Killing Babies

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

The Democrat Party, when it comes to the abortion issue, from "legal but rare" to pushing for third trimester abortions (New York's new law) and infanticide.

Evil is the only word I can muster.

The progressives are being very progressive, as in becoming progressively worse.

When it comes to any evil endeavor of the liberal left commie Democrats, in the end all one has to do is follow the money.

Last year, according to Planned Parenthood's own reporting, the number of abortions the group did this past year increased by over 11,000 from 321,384 in 2016 to 332,757.  During that same time period the harbingers of death also report that their federal funding increased.  They received $543.7 million in taxpayer funding in 2016 and that number increased by $20 million to $563.8 million in 2017-2018.

The defenders of Planned Parenthood argue that the organization is not primarily about abortion, but about female reproductive health.  They argue that the Planned Parenthood offices provide contraception (The amount of contraception that the group provided continued to plummet from 2,701,866 in 2016 to 2,620,867 in this report).  They argue Planned Parenthood provides cancer screenings and prevention services, which also went down, from 660,777 in 2016 to 614,361 (as the number of abortions increased).

The category of “Other Women’s Health Services” which includes pregnancy tests, prenatal services, and miscarriage care, decreased from 1,315,941 in 2016 to 1,302,460 in 2017-2018.

The number of patients neither went up, or down.

So, the organization we are told is all about Women's Health Services has drastically reduced those services but abortion has gone up?

Abortion brings in the money.

The organization’s excess of revenue over expenses continued its dramatic increase and more than doubled from $77.5 million in 2015 and $98.5 million in 2016 to a whopping $244.8 million in 2017.

They keep arguing that they are about women's health care, but they keep showing us that they are all about killing babies.

The liberal left's support of late-term abortion has slammed the news reels, of late.  New York's latest law makes it perfectly fine to kill the baby during the third trimester, a time period during which the baby can survive outside the mother's womb.

Hillary Clinton, as the horror of late-term abortion became a mainstream issue supported by the Democrats under heavy criticism, tweeted in defense of the barbaric practice, highlighting the fact that “only about 1% of abortions happen later in pregnancy—almost always because a woman’s health or life is at risk, or the pregnancy is no longer viable.”

One is too many, and the "woman's health or life is at risk, or the pregnancy is no longer viable" is a false argument.  If the woman's health is at risk, why must the child be killed in an abortion?  Why can't the baby simply be birthed?  Babies are viable outside the womb in the third trimester, so rather than pull a dead baby out of mommy, why not a live baby?

Late-term abortions after 21 weeks do indeed make up only 1.3 percent of abortions annually, according to the most recently available 2014 data from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, however, that still comes to just over 12,000 abortions a year.

Additionally, it is not clear where Clinton is getting her claim that the reason is “almost always” the woman’s “health or life” as the Guttmacher Institute cited a study from 2013 that found “most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.”

She also implied President Trump misrepresented the issue in his State of the Union address, adding that “lying about this is dangerous, and a slap in the face to families who face heartbreaking situations.”

“There could be no greater contrast to the beautiful image of a mother holding her infant child than the chilling displays our Nation saw in recent days,” President Trump said last week. “Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments from birth. These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get the chance to share their love and their dreams with the world.”

According to LifeNews: He was referencing the measure that passed last month in New York which permits abortion at “any time” to protect “a patient’s life or health” and removes criminal penalties for abortion. 

The “life or health” stipulation is a broad and notoriously vague legal term that can be interpreted to even include mental health. 

“To defend the dignity of every person, I am asking the Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in the mother’s womb,” he said later in the address. 

Clinton linked to a New York Times article, claiming that Trump’s remarks had “inaccuracies and gray areas.” 

In reference to his claim about pain capable unborn babies, the article highlighted that “an analysis of research in this area published in JAMA in 2005 found that pain sensation requires neural connections into the cortex, and the cortex is not functionally developed until the 26th week or later.” 

It also pointed to a Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists review which found that “’the fetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior’ to 24 weeks.” 

However the article excludes any reference to a contradictory growing body of more recent scientific evidence showing that unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks, including a recent NIH-funded study which found that infants delivered at 22-24 weeks who received treatment had increasing rates of survival without any neurological impairment. 

Another study found that “60 percent of infants born at 22 weeks who receive active hospital treatment will survive.” 

The article also argued that “contrary to Mr. Trump’s claim, late-term abortions do not allow ‘a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth.’”
But aside from pointing out that “late-term abortion” is not technically a medical term and illustrating that abortion after 21 weeks is rare, it points to nothing to contest Trump’s claim. 

“When they occur, it is usually because the fetus has been found to have a fatal condition that could not be detected earlier, such as a severe malformation of the brain, or because the mother’s life or health is at serious risk,” the author claims without providing any evidence. 

While the article helpfully points out that the New York law is “similar to stipulations made by the Supreme Court” in allowing abortion past 24 weeks “if the fetus is not considered viable or if the procedure is considered necessary to protect the woman’s life or health,” that does not change the fact that the law does indeed allow an unborn baby to “be ripped from the mother’s womb moments from birth,” in these cases as Trump said.
Clinton’s tweet and Trump’s remarks are reminiscent of the exchange the two had on the issue during a 2016 debate when Trump argued that “with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby…now you can say that that’s okay, and Hillary can say that that’s okay, but it’s not okay with me.”

Planned Parenthood, and the Democrats, however, are going way beyond just late-term abortion.  They are now embracing infanticide.

While I agree that the federal government has no authority over the issue, a recent U.S. Senate vote on a piece of legislation, recently, said a lot.  (Congress should propose an amendment to the Constitution regarding abortion, not use legislation)

The Senate vote was on a piece of legislation that would stop infanticide and require appropriate medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after a failed abortion.  All but three Democrats voted to block the bill, refusing it to be given cloture (which would allow it to come out of debate).

The Democrats, one might say, have gone full evil.  Like Planned Parenthood, the Democrats believe that infanticide, like abortion, is reproductive health care for women. National Review obtained a copy of the letter indicating the Planned Parenthood abortion company opposes stopping infanticide. 

Here is an excerpt from the letter:

The letter calls the born-alive legislation “another restriction on women’s access to reproductive health care” and says it would limit women’s access to “compassionate and appropriate medical care.”

In its most eerie passages, the letter comes dangerously close to echoing Northam’s own rhetoric. Sasse’s bill, these groups say, “injects politicians into the patient-provider relationship, disregarding providers’ training and clinical judgment and undermining their ability to determine the best course of action with their patients.” And later: “Every woman needs to be able to make the decision that is best for her and her family.”

Including allowing a gasping baby laying on a table that could be saved to die a horrible death lying there, cold, alone, in a pool of blood and fluids?

As LifeNews reported, pro-abortion Senator Patty Murray blocked a vote on a bill from pro-life Republican Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska that would stop infanticide nationwide. And in the House, Democrats have blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a bill that would stop infanticide a total of five times. 

Earlier this month. Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse had wanted to vote on a bill to protect babies born alive after failed abortions.

All of this because New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law new legislation that allows abortions up to birth and after Virginia Governor Ralph Northam backed infanticide during a radio interview — saying that he’s perfectly content if doctors and parents discuss letting disabled babies die after birth.

This wreaks of Nazi Germany, and Molech (Moloch is the biblical name of a Canaanite god associated with child sacrifice. The name of this deity is also sometimes spelled Molech, Milcom, or Malcam. The name Moloch results from a dysphemic vocalisation in the Second Temple period of a theonym based on the root mlk, "king".  Moloch - Wikipedia)

How far are we from throwing live babies upon a flaming altar?

After she blocked the initial vote, EWTN reporter Jason Calvi caught up with Senator Patty Murray and asked her why she blocked the Senate bill to provide medical care for babies who are born alive. She said that is between a woman and her doctor.

Murray continued her false claims that the bill somehow has to do with abortion. All the bill does is ensure that babies who are purposely induced or survive abortions are provided appropriate medical care and treatment. She was unpersuaded by that information.

As I was stewing over this incredibly evil stuff, I then came across the following headline:

Abortion Worker Tells Woman Baby Will Drown In A Jar Of 'Solution' If Born Alive

Again, the only word I can muster for this is "evil".

The horrible account was revealed in a recently released undercover video by Live Action.

According to LifeNews, Live Action filmed the video as part of an undercover investigation in 2013 and circulated it while Congress recently debated the bill to protect newborn babies from infanticide.

"Our investigators exposed this New York abortion facility, which says they will put a born-alive baby in a jar of ‘solution’ to drown her," Live Action founder Lila Rose tweeted. "They also say to ‘flush’ the baby down the toilet, or ‘put it in a bag’ if she’s born alive."

The 2013 investigation had an undercover activist seek an abortion at 23 weeks of pregnancy at Emily’s Women’s Center in the Bronx.

The abortion worker tells the undercover woman in the video that abortion on a six-month-old fetus would be a two-day procedure; if the baby were born alive at any point, it could be drowned, suffocated, or poisoned.

"Like, what if it was, like, twitching, or something like that," the woman said in the video regarding the live baby.

"The solution will make it stop," replied the clinic worker. "It's not gonna be moving around in the jar. That's the whole purpose of the solution."

When the woman asked if the baby "looked like it was breathing," the clinic worker said the solution would prevent that from happening any further. The clinic worker later clarifies that the "solution" is a toxic substance designed to poison the baby.

Later the woman asks what were to happen if she gave birth to a live baby while at home; the clinic worker tells her to either "flush it" or "put it in a bag."

"If it comes out, then it comes out," the worker said. "Flush it … or put it in a bag."

The worker later advises her to not call the hospital since it would force her to give birth to a live baby.

How is this even a discussion?  How is it that there are people who actually support such barbarism?

There should be no controversy regarding this subject.  Murder is murder.  Killing babies is wrong.

Period.

It’s hard to believe anyone would oppose stopping abortion, and at the very least, stopping late-term abortion or infanticide.  Yet, here we are.

Remember what I wrote early on in this article about following the money?

James O'Keefe, a conservative undercover journalist, exposed the abortion industry for what it is really about . . . selling body parts of the dead babies . . . and his team was jailed over it.

The problem is, underdeveloped body parts have not been good enough.  The butchers that call themselves scientists are demanding more fully developed body parts, and the abortion industry is working to give them what they want.  After all, chopped up babies is huge business, and very lucrative for abortion mill organizations like Planned Parenthood.

The ACLJ, thankfully, gets it and is taking action.

The ACLJ delivered Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests to the New York Governor’s office as part of our multifaceted legal strategy to defend life and expose the political and financial agenda of the abortion industry.

The records are expected to show what is really happening behind the scenes.

The specific requests are regarding all records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by Governor Andrew Cuomo or his staff, Lt. Governor Kathy Hochul or her staff, or any other Executive Chamber appointee, staff, employee or agent, that are or concern in any way communications with any person or organization advocating for the Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Governor Cuomo on January 22, 2019, its passage, or the language of any provision contained in the Act at any stage of its development in the state legislature.
All records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by any Department of Health appointee, staff, employee or agent, that are or concern in any way communications with any person or organization advocating for the Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Governor Cuomo on January 22, 2019, its passage, or the language of any provision contained in the Act at any stage of its development in the state legislature.
All records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by Governor Andrew Cuomo or his staff, Lt. Governor Kathy Hochul or her staff, or any other Executive Chamber appointee, staff, employee or agent, that are from or regard any person at or on behalf of any Planned Parenthood entity; the National Institute for Reproductive Freedom (NIRF); NARAL Pro-Choice America; National Organization for Women New York (NOW); or, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) – and which relate to the Reproductive Health Act or its passage in any way.

All records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by Governor Andrew Cuomo or his staff, Lt. Governor Kathy Hochul or her staff, or any other Executive Chamber appointee, staff, employee or agent, that concern or regard in any way the impact that the Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Governor Cuomo on January 22, 2019, could, would, or should have on the health, safety or wellbeing of any woman.
All records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by any Department of Health appointee, staff, employee or agent, that concern or regard in any way the impact that the Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Governor Cuomo on January 22, 2019, could, would, or should have on the health, safety or wellbeing of any woman.
All records prepared, generated, forwarded, transmitted, sent, shared, saved, received, or reviewed by any New York agency that concern or in any way discuss the Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Governor Cuomo on January 22, 2019, which are not otherwise described in the requests set forth herein.

The ACLJ says that "The light of day must shine on the dark shadows of the abortion industry. The American people must see how extreme abortion advocates really are. Our records demands will help expose the political corruption of the culture of death."

"We expect New York bureaucrats to try to do what all bureaucrats try to do with freedom of information requests – especially when there is something to hide: stall, redact and deny. If and when they do, we will take them to court."

I believe, if enough stones are overturned, and the crooks and crannies of this are searched thoroughly, the money flow associated with baby body parts will be but a small part of the larger horrifying story.

It's just a matter of flipping the right stone.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary