The Democrats/Leftists, including Obama, love to say that they believe in science.
Science, science, science. Absolute truth.
They claim that conservatives are against science.
That, of course, is absurd. Conservatives don't object to sound science.
The Leftists, however, do, especially when it comes to revealing the truth about life in the womb.
They kick and scream over giving women information, the science, of human development. That, for some reason, is cruel and hateful. For some reason, the truth about fetal development is something they want to withhold from women.
So who really is against science?
I know Barbara Walters is getting up there in years and she may not be as sharp as she used to be. Taking that into account, she said some ridiculous things on The View regarding abortion.
From the Media Research Center:
The liberal women on The View, Wednesday, shrieked at the "totalitarian" decision by a Texas judge to uphold a law requiring women to look at an ultrasound before having an abortion. Co-host and journalist Barbara Walters found the legal ruling– and not the act of abortion itself-- to be "heartbreaking."
Regarding the ruling, left-wing comedienne Joy Behar spewed, "It's very totalitarian in my opinion. I mean, it smacks of forcing somebody to confront something that they have already decided they don't want to deal with."
Rather than focus on the actual abortion, Walters lectured, "Then to have to go and be forced to hear, to see the fetus, to hear the heartbeat, to put more guilt on you, I think is heartbreaking."
Walters continued, declaring that the decision to "give up a child that is obviously unwanted... is such a tremendous decision, it's involved with so much fear of what you're doing and guilt."
No.
First, no child is unwanted. Some are unwanted by their biological mothers, but no child is unwanted. Someone wants to parent and love every "unwanted" child.
Second, it's not heartbreaking to know the truth about a baby developing in the womb. It's a beautiful, joyous, miraculous thing.
What's heartbreaking is for a woman to not realize the truth about what she's about to do to the human life inside her when she's planning on killing it.
If a woman doesn't believe abortion is morally wrong, if she doesn't think it's killing human life, then what's the big deal?
She could hear the baby's heartbeat for hours, for days, and it wouldn't matter.
It comes down to this: Either abortion is simply a "choice" to do away with a bit of tissue, or it's the intentional decision to stop a beating human heart. It's killing human life or it's not. There is no middle ground.
Women should not be spared the reality of the life they "choose" to abort. They should not be denied the SCIENCE.
It would be heartbreaking to learn too late the truth about the human life one "chose" to kill.
The only way to guarantee no regrets is by giving the woman the facts.
Pro-abortion advocates should have enough respect for women to permit them to deal with reality. I think preventing a woman from seeing the developing baby and hearing its heartbeat is a cruel act.
A woman should "choose" based on all the facts available to her.
Here's video:
3 comments:
Everyone thinks life in some form or another is expendable. For some it's fetuses (feti?), for others, murderers or people on the other side of a battle field, or simply persons of another religion. Still others extend protections to animals. And I'm sure there are those that feel partial to plants as well, though I don't think that movement would be particularly successful. Sort of like the Shakers of the diet world.
Talk to me about science when your side comes around on evolution and global warming.
You dance around the issue. You don't address it.
If you have no problem with stopping the beating heart of a developing baby in the womb, then just say it.
If you think that women shouldn't be given the truth about the human life they are carrying, then just say it. Don't talk about plants and animals.
The issue is the abortion of human life.
And it's ridiculous to suggest that conservatives don't buy the theory of evolution. Good grief, that's a silly sweeping statement. Of course, there's climate change. Have you ever been to the Dells?
This is an incendiary move by Texas to stir the pro-life agenda and distract the pro-choicers. In NJ (and most likely the rest of the country), the majority of women already DO get a brief ultrasound before an abortion to date the pregnancy and rule out anything unexpected - I do ultrasound scans here in NJ, so I know what it is like firsthand to watch how women are affected. So what's new here with this Texas law??!!- now women HAVE to pay the additional expense for an ultrasound and they HAVE to look at the screen? How do you MAKE them do that if they don't want to? Do you physically hold their head in position and force their eyes open? And how long do you "MAKE" them watch? Really folks, I am wondering if we've zoomed back in time hundreds of years where women were tortured or put do death for being raped or sleeping with a creep (Scarlet Letter come to mind?) In reality, some women DO willingly watch the ultrasound. INitially, this surprised me when I first started but now I understand why. Many even ask questions about what they are seeing. I have come to realize that whether or not they see (or are FORCED to see) an ultrasound, this is a decision that almost all the women facing the trauma of undergoing a surgical procedure to remove a pregnancy do not make lightly. They do not arrive at the operative center in ignorance of what they are doing, they are upset (at the least) and often in extreme mental distress and pain. I think it is extremely condescending, naive, and insulting to assume that forcing a woman to watch an ultrasound would 'enlighten' them as to the gravity of their situation. You may think abortion is barbaric, but I think it is barbaric to bully a woman to bear a child. I don't believe this law would result in changing most women's minds, but it may make abortion even that much more unaffordable. Do not underestimate the negative consequences of forcing women to give birth who are ill-equipped, or for whatever reason, feel they cannot provide a safe, loving home for their unborn .
Post a Comment