That's not like any democracy I'm familiar with. I'm more from the 'live and let live', "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" school.
"It ain't what they call you, it's what you answer to." - W. C. Fields
You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
That is "according to you", and that is where I'm directing my question.
According to you "a fetus is alive when it has brain life. It just doesn't have a meaningful version of life". This is not about "democracy" but your opinions, and the shared opinions of many others who have adopted this philosophy.
It is my observation that when those with power tend to feel they have the necessary insight and intelligence to determine who has and hasn't "a meaningful version of life", that all Hell breaks loose.
The Leftists were upset that Sarah Palin didn't abort her little boy with Down's Syndrome and were very critical of her for allowing his birth to take place. As time passes I suspect their rules about which life to allow will become even more stringent.
They don't believe that a prenatal life conceived in a human womb is a prenatal human baby. They claimed it is a blob of tissue with no consciousness and no ability to feel pain. They will claim “It doesn't sway many people” even having “watched films on abortions with friends and acquaintances where they show all the gruesome stuff “.
Including the claim that: “If someone doesn't believe that a stage of development has the full value of a fully developed human, they are likely not going to react emotionally because they do not have the same attachment to it that a person who does believe those things will.”
In their own word they claimed that it has only "the potential to develop consciousness and yet it is certainly not a human being".
As such, they convince themselves that abortion is not murder. If that's true, if that's what they truly believe, how on earth could they be emotionally disturbed by a factual description of a procedure called Dilation and Curettage performed during a surgical abortion procedure?
Do you get emotionally disturbed when people described the meat processing procedure? Would you accuse me of emotional appeal if I describe the butchering procedure as cutting into pieces of various sizes of meat or ground them hind legs into ground meats for sausage making? How about a description of cutting down a tree, a life no less, and shredding it into tiny pieces as mulch or pulverizing it into saw dust to be dumped into the compost pile?
How about liposuction procedure? Would you cry foul if I tell you how your fatty tissues are being sucked out of your sagging tummy?
Of course not. So, why would pro-abortion zealots who claim they don't believe a prenatal human life is a human being or, by their term, " a human person", get emotionally upset when a procedure of surgical abortion is factually described to them?
Obviously, deep down they know abortion is a cold blooded murder of innocent prenatal human beings. They may vehemently deny it and cry foul, but when confronted with reality, deep down within them their conscience convicts themselves. Thereby, involuntarily and unconsciously it betrays their lies. That’s why they cry foul and cry hard they do, vehemently and loudly.
Also, they will tell you abortion is a complex issue involving “unwanted children”. Yet, they refuse to realize that abortion is also too simple a solution to a complex problem. Not only that, it’s also a cop out option to destroy another human life to cover for the irresponsibility of the perpetrators.
With one foot, they will stand firm on the ground of abortion to make their point, which is a moot point. But, with the other foot hanging aloft, when confronted into a tight corner, they will stand on another ground to deny their case “to abort them".
It's an evasive behavior.
Here's something to ponder:
I'm surprised no one has yet come forth to cry "Boo-Hoo" on the emotional appeal thang. That insensitive reporter needs to be canned for not white washing or covering up the gruesome details. Yeah right!A short journey from 'pro-choice' to infanticide
"... the arraignment of Philadelphia abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell on eight murder charges: a third-degree charge for a woman who died under his knife, and seven first-degree charges of infanticide for "snipping" the spines of live babies "to ensure fetal demise": i.e. inducing births of viable thirdtrimester babies, and deliberately killing them post-delivery.
In its 261-page report, the grand jury described the conditions at Gosnell's filthy "clinic" as rivalling those in a Third World country: unwashed instruments spreading venereal disease, cats defecating where they pleased, a padlocked emergency exit, and floors sticky with placental and fetal remains.
Gosnell's gruesome practice was no secret, but the Pennysylvania Department of Health had decided to stop inspecting abortion clinics because "officials concluded that inspections would be 'putting a barrier up to women seeking abortions.'" ..."
If pro-abortionists will have their way, everything would be sanitized!
Last edited by dolphinocean; 04-14-11 at 02:10 PM.