Mon. Jun 27th, 2022

I have a dream.

I have a dream that one day I will live in a world where abortionists are asking, “What? WHO? We ?!” The tactic they cling to when confronted with the fact that their policies are unpopular, harsh and rude.

They will be honest about the fact that they consider a fertilized egg a human being – just like you and me. Often, proponents of abortion refer to an egg that has been fertilized within the last 30 seconds as a “baby” to pull the heart’s strings. Does the sperm match the egg? Boom! You have a child.

A post that they would also be honest-cotton wool The world of “personality” will need to balance the constitutional rights of human beings against the constitutional rights of the fertilized egg. And, according to many anti-abortion advocates, egg rights would actually violate the rights of the living, breathing person.

But they know that “personality” is not a popular policy position. It is ridiculous to snatch human rights from people who are born and breathing to give rights to eggs, embryos and blastocysts who need the body of a congenital and breathing pregnant woman to travel to become human. Can do It is cruel to deny infertility people the right to use them in vitro fertilization simply because they estimate that all other “babies” who are not implanted in the womb are being killed.

They also know that “personality” is down, ridiculous. Think about the famous trolley problem: you are driving a trolley that is blocking track A. There are five people on the track who are in danger of colliding. Or, you can go to track B, where only one person is at risk. The question is whether you change the track and kill one person or let the situation play out and kill five people. “Personality” workers would like you to believe that if there is a petri dish containing five fertilized eggs on track A, and a human child is strapped on track B, then crush the petri dish of fertilized eggs under the wheels of the trolley. Morally, it is like running away from a child. This is ridiculous.

And that is why they lie. Because they know their policies have nothing to do with it, and they don’t want you to know what they’re doing. Proponents of abortion want you to believe that their goals are commendable. They are only trying to save children and women.

But they are not – not really.

They are often trying to control it through bullying.

Take Marjorie Danen Felser, for example. She heads Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion organization that also has its own waste science research institute, the Charlotte Lozier Institute. In may New York The magazine called Danen Felser a “murderer.” cotton wool

Earlier this month, he Took aim In CNN’s Holly Thomas. Thomas’s crime?

Accurately report what “personality” means to those who are experiencing miscarriage.

Danfelser is on record as a “personality” supporter. It is not in dispute. But she doesn’t want people to think too hard about it.

Because she knows this means that every abortion becomes a crime scene.

Thomas explained in detail about the legal quagmire that pregnant women can find themselves if they are unable to prove, for example, that their abortion was an accident. He cited numerous examples of women who have been tried, convicted and imprisoned for miscarriage, even if there is evidence that they were at fault.

Amanda Cumberro, for example, was prosecuted under Alabama’s Chemical Hazards Act. The law was intended to keep children away from meth labs. There was no evidence that Meth caused his son’s death, but he was sentenced to ten years in prison anyway. The law on chemical hazards was not intended for people like her – pregnant people who use drugs – but apparently her mercy was a meth lab.

Britney Polo was convicted of genocide and sentenced to four years in prison. But again, there was no clear evidence that the use of meth caused abortion.

Patel was sentenced to 41 years in prison by Indiana prosecutors under the feticide law, which had never been used before to prosecute a miscarriage.

Following the abortion of Leslie Herrera, prosecutors in Star County, Texas charged her with murder, which authorities described as a self-inflicted abortion, before they could decide whether, Opsi Daisy, Texas. There was no law in India that made abortion a crime.

No damage was done. There is nothing to see here.

But Danfelser probably doesn’t want you to know the names of these women. She wants to perpetuate the obvious lie that the anti-abortion movement cares about women.

“The purpose of the provocative lies is to intimidate the United States with our own ability to pass kind and fair laws. This article – no mention of unborn victims of acts of violence” contains harmless provisions to women !!! ! @CNNPolitics Seriously? He tweeted a CNN article earlier this month.

There is nothing compassionate about forcing a person to face death or simply because the state claims interest in the embryo that the person is carrying.

There is nothing compassionate or merely condemnable about the death of a person with an ectopic pregnancy because the legislators believe that it is possible to have an ectopic pregnancy in the womb again. (It is not.)

Compassionate and just people do not exist in a world where legislators are proposing legislation criminalizing abortion under the death penalty, leaving a poor woman in Texas with five children and an impossible choice. There are no resources for raising a sixth child.

And in an environment where state officials perceive rape and rape as “ugly language” and “abortion slips,” it makes no sense.

And “keeping women safe” means nothing to at least 1,331 women who were arrested, detained or otherwise deprived of physical freedom between 2006 and 2020.

There is no point in “keeping women harmless” when subjugating and imprisoning women is a natural consequence of the first policy of the fetus.

Dannefelser’s anger at CNN’s Thomas sounds strange. Why would she be outraged that Thomas did not mention a harmless clause in a piece of legislation – the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which protects pregnant women and their children? And it was approved in the wake of the murder of her newborn baby. Wanted a pregnancy – when it wasn’t the subject of the article?

What has this federal legislation got to do with the countless cases that Thomas has told state officials about imprisoning pregnant women on suspicious grounds? Absolutely nothing.

But it did allow Danen Felser to fly the “Keep Women Harmless” flag, even though the anti-abortion movement could not reach the next brass ring, the “personality” of the fetus, which harmed many women. Along the way, mainly colored women and poor women, without arriving.

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.