Gov. Northam wants to kill ’em after they’re born. That’d be fourth trimester, wouldn’t it?
Six years ago–count ’em: six–the Media Research Council as a stunt, a hoax, a gag, asked college students if they supported abortions in the fourth trimester. Of course a lot of them didn’t know what a “trimester” was: maybe a new part of the body. As for the rest, a majority said “yes.”
And now, in 2019, we’ve got Democrat states competing with each other to see which one can allow the latest abortions. New York’s ahead: they’ll let you womens-health the baby as he’s coming out of the womb. Virginia did try to one-up New York on that, but it wouldn’t fly.
Out-and-out infanticide is no longer the stuff of dystopian science fiction. Brought to you by liberals, progressives, anti-human humanists–in short, the Democrat Party.
The ‘demand’ for abortions-on-demand could stop when ultrasounds show babies in the womb to be genderless (no reproductive/sexual organs) – ya think!
The problem here is that you don’t have to be alive, or even real, to vote Democrat. So libs have no incentive to spare babies: they can use them to elect villains long after they’ve sold off all their parts.
OMGee. May I quote you, again? Priceless!
Be my guest.
What astounds me about this is the lack of the basic human instinct to cherish and protect infants. How does someone get to the point where they could kill an infant?
Liberal ideology will take you there pretty quick.
There’s no one as anti-human as the humanists. These are people who don’t have natural feelings for others.
My take on it: cherishing children is not as basic a human instinct as one would think. Throughout history, humans have been willing to sacrifice their children, either literally, to their gods, or for other reasons. Infanticide was pretty common and universal. Female or disabled babies would be abandoned in the countryside. Children would be exchanged to other adults for favours, payment, or sexual use. Etc. Even cultures described as highly valuing children turn out to have some pretty cruel and vile practices towards them. And really, this isn’t all that different from nature; animals that raise their young can be protective and devoted to them for the most part, but will also abandon them, kill them or even eat them, at times.
From my many years of historical research of humanity from a more anthropological standpoint (it’s a lifelong interest of mine), I would put the notion of cherishing children squarely on Christianity. It took the rise of Christianity, which holds all people to be valued in the eyes of God, male or female, free or slave, Jew or gentile, for the idea of cherishing children. It took Jesus to say, better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone around your neck, then harm a child. This was completely, wildly different from the typical attitude towards children at the time. They were barely considered human until they reached puberty (adulthood).
Our current culture is working hard to reject our Judeo-Christian roots. No surprise, then, that they reject its value of children, too.
I do think you’re right about that. A lot of us have grown up in Christian culture that his been Christian for centuries, so cherishing children seems natural to us. Nor should we apologize for that, or submit to the multicultural idol: God’s way truly is the best way.
I still think that there is an innate protective instinct towards infants. That having been said, it can be overturned if it is taught against.
Any time we want to know how satan thinks, just listen to the rhetoric of these murderers.
well, let’s see now…..Pelosi is in her 4th trimester so it wouldn’t be wrong to kill her. See how the dems like that train of thought.