I am going to assume there is an equal amount of rage in America over the slaughtering and butchering of unborn children as there is for the famous lion that was killed.

The real disparity of course is the coverage by the media.
They try to extract mouring from the listener for the death of a beloved lion.
They try to cover up the killing of unborn children by using terms most people have no idea what they mean. They play up the so called good that Planned Parenthood does while playing down the butchering and selling of the baby parts.

I am more ashamed evry day of that part of our society that thinks more about the videos than they do what the videos portray.

You know the same tactic here on this forum when the source of controversy in an article is attacked while ignoring the more important message.

I am more upset about the lion. The babies are killed by their mothers. I don't think Planned Parenthood is the problem, I think the problem is these women killing their unborn children.

There is a lack sex education in too many areas, a total breakdown in values and way too many women left holding the bag when the guy takes off.

These woman have nothing to do with the sale of body parts. If you all feel so strongly stop buying products that contain them.

That's the liberal mentality. Sickening

That's because a lion is alive and a fetus is not. Your choice to call it an unborn child is propaganda only. You think the bible treats fetuses the same as humans? How come the old testament penalty for a fetal loss was entirely different than a human loss? Because even 2500 years ago those primitive cultures understood it ain't a baby until it is born at which time it is entitled to the protections given humans. So God says so and that's good enough for me.

Originally Posted by Guest

That's because a lion is alive and a fetus is not. Your choice to call it an unborn child is propaganda only. You think the bible treats fetuses the same as humans? How come the old testament penalty for a fetal loss was entirely different than a human loss? Because even 2500 years ago those primitive cultures understood it ain't a baby until it is born at which time it is entitled to the protections given humans. So God says so and that's good enough for me.

Dear Guest: You are privileged to make these comments because you had adults in your life that protected your right to life. Scientific evidence supports the fact that the unborn is alive and well into the first trimester.

If a woman doesn't want children she has a choice and methods to control conception. .

The topic at hand is the liberal press deflecting Planned Parenthood's breach of medical ethics by focusing on a dentist who killed a lion. This is a primary example of our continued march toward moral anarchy . it is also a deflection because it exposes the fact that the left never concerns it self with the rights of the unborn right up to and including birth . The left will claim the high ground by stating that the procedure is legal and benefits mankind but the facts are that the same scientific applications are being done without destroy a fetus. As to legal the courts should decide. It is clear that this is the same type of medical breach that was exercised in Nazi Germany

the left will then point to woman's right and woman's health and that anyone suggesting that funding for Planned parenthood be stopped is opposed to both. Well Senator Ernst ( R-Iowa) has drafted a bill that will divert funds from Planned Parenthood and redirect them to other health centers, hospital and organizations that provide non-abortion health care for all women. So much for not caring about women's health.

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

I am going to assume there is an equal amount of rage in America over the slaughtering and butchering of unborn children as there is for the famous lion that was killed.

The real disparity of course is the coverage by the media.
They try to extract mouring from the listener for the death of a beloved lion.
They try to cover up the killing of unborn children by using terms most people have no idea what they mean. They play up the so called good that Planned Parenthood does while playing down the butchering and selling of the baby parts.

I am more ashamed evry day of that part of our society that thinks more about the videos than they do what the videos portray.

You know the same tactic here on this forum when the source of controversy in an article is attacked while ignoring the more important message.

So true.

Originally Posted by Guest

I am more upset about the lion. The babies are killed by their mothers. I don't think Planned Parenthood is the problem, I think the problem is these women killing their unborn children.

There is a lack sex education in too many areas, a total breakdown in values and way too many women left holding the bag when the guy takes off.

These woman have nothing to do with the sale of body parts. If you all feel so strongly stop buying products that contain them.

Weird! I am surprised that you didn't also blame the lion for getting itself killed. Oh well, some folks have a warped way of seeing life.

Planned Parenthood has a legal right to provide abortions. We will see if it has a right to sell baby parts. Personally, I believe they should be cut off of all taxpayer funding since it is illegal for the gov to fund abortions. As far as providing baby parts, I am surprised that they aren't lynched for their abhorrent activity. Not only do I think congress should make it illegal, but I think that all residue of procedures should be treated as hazmat and destroyed. No one should profit from murder.

Originally Posted by Guest

That's because a lion is alive and a fetus is not. Your choice to call it an unborn child is propaganda only. You think the bible treats fetuses the same as humans? How come the old testament penalty for a fetal loss was entirely different than a human loss? Because even 2500 years ago those primitive cultures understood it ain't a baby until it is born at which time it is entitled to the protections given humans. So God says so and that's good enough for me.

What god are you referring to? It doesn't say anything like that in my Bible to substantiate your comment. Your statement was proven wrong many years ago. But, the abortion issue is moot at this point since the liberals have won the abortion battle (for now). The issue is what to do with the unborn baby parts. And of course, the older the unborn baby is, the more valuable the body parts. Of course, it's funny how it is a "fetus" until they are selling "body" parts. Then they are human body parts.

Maybe we should set up a franchise at assisted living and make some money off of seniors when they pass. How about that, want to be sliced and diced after you are gone? If so, why not be a donor? I'm sure you will jump in here and state that you are a donor. I set you up for that one. Remember, that is your choice. It's not the choice of the unborn baby.

I think we should compare planned parenthood to the Nazis. It seems like a good comparison.

I feel for the lion also. But, even though I sometimes like animals more than I do humans, I do know the difference. The idea that the lion gets more media coverage and empathy than the million unborn children murdered per year, is astounding.

The fetus is not a child until it can survive outside the mother.

I am right - all you reactionary wingnuts are wrong.

Originally Posted by Guest

The fetus is not a child until it can survive outside the mother.

I am right - all you reactionary wingnuts are wrong.

Perhaps you are right ~ Did you know that 22 week old fetus are surviving?

Twenty-two weeks is very young. Within abortion guidelines in many states.

"...The study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, looked at nearly 5,000 babies born before 27 weeks of gestation. It found that a significant number of babies who were born at 22 weeks, just over five months of gestation, survived after being medically treated in a hospital. Previously, 22 weeks was considered too early to resuscitate a baby because survival rates were so low..."


http://www.newsweek.com/babies-born-...y-finds-329518

Now what?

Originally Posted by Guest

Perhaps you are right ~ Did you know that 22 week old fetus are surviving?

Twenty-two weeks is very young. Within abortion guidelines in many states.

Now what?

So, you and I agree that a fetus in the first trimester is not a child. That is the first 3 months of pregnancy. No chance of survival outside the mother until just over 5 months and then some might survive with months of extensive hospital care.

Originally Posted by Guest

So, you and I agree that a fetus in the first trimester is not a child. That is the first 3 months of pregnancy. No chance of survival outside the mother until just over 5 months and then some might survive with months of extensive hospital care.

No, I don't agree with you. I said: Perhaps you are right.

As a reminder, the article (Perhaps you read it?) details how dramatically survival has changed. Perhaps survival will change again.

Originally Posted by Guest

No, I don't agree with you. I said: Perhaps you are right.

As a reminder, the article (Perhaps you read it?) details how dramatically survival has changed. Perhaps survival will change again.

Thank you for the "perhaps"that I am right. Shows you are a reasonable person.

I would think that most abortions are done before the fifth month. After that would most likely be for health concerns for the mother or some very serious malady with the fetus.

It is entirely up to the mother to choose. It is not up to a bunch of men in a legislative setting to decide.

Originally Posted by Guest

That's because a lion is alive and a fetus is not. Your choice to call it an unborn child is propaganda only. You think the bible treats fetuses the same as humans? How come the old testament penalty for a fetal loss was entirely different than a human loss? Because even 2500 years ago those primitive cultures understood it ain't a baby until it is born at which time it is entitled to the protections given humans. So God says so and that's good enough for me.

JMO, but I find this post to be the most grotesque, blasphemous post I have ever read. I'm hoping you wrote this for shock value only and it is not truly what you feel in your heart because it is so very ugly.

I would challenge you to work, HANDS ON, in an abortion clinic for a few months, then let us know what you think.

Originally Posted by Guest

The fetus is not a child until it can survive outside the mother.

I am right - all you reactionary wingnuts are wrong.

"reactionary wingnuts" ??? How did I know you were a liberal? By your derisive name calling. No big deal, because I have no problems speaking to young folks. Sometimes I just have to dumb it down a bit....joking.

You believe that a fetus is not viable until it's born and survives. So, if a baby is born and dies an hour later, you do not consider it a child? Probably not, because that would ruin your argument.

You see, abortion is rarely done out of necessity. 99% or more are done out of convenience. Convenience is another word for laziness in this case. The mother does not wish to be strapped down by a child, or they don't wish to go through 9 months of diet and taking care of themselves as well as loosing some sleep, morning sickness, etc. Laziness.

Here's a question for you that is slightly off subject. I doubt you will answer it honestly, but if you give me the answer I predict, then you will have proven my point. If you had a sister that had a newborn and on the way home from the hospital, she was in an accident and died but the child survived, would you take care of it?