach ahimsa, or nonviolence towards humans and animals alike to the point of vegetarianism, all are vegan-friendly, and all teach that abortion and war are the karma for killing animals, and that therefore, we cannot end abortion nor bring about world peace until first we abolish the killing of animals.

    This knowledge, however, does not rest with everyone. Not all pro-life-and-pro-animal people advocate the reincarnationist strategy for ending abortion and bringing about world peace. Shay Van Vlieman, founder of Vegans For Life in the late ’90s, said she doesn’t expect to see a vegan president in her lifetime: she would just be glad to elect a president who will work to overturn Roe v. Wade. And she insists she is not a Republican, but a libertarian!

    During the late 1990s, Rachel MacNair, a Quaker pacifist, feminist, vegan, past president of Feminists For Life, moderated an email list for pro-life vegetarians and pro-life vegans. Rachel is now a psychology professor, and has written several books on nonviolence. In 1998, the Animals Agenda ran a cover story on the debate within the animal rights movement over abortion. Vegan congressman Dennis Kucinich (D – Ohio), one of the most liberal members of Congress, was pro-life throughout most of his political career.

    Pro-life vegetarians and pro-life vegans are found within the “consistent-ethic” movement: pro-lifers opposed to capital punishment. A significant number of “consistent-ethic” Christians are / were vegetarian or vegan: Rose Evans, Ruth Enero, Rachel MacNair, Albert Fecko, Carol Crossed, Bill Samuel, Mary Krane Derr, Mary Rider, Father John Dear, etc.

    Mary Rider, a practicing Catholic, wrote in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a “consistent-ethic” periodical in 2002:

    “So we teach our children to walk softly on the earth and to embrace nonviolence as the only legitimate means of conflict resolution, on both a personal and a global level. We are aware of the excessive, privileged life we lead as educated, first world U.S. citizens and of the responsibilities to which our privilege calls us. We try to live simply. We eat low on the food chain. We try to buy nothing new… We try to respect all life and carry that message forward in all we do… Because we value people and relationships over things… First world consumption kills people around the world… Pollution, environmental devastation, corrupt governments, war, sweatshops… all are a are a result of our desire to buy more at a lower price… We believe each person has a right to live a valued and respected life free from hunger and discrimination…”

    The threat of overpopulation is frequently used to justify abortion as birth control. On a vegan diet, however, the world could easily support a human population several times its present size. The world’s cattle alone consume enough to feed over 8.7 billion humans. Even if abortion advocates argue shifting to a plant-based diet, a vegan diet, isn’t enough to stave off overpopulation, in light of the data showing the depletion of energy, food, fresh water, land space, raw materials and resources as well as the heavy contribution to air and water pollution, deforestization, and global warming caused by a meat-centered diet, how do abortion advocates — warning about overpopulation consuming the world’s resources — justify consuming meat?

    If vegetarianism were merely about “fit” or following a peculiar set of “dietary laws” why are pro-lifers offended by pro-choice vegetarians and pro-choice vegans? Clearly, they’re offended because they know vegetarianism involves the animals’ right to life, and thus these pro-choicers appear to value animal life over human life under some circumstances. And issues like animal experimentation, circuses, and fur have nothing to do with diet, eating, nor food, but do involve the animals’ right to life. Leonardo Da Vinci, Count Leo Tolstoy, Mohandas Gandhi, George Bernard Shaw, Susan B. Anthony, Percy Shelley, Rosa Parks, etc. were all vegetarian, and none of them were Jewish nor Muslim.

    For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action offers an introduction to animal rights ethics within Christianity alongside directly related sanctity-of-life issues, like the possible rights of unborn children. The book’s foreword is written by Mary Eberstadt, senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC, a Catholic who identifies herself as “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life.”

    Author Charles Camosy responds to criticisms from academicians Peter Singer and Lynn White, Jr., that the misinterpretation of “human dominion” (versus compassionate stewardship) is responsible for the current ecological crisis. Camosy indicates that Christianity cannot be blamed if humans with their imperfections distort their own religious teachings, that Christianity did not give rise to the industrial revolution, and that real Christianity — as it was meant to be practiced — is at odds with market-driven ethics and mass consumerism (a point made decades ago by liberal Protestant theologian Dr. Harvey Cox). Camosy concludes: “I became convinced that, if I wanted to be authentically and consistently pro-life, I should give up eating meat.” Dozens of books have been written on Christianity and animal rights. Camosy merely provides an overview of animal ethics within Christianity.

    Steve Kaufman, head of the Christian Vegetarian Association, was raised Jewish, and is now serving in the United Church of Christ, America’s largest pro-choice Protestant denomination. Steve expressed interest in Democrats For Life, his only reservation was whether Democrats For Life favors criminalizing abortion. Some animal advocates and activists (like Catholic vegan columnist Colman McCarthy) oppose abortion, but don’t think criminalization is the answer.

  9. If it is so important that every clump of cells be born, no matter the circumstances; the best way to attain that lofty but questionable goal is to ensure that every pregnant woman has the FULL support of society. Got to raise taxes on the rich to do it? Raise them. Got to execute all convicted rapists as a deterrent to other men? Execute them. Got to garnish the last dollar from a man’s salary who left his family, to care for the kids? Let him live in a box.

    And let me just leave you with one last thought. How many women, forced to go through an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, only to be thrown to the curb by those same people who insisted she go through it in the first place – how many of those women do you think will vote for a conservative after that? Or how many of her friends, because people talk.

    • I must also exclude most Republicans and conservatives from being honestly opposed to abortion as a result of such welfare reforms as the family cap (a provision where a woman’s welfare payments are not increased for another child), and their TOTAL REFUSAL to just fix the pro-abortion parts of Obamacare while otherwise leaving alone its Medicaid expansion and protections for pre-existing conditions. Rolling back the Medicaid expansion in Obamacare or its protections for pre-existing conditions without an adequate substitute is PRO-EUTHANASIA. It is a total mystery to me why such welfare reforms as the family cap are not recognized to be PRO-ABORTION; working families have child tax credits, although the tax reform passed in December 2017 abolished the dependency exemption, at least at the federal level. Most probably, the family cap disqualifies the vast majority of Republicans and conservatives from being honestly opposed to abortion.

      More generally, any penalties for pregnancy and childbirth of any kind and for any reason, regardless of whether or not the mother is married, are PRO-ABORTION. In other words, any attempts whatsoever to punish, shame, or stigmatize out-of-wedlock pregnancies and childbirths are PRO-ABORTION, plain and simple. Although it is wrong for those who are unmarried to be sexually active (including ALL homosexual and lesbian sexual activity of ANY kind, regardless of one’s “marital” status), it is much more important to protect the innocent baby after conception has occurred. In other words, once the baby is conceived, protecting the innocent baby from abortion MUST come first, regardless of whether or not the mother is married. I believe that a majority of women who have abortions are unmarried.

      Also, any complaining about out-of-wedlock pregnancies and childbirths, or the taxpayer cost of providing for the children of single mothers (welfare or otherwise) and for anchor babies, or any children for that matter, is PRO-ABORTION. More generally, any complaining about people having children they cannot afford, or the taxpayer cost of raising people’s children is PRO-ABORTION. Besides, some of these women might have been raped or sexually exploited. The #MeToo campaign indicates that such sexual assault is much more common than we may have thought. (Donald J. Trump’s endorsement of sexual assault on women is an implicit endorsement of abortion for babies who might be conceived as a result of such sexual assault, even if some other things he is doing may be pro-life.)

      Those who wish to curtail unmarried sexual activity will have to try to do so BEFORE conception occurs. For example, why not teach people proper sexual morality BEFORE the baby is conceived, including teaching men not to rape or sexually exploit women? Of course, that will not be enough for women who are raped or sexually exploited, but punishing or stigmatizing them after they get pregnant, or after they give birth is not helpful either. In addition, my Catholic faith ABSOLUTELY RULES OUT endorsing or approving of any kind of contraceptive solution here (except possibly after rape). In addition, some so-called contraceptives may actually have abortifacient consequences. Anyone honestly opposed to abortion would at least have to object to potentially abortifacient contraceptives.

      I must also consider any complaining about health insurance covering pregnancy and maternity and baby care, delays in extending the CHIP health insurance program or attempts to cut the CHIP health insurance program to be PRO-ABORTION. In addition, I must consider Donald Trump’s public charge restrictions which attempt to prohibit immigrants who ever used government programs to help them raise their children or otherwise provide for their families from qualifying for US citizenship to be both PRO-ABORTION and PRO-EUTHANASIA. More generally, any attempt whatsoever to try to punish people for having babies, or for making use of government programs intended to help parents to raise their children or otherwise provide for their families is both PRO-ABORTION and PRO-EUTHANASIA. Again, working families have child tax credits, although the tax reform passed in December 2017 abolished the dependency exemption, at least at the federal level.

      Honestly opposing abortion ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES a willingness to put up with more out-of-wedlock pregnancies and childbirths in return for fewer abortions; ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES a willingness to put up with immigrant families and others using government programs to help them raise their children; ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES a willingness to put up with the taxpayer cost of providing for the children of single mothers (welfare or otherwise) and for anchor babies, or any children for that matter (working families have child tax credits, although the tax reform that passed in December 2017 abolished the dependency exemption, at least at the federal level); ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES a willingness to accept the existence of health insurance covering pregnancy and maternity and baby care; and ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES opposition to any so-called contraceptives that can have abortifacient consequences.

      • You are mostly correct but one thing you are incorrect in. President Trump is not encouraging sexual assault of women. That’s just one big lie you somehow believed was true.

  10. the democrat baby-killers and non-americans have spioled any chance of the people to accept them. we used to exicute any murderers. now the democraps are trying to out kill the murders of the war. pol-pot/stalin/hitler and the rest of the crazies, the planed parenthood now murders children and screams about animal abuse. MAKES ONE HELL OF A LOT OF SENSE DOSN’T IT….NEVER TRUST A DEMOCRAT..

    • Speaking of “MAKING A HELL OF A LOT OF SENSE, esp. Never Trust a republican RETARD with their constant ASSHOLE KISSING of a presidential PIG!

    • Hey, dobber. In your above comments, the last one sure very fittingly applies to d trump, VERBALLY DO UNTO THAT Oval Office INSANE IDIOT, that MENTALLY ILL MORONIC MONKEY IN EQUAL MEASURE,JUST AS HE HAS VERBALLY DONE UNTO OTHERS!

  11. How many Einsteins, Hawkings, Beethovens and other geniuses have we lost because some women have chosen a selfish path? I’m all for abortion as long as those being aborted are those who would legalize the barbaric practice.

    • On the Other Side Of The Coin, How about also all the would be Ted Bundys, the John Wayne Gacys, the Jack The Rippers, the Adolf Hitlers that (THANK GOD) were Never Born cause their mothers chose the Right Path that spared Humanity from their HORRORS! Maybe some republican Retards might think about that if they have enough brains to do so?

  12. God bless President Trump and his on going battle against abortions! I have done battle with several pro-choice people on these blogs and they all have the same tired explanation for supporting abortions;my body. my choice.And as I’ve stated to them, in this day and age there is NO reason for any woman to become pregnant to begin with. So many options available to them to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.But upmost is common sense.It makes me sick that some states have even endorsed a woman can have an abortion when that poor innocent is ready to be born! KILLING that poor baby right there and then!!Disgusting!!It’s not about denying a woman HER right. It’s about denying that innocent a chance at life….
    My my husband and myself could not have another child, we adopted a little baby girl that was born with ALOT of heath problems.And we never regretted our decision for a minute.

  13. After working 15 years on County Inpatient Psychiatric units, it was almost commonplace to have at least one Downs patient on board. Some are more highly functional than others, but most are very loving and appreciate any care and attention they’re given. As a parent of four, I often wondered what I would do if prenatal testing indicated a genetic flaw in the fetus my wife was carrying. This, in itself, has nothing to do with what others feel about the subject; it had to do with how I felt about it. In the final analysis, as something [we] created, I would opt for allowing the child to go full term and, once alive and in our arms, I know we would be prepared to make whatever sacrifices it would take to allow the child the best life possible…regardless of how demanding. So many children have come into this world with conditions that place tremendous hardships on parents. However, it’s refreshing to know of so many who have made the sacrifices to ensure their handicapped offspring is allowed to live in our wonderful world.

  14. Diď you ever consider how Trump got rid of his unwanted chìldren fròm all of his unfaithful ventures he has had over his lifetime? Abortion was his convenìent way of disposing of the proof of his adulterous relatiònships. Those women he paid off to abort his child are too ashamed to cone forth.Remember-he does nòt care abòut human lìfe.

  15. Here is what I can NOT understand about Anti-Choice.

    They demand that the un-born MUST be given the right to life. To me, this makes as little sense as giving the right to life, to the un-DEAD. Including vampires, mummies, witches, demons, and so on.

    If anti-choice is so determined that the UN-born MUST be allowed to “live”, then WHY dont they condemn Hollywood, for making movies, where the un-DEAD are butchered, on the screen (while millions of viewers watch, and clap?)

    Finally, I issue this prophecy/edict/etc.:

    Once women LOSE their right to make thier own life decisions, then how long will it be, before MEN LOSE OUR RIGHTS, to make our own decisions?

    Anti-Choice sounds more like Communist Russia, or Facist Germany, than the United States.

    • Norman Hinderliter: Your analogous are just ridiculous! Comparing FACTICAL characters from a movie to a human that has life!!
      Opposing abortion,it isn’t anti-choice especially in today’s society. There are so MANY options available today for both parties so a woman can’t become pregnant to begin with…. Common sense for one.
      I’ve also seen you post on other blogs asking the same question; what men’s rights are you so afraid of losing???

  16. My wife and I already had 2 daughters, but we wanted four children. So, she got pregnant again. The Dr wanted my wife to abort the pregnancy, as she had a large ovarian tumer, and might not make it thru childbirth. We said no, put it in the Hands of an Almighty God, and when she gave birth to our third child, she came very close to death. In her recovery state, she remembers the Dr. and the Nurses discussing whether she would pull thru or not. Well, our God was watching over her and she did pull thru – of course, the Dr would have nothing more to do with her because she had not aborted. And this third daughter of our is a real PRO-LIFE champion, as all of us our. We didn’t want her growing up alone (our oldest sister was 7), so we attempted to adopt another child, not necessarily an infant but one about 2 years old with a manageable defect, and we didn’t care about the race of the child. Even though I had lots of room in my house, we were turned away in Virginia, Michigan and Texas, where the adoption clinics were held – seems they did not want to lose their government funding, which was based on how many orphans they had in their care. We have been to the PRO-LIFE movements in DC several times, AND we continue to support the PRO-LIFE movement locally.

  17. We have a grand daughter born with spina bifida and she is a shining star. She does not let anything stop her. She drives, has always held a job and calls her grandparents every week. What a tragedy if she had been aborted.

  18. In her 1982 article, “All Abortions are Selective”, pro-life feminist Jo McGowan asks about sex-selective abortions:

    “What are we to make of all this? Without denying in any sense the depravity of killing baby girls simply because they are girls, I submit that the position (pro-choice) feminists have taken on this issue is morally bankrupt, without substance of any kind.

    “Why? Because one cannot have it both ways. Once the abortion of any child, for any reason, is permitted, the abortion of all children becomes acceptable.

    “If it is all right to kill a child because it is handicapped, or because its mother is unmarried, or because it is the third child in a family that only wanted two, why isn’t it all right to kill it because it is a girl?

    “This process of aborting girls when boys are wanted has been termed ‘selective abortion’, but in fact every abortion is a selective one. What changes from case to case are only the values of the parents, determining what they select and what they reject…

    “(Pro-choice) feminists who have been so active in assuring women of the ‘right to choose’ can hardly complain when those same women exercise their freedom to choose something with which (pro-choice) feminists do not agree.

    “Choice being such a highly personal affair, one can hardly expect everyone to choose the same things. But it is tragically ironic that what has been hailed as the ‘great liberator’ of women may turn out instead to be the means of their destruction…

    “Perhaps, however, something good may yet emerge from this ‘female feticide’ outrage. Perhaps people, and (pro-choice) feminists in particular, will finally realize what is actually at stake in an abortion, any abortion.

    “Perhaps from this undeniable truth that it is wrong to kill girls will emerge the larger truth that it is wrong to kill anyone.”

    Abortion advocates resort to intellectual dishonesty when they frame the abortion issue solely in terms of a woman’s “choice” rather than in terms of the possible rights of the unborn. In the 1970s, pro-life feminist Juli Loesch wrote:

    “Each woman has the right (to contraception)… But once a woman has conceived, she can no longer choose whether or not to become a mother.

    Biologically, she is already a mother… the woman’s rights are then limited, as every right is limited, by the existence of another human being who also has rights.”

    Pro-life feminist Ruth Enero similarly refers to a “narrowing of choices.”

    There’s the old adage: my right to swing my fist through the air ends where the next person’s face begins. Recognizing the rights of another class of beings (and not merely human beings!) limits our freedoms and our choices and requires a change in our lifestyle — the abolition of (human) slavery is a good example of this.

    This point was made in a September 2000 article, “Abortion and the Left” which appeared in the Stanislaus Connections, a monthly newspaper put out by the Modesto, CA Peace/Life Center. Again, recognizing the rights of another class of beings (and not merely human beings!) limits our freedoms and our choices and requires a change in our lifestyle — the abolition of (human) slavery is a good example of this:

    Are whites free to own slaves or lynch blacks?

    No! Because of the civil rights movement, we’ve corrected that injustice.

    Is domestic violence tolerated?

    No! Because of the women’s movement, domestic violence is unacceptable.

    Should hate crimes against LGBTs be permitted under the guise of “choice”?

    No! LGBTs have rights.

    This isn’t rocket science, but if animals have rights, then our freedoms and choices to commit crimes against animals are similarly banned, limited, restricted, etc.

    This point was made clear by pro-life feminist Ginny Desmond Billinger, in an article entitled “Confessions of an Anti-Choice Fanatic,” which originally appeared in the September/October 1982 issue of Minnesota Feminists For Life, and which later appeared in the Pro-Life Feminism: Different Voices anthology in 1985:

    “Let’s take a look at just a few of the other issues that I, as an avowed antichoicer, am ready to address:

    “Spouse and child beating — here, my position is unhesitatingly anti-choice. My perspective as a spouse, a parent, and a former child qualifies me to support all measures to remove from people the freedom to choose to abuse their family members–even in the privacy of their own homes.

    “Drunk driving — Again, anti-choice. I’m afraid I must impose my morality on those who would choose to operate life-threatening machines while influenced by alcohol, and ask them to temporarily abstain from one or the other.

    “Gun control — Despite the big-bucks, ‘constitutional rights’ lobbying by the NRA, I remain consistently anti-choice on this issue. The memory of a friend, forces me to reject any justification for handgun ownership without strict regulation.

    “Endangered species protection — Faced with a whale-hunter or seal-clubber, I’ll take a hard line anti-choice stand every time.

    “Hazardous waste disposal — We’re talking about the rights of corporate America Vs the average Joe here, but my anti-choice position still applies. The right to choose efficient business practices must always be weighed against the public’s right to a safe environment. Ditto for occupational safety and health issues.

    “I expect that these declarations will leave me open to censure; I will no doubt be labeled a heretic. The American principle of personal liberty would surely suffer with the propagation of my anti-choice philosophy…

    “So call me what you will: pro-life, anti-choice, fetus-worshiper, anti-abortion. A thousand labels will never alter the certainty that the road to freedom cannot be paved with the sacrificed rights of others.”

    Animal rights activists have even proven themselves to be “anti-choice” depending upon the issue. A 1994 letter to The Animals’ Voice Magazine, for example, states:

    “Exit polls in Aspen, Colorado, after the failed 1989 fur ban was voted on, found that most people were against fur but wanted people to have a choice to wear it. Instead of giving in, we should take the offensive and state in no uncertain terms that to abuse and kill animals is wrong, period! There is no choice because another being had to suffer to produce that item… an eventual ban on fur would be impossible if we tell people that they have some sort of ‘choice’ to kill… remember, no one has the ‘right to choose’ death over life for another being.”

    Similarly, a 2003 letter in Veg-News reads: “I did have some concerns about (the) Veg Psych column which asserted that we must respect a non-vegan’s ‘right to choose’ her/his food.

    “While I would never advocate intolerance (quite the opposite actually), arguing that we have a ‘right to choose’ when it comes to eating meat, eggs, and dairy is akin to saying we have a ‘right to choose’ to beat dogs, harass wildlife, and torture cats.

    “Each is a clear example of animal cruelty, whether we’re the perpetrators ourselves, or the ones who pay others to commit the violence on our behalf.

    “Clearly, we have the ability to choose to cause animal abuse, but that doesn’t translate into a right to make that choice.”

    “Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment,” insists People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

    As the animal rights movement continues to influence mainstream society, humankind is finally ending millennia of injustices against animals.

  19. To “pro-choice” ladies, You have always had a choice—do I open up my legs OR do I keep my legs closed…..simple….

  20. Like that’s News? Considering that CRAZY donald & D for DUMB trump has from day one done a lot of things that any Real American with an ounce of common sense & being in their Right, Rational Mind would Hate!

  21. ‪Under President Trump, best economy in decades, lowest unemployment numbers for Blacks,Hispanics,Asians EVER (women in 15years)lowest unemployment ever, The list goes on. Best president ever, President Trump!‬

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here