It really is quite creepy how often the President has talked about abortion in relation to his daughters.
— ➡️Curt Jester⬅️ (@CurtJester) October 18, 2012
Candidate and President Obama has done this multiple times and most recently in the second presidential debate. Most famously he said that he didn’t want his daughters, “punished with a baby.” Equal opportunity has come to mean that women must become like men and not being able to get pregnant. Instead of the “sacred feminine” feminist will talk about it is more like the “scared feminine” where fecundity is a disease to be treated. A pregnancy is only good if it was fully intended with conditions such as right time, economic circumstance, and perhaps a Sun/Moon/Uranus conjunction.
Hearing statements from the President, Vice President, and their allies in the last couple of weeks show that part of the responsibility of a Democratic Party candidate is to proclaim the exceptionalism of Planned Parenthood. The President had previously said “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”, but his pride and support of Planned Parenthood is super patriotic in the sense of devotion and support. To be a modern day Democrat is to be a Planned Parenthood apologist.
It does seem that an organization that is so loved by Democrats is the one they seem to know so little about. The President repeated the lie that Planned Parenthood did mammograms – something that has been debunked multiple times. The Vice President even said “And now these guys pledge that they are going to defund Planned Parenthood, which under law cannot perform any abortion.” Well actually it is under law that they can’t perform mammograms since none of their clinics have a license to do so. The President and some ads from Democrats have also lied that a President Romney would reduce access to cancer screenings. Well Planned Parenthood can’t do cancer screenings, but they can prescribe you a class 1 carcinogenic in the form of hormonal contraceptions so that your chance of cancer is higher. Really the President seems to be an extension of Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project”.
“The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. And we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” (Margaret Sanger letter – 1939)
Rather odd that the one thing Planned Parenthood does the most of and makes the most money from is abortion and the non-coincidence that this is never brought up when it comes to taxpayer funding.
As I have mentioned before it is interesting that with all this focus on female contraception that “safe sex” is almost never even mentioned anymore. I guess all those sexually transmitted diseases, which are still increasing, are no longer a concern. Maybe if you want to create the narrative that birth control is prohibitively expensive you just don’t want to promote cheap condoms as policy. Though the Obama Administration was quite willing to flood Peru with cheap condoms. The whole safe sex meme was always a bad response and once again birth control was favored over self control as Chesterton reminded us.
The artificial neutering of women as a form of equality reminds me of the Gnostic “Gospel of Thomas” where the Gnostic Jesus says “Look, I will lead her that I may make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven.” The same goes for the liberal kingdom of heaven.
Recently a study showing that contraception reduces abortion rates has been much touted. The same people who say there is nothing morally wrong with abortion are saying this is a good thing. In the study they pushed implant forms of contraception along with IUDs. The reason abortion supporters have redefined conception to after implantation is so that abortion inducing products which prevent implantation by physical or chemical means can be ignored as causing abortions. Well I will wonder off the implantation and call this a lie. What the study is really saying is that they can reduce surgical abortions by means that sometimes induce early abortion. Regardless the argument that one intrinsic evil helps reduce another intrinsic evil is just not appealing to me. Just a form of contraceptive consequentialism.
Lydia McGrew at “What’s Wrong with the World” has a good article on the many other problems with this study.
Included in her post is something rather amazing about the timing of the study.
The results were so dramatic, in fact, that Peipert asked the journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology to publish the study before the Nov. 6 presidential election, knowing that the Affordable Care Act, and its reproductive health provisions, are major issues in the campaign.
“It just has so many implications for our society,” he told NBC News.
You hit on a number of critical arguments that need be brought to the fore – even if people cannot be convinced on moral arguments against abortion, it is hard to argue with carcinogens and Margaret Sanger’s genocidal tendencies.
I do have one issue on definitions that I think is important. You note that pills often cause early abortions, while pro-choice advocates suggest they prevent abortions. The fundamental problem is that, if I understand the medical definition of “abortion” correctly, it is considered the end of a pregnancy, which begins at implantation. So, choice advocates are technically correct and semantically hide behind this definition, all the while knowing that pro-lifers’ real objection is to the destruction of a human life, which begins at conception. The pro-life side has to figure out a succinct way to clarify the distinction.
(((Candidate and President Obama has done this multiple times and most recently in the second presidential debate. Most famously he said that he didn’t want his daughters, “punished with a baby.”)))
Jeff! After our Canadian Walk for life, we were invited for our daily fix of coffee and donuts. Anyway while I was enjoying our free coffee and donut, the speaker made a mistake and right after he finished speaking, I politely said out loud while everyone was listening including our priest saying, “IT’s” a good thing that you’re not perfect cause we’lld have to crucify you and every body laughed. Long story short, I spoke to this person concerning a bill to protect the Unborn in our Canadian parliament that was not passed. Anyway some how, Mr Obama’s name came into our conversation and as far as this person was concerned, your American president was 100% pro life and didn’t support abortion whatsoever.
My question for you is, are you really sure that Mr Obama didn’t also say that he would do all in his power to make sure that his daughter didn’t have an abortion if she got pregnant?
Let’s be careful of stones that we throw.
I hear ya folks! Any point to this Victor?
Just being a Canadian Ass pin, That’s all! 🙂
Wrong. When the topic is laws prohibiting circumsciscion (like in NYC), we talk about our sons. SAme difference.
Did you know that the original Black Panther Party in Oakland, CA used to picket the Planned Parenthood centers in black neighborhoods?