Quiet In The Face Of Evil

Democrats define the meaning of power. For them, it means running on pro-abortion, using the issue to gain power. And when someone calls it evil, they shrug it off as “you are just trying to take abortion rights away.” Note, I refuse to use the term reproductive rights.

When all the outrage came down over Gov Northam’s interview statements on abortion that could be described as infanticide, the Dems were speechless. Not for contempt but because they could not defend it. I mean Notham came right on and said what the agenda was in detail. How could they defend that?

They couldn’t say it was a lie or that it was fabricated and it was not out of context.

Then they adopted a more cavalier attitude. So what? They parsed it down that it somehow did not really mean anything because it was not that common. Instead, they shifted the debate to one about abortion or Roe v. Wade itself. But that was not the issue or source of outrage. Infanticide was.

All that dust up over Northam’s yearbook followed which is all anyone wanted to talk about since. Rather convenient is it not? They made the racism issue the bigger story.

Last night I heard a liberal Fox contributor give what must be the latest installment of talking points to divert from the issue. Jessica Tarlov made the claim that the “late-term” abortion description was a made up thing by conservatives. Yes, we invented the term, she said. But by it we are only trying to differentiate these from other abortions. Rightfully so. I suppose to her they are all just abortions, no need for any descriptors.

And she claimed that we were the only ones who use such terminology. Except for one thing, professionals and academics do as well. They commonly refer to earlier abortions vs later abortions. See, it is the element of time — which is development in the life of a fetus or baby — that Democrats do not want to acknowledge.

It would seem an important factor in many circumstances. But Jessica does not like the time frame being alluded to. We could also technically call them 3rd-trimester abortions. She probably would object to that, too. It reveals the developmental state of the baby.

If it is after 6 months, many people accept it can be a viable fetus. She would like to divert from the viability issue. Note how we are at fault for calling it “late-term.” I guess if you have no other argument or defense, then the only thing left is to argue over semantics and descriptors. No, she doesn’t want them to have an identifiable identity or humanity.

How does terminology change what Gosnell did or what Northam was talking about?

For background reference, here is the Grand Jury Report on Kermit Gosnell, in its details. By the way, it refers to late-term abortions as well as infants born alive and “infanticide.’ But then there can never be a full accounting for how many of these procedures were done, or how many babies were killed, because he destroyed the records.

When the Gosnell story finally broke in media, it was met with the same silence among Democrats and leftists that the media initially gave it. The same deadly silence that kept Gosnell in practice for years. Terminology was not the problem, what was done was. Even “fact-checkers” could not excuse it. So the answer was just do not talk about it.

But something else is also marked by that time frame of first, second and third trimester. That is the support for abortion according to trimesters. At late-term, only about 13% of people support it. So it sounds like she is the one with the language problem, everyone else knows what it is. Speaking of time, that dislike is consistently about the same since ’96 when they first began polling it. But blame it all on the words late-term abortion. Sigh.

Right Ring | Bullright

Abortion providers in their own words

Gosnell is only a symptom of the larger problem

Whether it is putting the baby in a jar of toxic fluids, or telling a woman to” flush it down the toilet” like waste, abortion providers are quick to espouse the solution. (remember Hitler and the final solution)

They make it sound as simple as pouring Drano into a clogged drain. That comes from people who could not care less about human life.

Babies drowned alive in toxic liquid

New, horrific discoveries in New York, Washington, D.C.
WND  (Listen to video at link)

A Pennsylvania jury will soon render a verdict on whether abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell murdered four babies who survived abortions as well as a woman who was one of his patients, but a new series of videos from Live Action suggest that Gosnell’s actions are not out of the mainstream.

Live Action President Lila Rose told WND her group has already released two videos showing abortion providers in New York City and Washington, D.C., explaining how they would do nothing to help a baby who survived an abortion to survive.

The 10-year Planned Parenthood adviser tells an undercover Live Action investigator that if she were to deliver her baby alive while at home between the stages in her two-day abortion, that she should just “flush it.” The female official also said that the woman definitely should not call a hospital because it wouldn’t help her since the abortion had already started. She further asserted that any surviving baby would die once it was submerged in a toxic solution inside a jar.

In Washington, Dr. Caesare Santanegelo admits that he is legally bound to help a baby who survived an abortion to stay alive – but that he would not. Santangelo said he would call 9-1-1 but do nothing on his own to save the child’s life. He also criticized Virginia hospitals for their policy of trying to save those lives.

“Gosnell is not alone. This investigation shows already those in the Bronx and in D.C., abortion workers talking about how they would commit infanticide and how this is either the tactic they would use, whether to expose the infant or put it in a jar of toxic solution so that it will stop breathing,” said Rose, who added that these first two videos are just the beginning of this series which she contends will repeatedly show abortion practitioners having detailed knowledge of exactly what they would do if a baby survives an abortion – a description that almost never follows the law.

The Gosnell trial was part of the motivation for this video series, but Rose said personal stories and cold statistics prove this situation plays out far more often than the pro-choice movement would have Americans believe.

“We’ve had our eye on the late-term abortion industry because of the stories that have emerged of victims that survived abortion attempts and then lived to tell about it or the stories of women who suffered or are even killed because of the abortion,” said Rose.

“Then we came across statistics like out of the U.K., where the study was done about one in 10 children in the late term survive their abortion attempt. This is because you’re inducing labor at this stage and the child, supposed to have been killed with forceps or poison, may come out alive,” she said.

While Rose would love to see proper enforcement of existing laws on late-term abortions in addition to new laws, she said real progress will come when abortion is no longer legal in America. She is also pushing hard against the conventional thought that having access to abortions empowers women.

“The abortion movement is built upon this false protection, supposedly, of women’s rights, but how does this support or empower women to have them involved in ghastly two to three-day procedures that literally rip their children from their wombs and endanger their physical and psychological health,” she said. “This is not good for women, just as this is clearly not good for our society because we’re killing our weakest children when they’re in their most vulnerable state.”

Rose said new videos could come in the next several days.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/babies-drowned-alive-in-toxic-liquid/#SEdh3OOKL6V1zs7R.99

Any questions? It kind of makes me wonder what they do for recreation?

H/T to Pepp for the article.