Ever since I left Planned Parenthood, I have been talking about the abortion quotas that are established inside abortion facilities. Many abortion supporters refused to believe it, citing that surely Planned Parenthood wants abortion to be safe, legal and RARE. If they want something to be RARE, they certainly wouldn’t have quotas, right?
We recently had a clinic worker leave the affiliate, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains. This affiliate runs the 2nd largest Planned Parenthood facility in the U.S. At this clinic in Denver, they give out various awards to their satellite clinics and post these awards on a bulletin board for everyone to see.
When our former worker saw this award on public display, it really started to change her thinking about Planned Parenthood’s motivation. This award was given to their Aurora clinic for “exceeding abortion visits first half of fiscal year 2012 compared to first half of fiscal year 2013.”
This means that the Aurora Planned Parenthood exceeded the abortion quota that was imposed on them. And THAT is award worthy according to plannedparenthood .
Yayyyy abortion! What kind of sick shit is this?
Wow…just wow… I’m so glad these awful places are getting shut down. :)
History will not be kind to us. Civilized people do not kill their children, whether born or not. This act should be reserved for barbarians and barbarians alone.
It’s time to reclaim our humanity. It’s been time.
The idea that the left wants abortion to be “safe, legal, and rare” is one of the biggest cons of the last 50 years.
Humans are equal by nature, not function. Using functional properties to account for value puts a burden on abortion advocates to account for basic human equality.— Scott Klusendorf (via babydontabort)
Lest you think that dear Emily represents the fringe of the abortion movement, consider that many mainstream leftwing blogs have seized on this video and passionately defended it. But, if you’re paying attention, you already know that this woman is not on the fringe, because there is no fringe. All abortion advocacy is extremism. It is impossible to be moderately in favor of abortion, just as it is impossible to be moderately opposed to it. Seeking a middle ground on abortion is like searching for a middle ground on slavery or genocide. It doesn’t exist, and those who wish to find it will inevitably end up in favor, and those in favor of murderous atrocities are always extremely in favor of murderous atrocities. Your acceptance — however moderate – of a deep and depraved evil, will color your soul in blackness, and send you barreling into a darkness that will utterly distort your moral compass, leading you to bow at the altar of the Culture of Death, where abortion is the highest sacrament.—
Your conscience is not a lunch tray, with all of the different components separated into their own compartments. Your conscience is a bucket, and everything you dump into it will mingle and mix with everything else. The point is, if you pour an acceptance of child murder into your bucket, it will poison everything else, and soon even the good parts will be colored and tainted by your tacit endorsement of violence against the innocent. It changes you, and how you see the world. This will happen. There is no way around it. Anyone who celebrates or endorses abortion, but then pretends to recoil at any other form of murder, is lying. They are lying to themselves, and to you. They are liars, and I will call them that, without apology.
This topic is the big E on the eye chart. If you can’t figure out something this basic, it speaks volumes about your twisted moral compass and/or your capacity for cognitive dissonance.
People know abortion is happening, but they also realize that if they look at it too closely, they will not be able to live at peace with themselves unless they do something to stop it. At the same time, they know that if they try to stop it, there will be a price to pay. They may lose friends or face other kinds of opposition. They don’t want to make the sacrifice necessary to confront injustice. What, then, is their solution to this dilemma? Ignore the problem altogether. Denial protects them from the pain of the situation. This is why so many people become angry when the topic of abortion is raised: After successfully ignoring it, no such person wants it brought to the surface again.— Fr. Frank Pavone (via twocrowns)
Anonymous said: Unless you've been in the situation of needing an abortion than you really wouldn't understand...just saying
I’ve never been in a situation where I needed to murder or rape someone either, but I have no trouble understanding those things are wrong.
To learn the truth about “safe and legal” abortions, go to: www.safeandlegal.com
Above is an excerpt from ‘Personhood’ by Lauren Zuniga, which can be viewed here.
This doesn’t even make sense. Nobody is arguing for making it legal to slaughter foster kids, immigrants, gays, transgender kids, inner city kids, uninsured workers, prisoners, or soldiers. Go ahead and make an argument for your policy preferences that impact any or all of those categories of people, but none of those ideas by logical necessity follow from the position that children in the womb should be protected from murder.
Guess what? I am pro-life. I think the state has an interest in protecting the rights of unborn children to be alive, including those that may turn out to be foster kids, immigrants, gay, transgender, inner city kids, uninsured workers, prisoners, and soldiers.
Zuniga’s attempt at a coherent argument is an epic fail.
[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.— Philosophers Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, in the Journal of Medical Ethics, via this article.
— Canadian MP Stephen Woodworth (via stereo-farts)
Don’t accept any law that says some human beings are not human beings! No Member of Parliament should remain silent in the face of any law that says some human beings are not human beings.
Now there might be some people who can convince themselves that a child magically transforms into a human being when their little toe pops out of the birth canal…However, I’ve concluded that modern medical science will inform us that children are in reality human beings at some point before the moment of complete birth.
History is littered with disastrous examples of laws which pretended some people were not human beings to achieve some desired result or suit someone’s philosophy…Just laws must be based on accurate evidence, not arbitrary lines unrelated to reality. If there’s no objective criteria for who’s a human being, then personhood and the fundamental rights that go with it can be defined in any way any powerful person or group decides. Is that the Canada you want?
Been waiting for this one. Technically it was his baby too. Complicates the logic even further.
See this CNN article for the background details of this man’s depraved act. He has since been convicted and sentenced to nearly 14 years in prison. His act is no more or no less depraved than if his girlfriend had decided to kill their child own her own. This is why our culture must change. This is why killing unborn children must end.