Star Parker - Planned Parenthood Targets Black Women

In 1854, Abraham Lincoln confronted America’s first “pro-choice” Senator, Stephen Douglas, in a speech in Peoria, Illinois.

“Choice” then was about slavery, not abortion.

Douglas sponsored the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which addressed the sticky question of how to deal with the legality of slavery in new territories entering the union. The Kansas-Nebraska Act resolved this by “choice.” Residents would vote to decide if slavery would be legal in their territory.

Lincoln challenged Douglas’s “pro-choice” position on slavery. According to Douglas, said Lincoln, “…the principle of the Nebraska Bill was very old; that it originated when God made man and placed good and evil before him, allowing him to choose for himself, being responsible for the choice he should make.”

No, said Lincoln. “God did not place good and evil before man, telling him to make his choice. On the contrary, he did tell him there was one tree, of the fruit of which he should not eat, upon pain of certain death.”

Our constitution, conveyed by the nation’s founders 65 years before Lincoln spoke those words, circumvented the question of slavery, permitting the great paradox of a nation founded on the ideals of freedom, which allowed slavery.

The struggle for racial justice in America – whether fighting slavery, or fighting for civil rights - has always been informed by absolute standards of right and wrong, of good and evil, that transcend even the cleverest human mind. Black history is testimony to where we wind up when those standards get lost.

Yet, once again, those standards have gotten lost. And, once again, black Americans are bearing the brunt of the cost of a nation that has lost its moral rudder. This time as result of wantonly legal and available abortion.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, blacks accounted for 35.4 percent of abortions performed in 2009, despite representing, according to the 2010 census, just 13.6 percent of the US population.

Let’s not be deluded that this is an accident.

Analysis of 2010 census data by an initiative called Protecting Black Life shows that 79 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics are located in walking distance of minority neighborhoods – 62 percent within 2 miles of primarily black neighborhoods and 64 percent of Hispanic/Latino neighborhoods.

Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, systematically targets minority women for abortion.

Before the Civil War, there were church going Americans who rationalized slavery by believing that blacks were less than human. This view was legally formalized in the US Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision.

It is not surprising that our first “pro-choice” Senator, Stephen Douglas, supported the Dred Scott decision.

Views echoing Dred Scott help rationalize Planned Parenthood’s targeted destruction of black children in the womb.

In 1957, Mike Wallace interviewed Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and asked her if she believed in sin.

Sanger, whose racist and eugenicist views are well documented, replied, “I believe the biggest sin in the world is parents bringing children into the world that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically. Delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things just marked when they are born.”

It is a sign of these dismally confused times that it was our first black president, Barack Obama, who, last week, became the first sitting American president to address Planned Parenthood.

In his address, the President did not use the word “abortion” once, nor was there a single reference to the current trial and murder charges against Philadelphia abortion Doctor Kermit Gosnell.

You’d think he was addressing Ronald McDonald House, not an organization that provided 333,964 abortions last year, disproportionately on black women.

Black unemployment and poverty rates are almost double the national averages. I suppose Planned Parenthood, with support from our president, and $542 million in taxpayer funds, feels it is doing its part to solve this problem.

Star Parker

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Lila Rose - Tamara Holder Debate Bronx Infanticide Undercover Video

Pro-life advocates will stage a protest at the office of a Washington, D.C. abortion practitioner who was exposed on an undercover video saying he would let a newly-born baby die who survived a failed abortion.

In a second undercover video Live Action has released in two days, another abortion clinic staffer acknowledges leaving babies to die following failed abortions. The videos show there are other abortion clinics, abortion practitioners and staff who, like Kermit Gosnell, would leave babies to die after failed abortions.

First, the pro-life group released a video showing an abortion facility staff member saying an unborn child born alive after a botched abortion should just be flushed down the toilet. In the second video, leading D.C. late-term abortion doctor Cesare Santengelo admits he would leave a baby struggling for life after a failed abortion to die.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Matt Barber - Kermit Gosnell Trial: Much Ado About Nothing

What’s the big deal?

I mean, why are we surprised that an abortionist and his staff would, behind the walls of an always-lethal abortion clinic, commit one of the most horrific serial killings in American history? What did you think abortionists do, heal people?

Why are we taken aback that there was no oversight, no regulation, or that Planned Parenthood, though privy to the clinic’s filthy, medieval conditions, refused to report it to the Department of Health? After all, Planned Parenthood, Barack Obama and the DNC have vehemently opposed all laws – such as those in Virginia, Mississippi and elsewhere – designed to prevent exactly the same kind of squalid conditions found in Gosnell’s clinic (and others), laws that simply direct abortion mills to meet the same minimal safety standards required of all other medical facilities.

You didn’t really buy that whole “women’s health” nonsense, did you?

Sucker.

Seriously, there are so few sociopathic doctors left willing to hack alive those inconvenient little buggers; so you anti-choice nuts need to just chill. Who cares about “blood smeared walls,” or babies left to drown in toilets, or snipped spinal cords, or dismembered body parts kept in jars, or screaming, crying newborns silenced by decapitation? What did you think women were “choosing” with abortion, some kind of medical treatment? We’re not removing a tumor here. You’ve got to kill a few babies to make a “reproductive freedom” omelette. Besides, there’s billions to be made in the death racket.

Let’s keep it real. The only difference between what happened in Gosnell’s Philadelphia clinic and what happens every day in Planned Parenthoods across the country can be measured by a matter of inches – by the child’s proximity to her mother in the room. Whether the baby is in the womb or 12 inches removed, a dead baby is a dead baby, right? So why all the drama? Relax. You know, Roe v. Wade and all.

Besides, what’s an abortionist to do (wink, wink) if that resilient little pest does survive, if she’s born alive? I appreciate President Obama’s candor on the matter. Like he said, laws preventing abortionists like Gosnell from finishing her off are “really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.” Snippety-snip, eh, Barack? You know, choice and all.

Or, as Gosnell attorney Jack McMahon noted during the trial, it’s “ludicrous … to say a baby is born alive because it moves one time.” You anti-choice zealots don’t get to define the terms here. One man’s “alive” is another man’s “unwanted pregnancy.” Potato, potahto.

And why are we stunned that the mainstream media have spiked a story with all the bloody and salacious newsworthy trappings that – had abortion not been involved – would have filled the news cycle 24/7?

You think some now-barren, 40-something copy editor who’s had five abortions wants to draw attention to its grisly reality? You think she wants to be reminded of her own string of dismembered little choices? No, better to sip appletinis with the boys down at the National Press Club and pretend it never happened. Now that’s reproductive freedom! That’s freedom of the press!

In reality, to the media, this stuff is old news. Gosnell is on trial for doing something nearly indistinguishable from partial-birth abortion – a “never necessary” procedure (according to the AMA) Obama vocally endorsed. He said that banning it was part of a concerted effort “to steadily roll back the hard-won rights of American women.”

Furthermore, why are we surprised that this rush-to-judgment-when-it-suits-his-political-agenda president suddenly “can’t comment” on Gosnell “because it’s an active trial”? Remember? This is the same race-baiting “community organizer” who said that Cambridge police “acted stupidly” when arresting a combative black Harvard professor who, as it turned out, was himself acting stupidly. Don’t forget; this is the same president who had no problem laying guilt on a “presumed innocent” George Zimmerman, saying, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Funny, I actually do have a son and, when he was born, he looked a lot like those little boys Gosnell and Planned Parenthood kill every day. Come to think of it, most of them looked almost identical to Trayvon, skin color and all.

Curious.

Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., called Obama out on his refusal to address Gosnell: “Mr. President, your silence on this issue is deafening,” he said.

I agree. The left’s silence – to include the mainstream media – speaks volumes. It’s a tacit endorsement of Gosnell’s gruesome practices. And why shouldn’t it be?

To “pro-choicers” it’s not that old Kermit did anything wrong; it’s just that he got caught doing it. He was careless. He pulled back the curtain of “reproductive freedom” to reveal abortion’s house of horrors. Kermit Gosnell is liberalism personified, and liberalism relies on deceit. The “progressive” culture is a culture of death. Moral relativism is as moral relativism does.

Speaking of moral relativism, on Friday the first sitting president in United States history gave the keynote address at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser. Nice timing. Even as the Gosnell mass-murder trial wraps up, Obama was lending the full weight of his presidency to a mass-murder celebration.

His message? All you Planned Parenthood-hating, anti-Gosnell right-wingers better listen up: “No matter how great the challenge, no matter how fierce the opposition, there’s one thing that the past few years have shown,” he promised. “That Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere. It’s not going anywhere today. It’s not going anywhere tomorrow.”

Yeah, we’ll see about that, slick.

Matt Barber

Matt Barber served as Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America before joining Liberty University School of Law in 2008. In addition to his Juris Doctorate degree, Dean Barber holds a Master of Arts in Public Policy from Regent University and a Bachelor of Science in Organizational Management from Colorado Christian University.

Matt Barber is a published freelance writer, many newspapers and online publications run his columns, including the Washington Examiner, Washington Times, Insight magazine, WorldNetDaily.com, TownHall.com and many others.

Matt Barber was a law enforcement officer for three years and a corporate fraud investigator for five years.

Matt Barber served twelve years in the Army National Guard, and was an undefeated professional boxer, retiring in 2004. Several times prior to turning pro, he was a state and regional Golden Gloves champion, competing in the 1992 Western Olympic Trials and winning a Gold Medal in the 1993 Police and Fire World Games.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Andrew Klavan - The Hilarious World of Abortion

With a debate about the public funding of Planned Parenthood brewing, it's time to have a serious discussion about abortion.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Kevin McCullough - Barack Hussein Gosnell

President Obama continues to break barriers in his historical Presidency.

Some of them infamous barriers, but he breaks them nonetheless.

This past Friday was just such an occasion. Because, to my knowledge, for the first time, a sitting President brought the full weight of the office he holds face to face in support of an organization that killed 339,000 American children, the last year we have records for.

Not only that President Obama beamed proudly, as he congratulated the "good work" this organization has done (while killing 339,000 children a year), and pledged continued support from you and me--the American tax-payer--to do so. In fact in Friday morning's speech he seemed to imply that if any of us objected to our tax dollars being used to burn, chop, and stab children to death, that we were from some throwback era. He implied we were stuck in fact in the 1950's.

I guess he picked that decade because it was still illegal to burn, chop, and stab children to death--much less get paid to do so with tax-payer dollars then.

Oh and did I mention--we gave this organization just shy of one half billion dollars to burn, chop, and stab those children to death.

See Planned Parenthood touts cancer screenings, but Lila Rose proved they don't do mammograms. They claim they are improving the health of women, but they have become the biggest cemetery of unborn women in history. They say they give women choices--which they interpret to mean--encourage them to be as promiscuous as possible. Planned Parenthood may be many things, but helpful to women, is not one of them--so says every woman I've ever spoken to on the matter.

But that didn't stop President Obama: "You've also got a president who's going to be right there with you, fighting every step of the way."

Fighting what Mr. President? Fighting to defend innocent children as they struggle to survive? Fighting to protect baby boys and girls who 100% of the time would choose to live rather than be snipped at the base of their brain stem?

Simultaneous to President Obama's big appearance the relatively unnoticed trial of Kermit Gosnell continued in Philadelphia.

You may not know anything about it because the main networks have purposefully chosen to ignore a trial that includes 300 plus bodies of dead children, jars of pickled feet, children struggling, gasping, crying out for life, only to in fact have a cold piece of steel slice their brain stem and immediately fall silent.

See Mr. Gosnell is on trial for the murder of at least eight children and one woman because he had an instance or two of malpractice in his procedure office.

Well in Planned Parenthood's 100+ years there have been far more women who have died from exactly the same cause, and the number of children killed in their procedure offices is Gosnell's total multiplied hundreds of thousands of times (in just the last year we have on record.)

What is also stunning is the abject racial self-loathing it must require for President Obama and Kermit Gosnell to directly and unequivocally contribute to an organization and "medical" practices that were set up by design to extinguish the people with their same color of skin.

Margaret Sanger--Planned Parenthood's founder--argued in articles such as "The Eugenic Conscience" (February 1921) that sterilizing the "unfit" Negro was her "plan of Salvation" for the American civilization.

Evidently President Obama and Kermit Gosnell strongly agree with that racial "solution." Their actions certainly demonstrate as much.

The truth is Kermit Gosnell's house of horrors where he burned, chopped, snipped, and stabbed babies to death, is very little different than the Planned Parenthood "super-sized" abortion mills. Very little different indeed.

The truth is that both Planned Parenthood and Kermit Gosnell prey upon mostly immigrant minority women and while President Obama trots out Sandra Fluke to yell "squirrel" about contraception, and has attempted to force those of us who have a moral objection to providing money to those who will burn, chop, snip and stab babies, the smoke screen never fools the children who always end up dead.

Thinking about it from the moral arguments in fact, if Planned Parenthood is providing tremendous "health services for women" by way of killing 339,000 children (of which half of them are likely to be female), than Kermit Gosnell should be in the women's health care hall-of-fame. He did it for the poorest, and those with the least amount of resources, and at least most of the women walked out alive. Only a few ended up at the hospital to get sutures redone.

Yes President Obama, Planned Parenthood, and Kermit Gosnell, unified for the cause of women's health--so long as you define children as removable tumors.

You're just unlikely to see President Obama showing up at Kermit Gosnell's side to tell him he'll be fighting alongside him every step of the way.

Kevin McCullough

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays (7-9am EST) & "Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11pm EST) on 289 stations & Sirius/XM . His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change" is in stores now.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Daniel Greenfield - Violence On Their Behalf

Originally Published on the Sultan Knish blog

---

Somewhere toward the end of "A Few Good Men" comes the only scene from the movie that anyone actually remembers. It's the one where Jack Nicholson in a uniform begins chewing the scenery and turns a dreary Aaron Sorkin adaptation of an Aaron Sorkin play into a memorable movie while inflicting Sorkin on the entertainment industry for the next two decades.

The familiar thesis of Nicholson's Colonel Jessup is that he does what needs to be done and what no one wants to talk about needing to be done. His existence may be "grotesque and incomprehensible to you", but he does the ugly things that make it possible for everyone to go about their day.

The speech is an extended wordy distillation of a familiar quote that was variously attributed to Churchill or Orwell. "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

In the urban battlefield of Philly, one of those rough men doing violence on behalf of liberal ideas was a Thomas Jefferson University grad by the name of Kermit Gosnell. Gosnell was one of those unsung heroes doing the dirty work that allowed the activists putting on another round of the Vagina Monologues sleep safely in their beds at night.

Most supporters of military intervention don't like looking at photos of dead children after a bombing raid. They will contend that they are a fact, but not the point. Gosnell's butcher shop is similarly a fact, rather than the point. Pro-choice activists will argue that it is not representative of abortion clinics. And it isn't.

It is representative of what abortion looks like once you cut through the upper layer of the medical services provided to Sarah Lawrence grads and down to the street level of the lower strata that don't visit abortion clinics to assert their reproductive empowerment, but because the family unit is broken and they are trying to escape the same cycle of broken families that they can never leave behind.

Kermit Gosnell wasn't running an Aaron Sorkin abortion clinic. He was running a Colonel Jessup abortion clinic.

Margaret Sanger got her start setting up shop in Jewish and Italian neighborhoods because those were the two groups that the upper strata of the day thought were having too many children. Back then it was supposed to be about wives overburdened with too many children. Now it's about families that never existed where the abortions don't happen at the clinic, those are just the final expressions of a larger societal abortion that took place when the family died.

Abortion is the final act of the death of the family. It pretends to solve the problem that arises from the absence of the family. The first abortion kills marriage. The last abortion kills the child that might have come from a marriage that never existed.

The family isn't dead everywhere. It's more likely to be dead in the places that men like Gosnell do business than the places where the policymakers and the non-profits who dress up destruction as empowerment do business.

Most arsonists don't set their own houses on fire. Most liberal policies don't affect liberals. And that's true in the family sphere where the liberals in the top 1 percent are more likely to have a stable marriage than the bottom 1 percent bleeding in Gosnell's house of reproductive freedom because their dead baby does not have and will not have a father.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell was doing the dirty work of the liberal state by cleaning up some of the mess. It was bloody and murderous work, but it was made necessary by the sort of people who talk about reproductive freedom while little realizing how little freedom the women who bled, and sometimes died, in Gosnell's offices really had.

The issue isn't as simple as Pro-Choice. Abortion is just the conclusion of the sordid package of social liberalism. The package begins with sex ed, complete with the obligatory LGBT mentions, runs through national STD infestations, hookup culture, single parenthood and packs of young men and women recreating the mistakes of the parents they never had and then flushing those mistakes down the toilet before settling down with three kids, by different fathers who are never around, and a package of subsidies from the welfare state administered by social workers who have seen it all.

It's not the story for everyone, but for many of the women who found and find their way to places like Gosnell's butcher shop, that is their story. It's not a story about abortion. It's a story about what happens when you replace the family with free love that turns out to be neither free nor love. Like teaching first graders sex ed or handing out condoms on the street, abortion is one of the ways that the liberal state tries to limit the fallout from its destruction of the family.

The fallout is ugly and bloody. You can see it in the packs of angry teenage flash mobs smashing through stores. You can see it in the food stamp cards that mothers tote like coupons, the teen domestic abuse hotline posters hanging around neighborhoods "If he respects you, he won't beat you" and the other posters of frightened pregnant teenagers holding their stomachs and whispering, "I don't want to lose my dream."

The end of that long brutal journey through black eyes, plans for a GED and medical tests at the clinic is one of Dr. Gosnell's slabs. The men and women who made Kermit Gosnell's business boom don't want to look at him. Why would they? How many people wanted to look at William Calley? They are satisfied knowing that somewhere rough men in latex gloves are doing violence of the world they made. The world they unmade.

They are beginning to claim Gosnell's story already and remake it into another drama about the lack of access. More money must be given to Planned Parenthood so that no Dr. Gosnell's happen again. Reform and accountability are key. More money must go to groups that promote the lifestyles that lead to abortion and then dispense abortions so that the whole cycle can continue to expand. The babies have to be destroyed to save the next generation of babies from being punished with babies.

But the Gosnells aren't going anywhere. They are everywhere. Sometimes they're Middle Eastern. Other times they're Chinese or Pakistani. Their medical skills are poor, but it's not because they're stupid, it's because they don't care. They set up shop in poor neighborhoods. The philosophy is fast food. In and out. Maximize patients. Maximize cash. The treatment is sloppy but so are the patients and no one cares because there is a separate waiting room for the white patients.

Often they work the Medicaid/Medicare angle where they defraud the government, ordering endless tests from clinics they have relationships with while offering the lowest standard of care possible. And some cash in on the abortion business. Patients aren't people to them. They're wallets or insurance cards with eyes, teeth, bones, genitalia, muscles and any other parts that they can bill for.

It's easy to take a whack at them, but vultures only gather where there is carrion. The Gosnells are vultures. They will eat what they can, gorge themselves on bloody meat and then waddle in the sun. But they didn't make this world where family is becoming an alien concept and a child is an alien fetal parasite. They are just cashing in on it.

Kermit Gosnell is the future. And the future in places like this is ugly and grim. It's broken families living on social welfare creating more broken families. It's dead children whose murder churches and synagogues are forced to pay for. It's living children who grow up hoping to be able to kill. It's feral packs of lost boys who will never be men and the girls who suddenly become women reading an ad and taking a bus down to 3801 Lancaster Avenue because they're lonely and afraid and they're afraid of losing their dreams, even if they don't know what they are anymore.

This is the world that liberalism made. It is small, mean and ugly. Call it Sex Positive Education or Reproductive Freedom or any other euphemism and out of sight of the specialized study sessions at overpriced colleges, it still ends with mothers towing screaming children down the street, going to church on Sundays even though they don't believe and there are hardly any younger men there and others mothers becoming girls again at Dr. Gosnell's hands.

Kermit Gosnell will be locked up. There will be a brief spurt of inspections. And then things will go on as before and the empowerment educators who wear "I Had an Abortion" t-shirts while they drive to the soccer games of their children in some placid suburb will sleep well at night knowing that somewhere in Philly, NYC and LA there are rough men doing violence to the wombs of desperate women and the lives of their unborn children on behalf of their ideologies and policies. Rough men in dark places doing he inevitable dirty work in the world they made.

Daniel Greenfield

Visit Daniel's Blog Sultan Knish by clicking HERE

Daniel Greenfield is a blogger and columnist born in Israel and living in New York City. Daniel is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a contributing editor at Family Security Matters.

Daniel's original biweekly column appears at Front Page Magazine and his blog articles regularly appear at Family Security Matters, the Jewish Press, Times of Israel, Act for America and Right Side News, as well as daily at the Canada Free Press and a number of other outlets. Daniel has a column titled Western Front at Israel National News and his op eds have also appeared in the New York Sun, the Jewish Press and at FOX Nation.

Daniel was named one of the Jewish Press' Most Worthwhile Blogs from 2006-2011 and his writing has been cited by Rush Limbaugh, Melanie Philips, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Judith Klinghoffer, John Podhoretz, Jeff Jacoby and Michelle Malkin, among others.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Michael Brown - Planned Parenthood Confirms its Baby-Killer Status

In testimony that shocked Florida legislators, a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood explained that “her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.” But what else should we expect from an organization that has made countless millions of dollars off the killing of unborn babies?

As reported March 29, 2012 by the Weekly Standard, these legislators were “considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion,” similar to the Born Alive Protection Act that Barack Obama voted against four times before he was president.

Rep. Jim Boyd was so taken aback by the testimony of Alisa LaPolt Snow, the Planned Parenthood lobbyist, that he said to her, “So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief. If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”

She replied, “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

What? The baby survives an abortion in a Planned Parenthood clinic and is fighting for its life, and Planned Parenthood isn’t willing to say, “Yes, we want to see the baby’s life saved”? Of course not. If it was up to the mother and doctor to terminate the baby’s life inside the womb, why not continue the barbaric act outside the womb?

Rep. Jose Oliva, also incredulous, asked Snow, “You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”

Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider,” to which Oliva rightly countered, “I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?”

Snow was obviously caught off guard and could only reply, “That’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that. I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”

In other words, even I can’t pretend to defend my own ridiculous position here.

And what would Planned Parenthood say about the actions of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell? He was charged “with murdering seven babies born alive and with the death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar, who died during an abortion in November of 2009.”

Specifically, these were “seven recently born babies whose necks were stabbed with scissors and whose spinal cords were slit” by Gosnell. But if we follow the rationale of Planned Parenthood, what did he do that was so terrible? After all, the mother wanted to terminate her baby’s life and the doctor simply made sure it happened, inside or outside the womb. Why should he face criminal charges? (We’re not discussing Gosnell’s alleged involvement in the death of Karamaya Mongar.)

Remarkably, earlier this year, “a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University” published an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics arguing that, “Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are ‘morally irrelevant’ and ending their lives is no different to abortion.” (This is not a fabricated story.)

According to the article, “newborn babies are not ‘actual persons’ and do not have a ‘moral right to life’. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.”

This would include a baby born with Downs Syndrome whose condition had not been diagnosed by prenatal testing? By all means, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, the authors of the article argue, the parents should have the right to kill the baby. (I’m literally getting chills of disgust as I type these words.)

And these are “medical ethicists” linked to Oxford University, not Nazi doctors linked to the Third Reich (although they might well have served Hitler with distinction with “ethics” like this).

Giubilini and Minerva concluded that “what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.” Yes, kill a healthy, unwanted baby too!

Not surprisingly, “The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics [and a colleague of the two authors], said the article’s authors had received death threats since publishing the article,” which is completely understandable although not justifiable.

But rather than saying he had made a terrible error by publishing such dangerous – literally, murderous – drivel, Savulescu stated that “those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were ‘fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society.’”

This is perverted academic arrogance at the highest (really lowest) imaginable level, but the professor simply stated directly what Planned Parenthood’s Alisa LaPolt Snow wasn’t willing to say: Only fanatics oppose our good work, and we are committed to taking the lives of unwanted babies. So if we can’t finish the job in the womb, we’re happy to do so outside the womb.

God help us.

Dr. Michael Brown

Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and is the author of 20 books. He has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Rush Limbaugh - Planned Parenthood - Hooking Kids on Sex

On the Rush Limbaugh radio program, Rush discusses American Life League's popular ALL Report 'Hooking Kids on Sex' mentioned in a Washington Times column on March 26, 2013.

WARNING: Explicit Graphic Sexual Images

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Planned Parenthood endorses post-birth abortion

The Weekly Standard reports:

Florida legislators considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion were shocked during a committee hearing this week when a Planned Parenthood official endorsed a right to post-birth abortion.

Alisa LaPolt Snow [pictured right] the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.

“So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief,” said Rep. Jim Boyd. “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”

“We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician,” said PP lobbyist Snow.

Rep. Daniel Davis then asked Snow, “What happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving. What do your physicians do at that point?”

“I do not have that information,” Snow replied. “I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”

Rep. Jose Oliva followed up, asking the Planned Parenthood official, “You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”

Again, Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider.”

Florida HB1129 defines the term “born alive” almost as the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 did. An amendment to HB1129 added the federal BAIPA’s “neutrality clause.”

But HB1129 went further than the federal BAIPA by adding, as the sponsor testified (beginning at 11:02) during the committee hearing:

1. Parity, that regardless of how a born alive infant entered the world – natural birth, c-section, or abortion – s/he shall be treated with the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence. The bill provided that a born alive baby would immediately be transported to a hospital.
2. “Infant born alive” becomes a reportable item.
3. Surrender – “A work in progress,” according to the sponsor, The bill’s language originally assumed the baby was not wanted, since the mother had just paid to have him or her killed, and should be immediately surrendered to the state. The sponsor said an amendment was being crafted for the unique circumstance when an abortion was necessary for the health of the mother, which meant mean she likely would still want the infant born alive and give it loving care.

It was into this bill language mix that PP lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow stepped in.

The problems PP had with the bill were providing care, transport, and surrender.

The former two are problems state Sen. Barack Obama had with a separate companion bill (page 33) to Illinois’ Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which for all intents and purposes was saying the same thing, that medical care of abortion survivors was to be taken out of the hands of the doctor who had been paid to kill them:

[A]n additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make thee assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion….

Obama agreed with Snow that, regarding the care of abortion survivor, as Snow testified, “any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

Barack Obama fought the BAIPA (Born Alive Infant Protection Act) in Illinois with all the power he could muster.
Why? Ask Barack Obama

Life After Abortion

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Andrew Klavan - The World of Abortion

With a debate about the public funding of Planned Parenthood brewing, it's time to have a serious discussion about abortion.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - Obama and Der Führer

Daring to suggest that there may be even a remote similarity between Barack Obama and Adolf Hitler is considered by many to be a comparison that is extreme. But ever since the president acted unilaterally and chose to push through his $500 million anti-gun package with its 23 executive orders while surrounded on all sides by young children, there is one parallel that makes Barack Obama’s interaction with youngsters similar to that of Germany’s Führer, Adolf Hitler.

In their nearly identical fondness for staged expressions of compassion about issues affecting their citizens, both men posed with children in one location while sanctioning their murder in another. Therefore, when it comes to the exploitation of little ones, it should not be considered irreverent to weigh the president’s calculating tendencies against those of Der Führer

In fairness, it must be said that it is common for most politicians to use children as accoutrements to advance a given agenda. Notorious totalitarian dictators like Mao and Stalin did it, and Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro still do it too.

On occasion, former president G.W. Bush was known to include children in policy-based photo ops – but he did it to advance pro-life policies that supported the dignity and sanctity of life. Adolf Hitler’s intent was quite the opposite. Germany’s leader exploited certain children for propaganda purposes, and did so while other children he believed were subhuman were being executed.

Therefore, during the first phase of the dismantling of the Second Amendment, when Barack Obama pretended to take counsel from four schoolchildren, in essence what he was doing was chillingly similar to what Hitler did. Why? Because at the White House while the President was advocating for child safety, in abortion mills across the nation clinicians were carrying out the grisly work he supports.

After the Sandy Hook shootings, as well as at the White House signing of his two dozen Executive Actions, NARAL 100-percenter Barack Obama shared with Americans the following words: “This is our first task as a society, keeping our children safe. This is how we will be judged.” Adolf Hitler said similar things; in Mein Kampf, Der Führer declared that the “folkish state…must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people.”

The problem with both those statements is that during the height of World War II, while Hitler posed for photographs with tow-headed liebchens, his minions were busy “grabbing the legs and smashing the skulls of living babies” against the sides of cattle cars. For Adolf Hitler, his young targets were Jewish children below the age of 12. For “Above My Pay grade” Barack Obama, it’s pre-born, partially born, and born-alive babies of any race, creed, or color.

At the White House signing of his anti-gun executive orders, while Obama passed out awkward hugs to children who, no thanks to him, somehow managed to get out of the womb alive, abortion providers across the country were sucking the brains out of living, partially-born infants.

According to Ian Kershaw, professor of modern history at the University of Sheffield, Adolf Hitler initiated and demanded the killing by gassings, shootings, and beatings. Yet much like Barack Obama, Der Führer managed to keep his hands clean by remaining “aloof from the dirtiest work of his regime.”

In America, eighty years after Germany was defeated, national teams of well-funded Planned Parenthood SS squads scald, dismember, and suction pre-born infants to death. As with Hitler’s “Final Solution,” the ongoing American Holocaust has Barack Obama’s political and financial support. That is why, although the hand that recently high-fived an 8-year-old girl in public is a hand drenched in innocent blood.

In pursuit of an Aryan race, it took Adolf Hitler six years to exterminate six million Jews, millions of whom were babies and young children. Barack Obama, on behalf of freedom of choice, endorses and funds the mass destruction of 1.2 million pre-born infants per year.

In the end, despite the harsh nature of the Hitler/Obama comparison, when it comes to the simultaneous exploitation and extermination of tiny children there is not much difference between history’s most famous master race-maker and America’s master guardian of state-sanctioned genocide.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Star Parker - Roe v Wade - Forty Years After

The number forty has great significance in the Bible.

Perhaps best known is the forty years that the Israelites were condemned to wander in the desert before being permitted entry into the Promised Land.

Maybe this mystical quantity will bear significance as we note, this month, the fortieth year since the Roe v Wade decision legalized abortion in America.

Forty years we have lived with the silent, and sometimes not so silent, holocaust in our midst as the lives of 55 million innocent and unborn children have been killed, plucked from their journey to enter this world.

Who were they? Who would they have become?

The unmarried graduate student who gave birth to hi-tech impresario and co-founder of Apple, Steve Jobs, may well have aborted this child had her pregnancy occurred in 1973 rather than 1955.

This past week former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, recovering victim of a crazed gunman, visited, along with her husband Mark Kelly, Newtown, Connecticut, site of the latest horrible shooting incident.

In their public remarks, they expressed concern that our society has become “desensitized to acts of violence.”

Appropriate words, I think, that certainly should be considered in the broadest possible sense in our effort to grasp our willingness to tolerate, even nurture, the open and flourishing presence of evil in our society.

It takes a deadening of the soul to permit this, a state of being “desensitized.”

We know it because when those senses are awakened, our indifference and willingness to tolerate evil is pushed back.

When William Wilberforce fought to abolish the slave trade in England, he moved a boatload of the elite into proximity of a slave ship to smell the stench. Their senses were awakened and a major step forward was achieved to end the horror.

Reformed slave trader John Newton composed “Amazing Grace,” with the unforgettable line “Was blind but now I see.”

If there is good news, it is that, slowly, America seems to be coming to its senses regarding destruction of unborn children.

This week’s Time Magazine cover story announces “40 years ago abortion-rights activists won an epic victory with Roe v Wade: They’ve been losing ever since.”

But in noting that ultrasound has reduced the willingness of Americans to tolerate abortion, author of the story Kate Pickert misses the key point when she writes, “Thanks to prenatal ultrasound, Americans now understand what a fetus look like and that babies born as early as 24 weeks can now survive.”

The key point is that the graphic ultrasound picture, showing the growing and moving fetus, has raised awareness that this unborn child is alive and that abortion is murder.

Ultrasound is sensitizing a desensitized American public that has been willing to tolerate this horror over these forty years.

Wars are not won overnight. Victory is achieved battle by battle.

Wilberforce did not stop slavery, but he stopped the slave trade.

Lincoln’s first aspiration was not total abolishment of slavery in America, but making it illegal in new entrants to the Union.

A battle before us now, as the American soul awakens to the evil of abortion, is to end the expropriation of US taxpayer funds, which now provide almost half the budget of the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.

According to Rep. Marsha Blackburn(R-Tenn), Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report shows receipt of $542 million from US taxpayers. This is outrageous, particularly when every other day we witness a new confrontation in Washington to find ways to cut our trillion-dollar budget deficit.

Rep. Blackburn has introduced legislation to end this funding to large abortion providers. Every American should support this and help win this battle.

And we must continue to work to win the war and awaken the American soul, so that forty years after Roe v Wade we bring an end to the scourge of legal abortion in America.

Star Parker

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - Barack Obama, Planned Parenthood, and pictures of one million dead

Originally posted at Live Action News

---

Recently, Barack Obama’s most beloved purveyor of choice, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, released their 2011-2012 annual report. The organization’s current data is printed on a well-designed, brightly colored pamphlet. On the Affiliate Medical Services page, along with a corresponding pie chart, is a gray slice of pie that represents the 1/3-of-a-million living human beings the organization exterminated just last year.

Obama and Planned Parenthood

The statistics cite figures which claim that in fiscal year 2011, 333,964 babies were destroyed. That is an impressive figure even in abortion-on-demand circles, especially for those who work tirelessly to convince America that pap smears are Planned Parenthood’s specialty.

Yet despite the bad economy, Planned Parenthood touts assets totaling $1.2 billion, $542.4 million of which comes from “government health services grants and reimbursements,” including “payments from Medicaid managed care plans.” In other words, whether pro-life Americans like it or not, tax dollars are helping facilitate the unfettered slaughter of preborn children.

There is no denying that thanks to eroding morals, an obliging president, and ample government funding, feticide continues to prosper. Between 2011 and 2012, the death factory disguised as a women’s healthcare provider served orange juice and crushed ice to 333,964 women after slicing, dicing, and suctioning helpless babies from inhospitable wombs.

During the previous year, Planned Parenthood clinic workers only emptied 329,445 empty juice cups into the red biohazard bags already occupied by 329,445 dead babies. In the death-for-profit business, the addition of 4,519 tiny corpses is an admirable uptick worth celebrating.

As for the realm of celebrity representatives, if Planned Parenthood held a fundraising telethon, their main shill President Barack Obama would be the organization’s own version of Jerry Lewis. Coincidentally, from 2009 to 2012, in the three years that Obama’s presence had been gracing the Oval Office and with his hearty endorsement, Planned Parenthood memorialized his historic presidency by executing 995,687 innocents. That’s nearly one million helpless unborn children coldly denied the right to life.

One million is a big number, and in honor of Obama’s second term, one million is exactly the amount of dollars the president is requesting rich donors contribute to his upcoming inaugural celebration, or, for the mathematically challenged, about one dollar per baby aborted by Planned Parenthood during his first term.

In the meantime, while Americans spend time trying to figure out just how many dollars those millionaires actually make, Planned Parenthood is busily going about the work of slaughtering perfectly healthy pre-term infants.

Even still, Planned Parenthood continues to insist that abortion does not make up the bulk of their industry because, according to them, killing a paltry one million babies per three-year interval is modest at best. Maybe the problem is that the abortion giant is so busy dispatching the unborn that they can’t take the time to figure out what 1,000,000 really means.

Lest we forget, one million is 1000 X 1000. If one million sports fans gathered together, they could fill 62.5 16,000-seat arenas. A million days is 2,740 years. A million miles is 40 times around the circumference of the earth. Sixteen miles equals approximately one million inches. A million pennies weighs 10,000 pounds, or as much as a circus elephant. If you counted at a rate of once per second it would take about 11 full days to count to one million, and if it were little babies you were counting, every 94 seconds would represent another life being snuffed out in a friendly downtown Planned Parenthood clinic.

For those who care, in order to understand the magnitude of one million, talking dots, pennies, seconds, years, miles and filling football stadiums does provide some context. However, when it comes to abortion, the figure one million represents very real, very dead human beings.

To put one million into a people perspective, let’s just say that if the entire population of San Jose, California, or 945,942 people, were to be wiped out in an earthquake, how would America react if the victims were recorded as cold numbers on a carnival-colored page with a Ferris-wheel pie chart to chronicle the event?

Even more deceitful and disturbing is that the left and their liberal president dismiss the purposeful termination of one million people as a mere pittance. But when a disturbed individual with a gun massacres 20 first graders, Americans are asked to take seriously President Obama’s dismay over the deaths of children whose disposal he would have funded had they been in the womb instead of a classroom.

In the end, Planned Parenthood’s 2011-2012 annual report is quite informative. What it proves is that last year, Barack Obama’s dearly-loved abortion mill staffed their clinics with conscience-free sociopaths, outfitted them in blue scrubs, and provided them with the stainless steel weapons needed to take the lives of many more children than a lone madman with a loaded gun ever could.

PLEASE VISIT AND SUPPORT LIVE ACTION an organization dedicated to the sanctity of life.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - What You Didn’t Know About Your Neighborhood

Originally posted at American Thinker

---

One of the most stunning attributes of liberalism today is duplicity. What other group uses legality as a basis to defend exterminating the unborn, yet when it comes to owning a handgun, legality becomes irrelevant?

From the White House to Your House, the push is now on to paint gun owners in a negative light and clearly, it’s working. For example, in an effort to better serve New York’s Westchester and Rockland Counties, the Gannett-owned Journal News took it upon itself, without notifying the affected parties, to make public all the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of residents in the area with registered handguns.

The Journal News was so concerned about informing its readership of the prospective danger gun owners pose that it published a detailed interactive map with red and blue dots pinpointing the location of residents licensed to own pistols or revolvers and permit holders who “have purchased a firearm or updated the information on a permit in the past five years.”

Until recently, it was thought assault weapons were the menace. Now, owning a gun, any gun, is right up there with committing a sex crime. The Journal News’ address listing might as well have been a sex offender registry because gun stigma is now running a close second to being a convicted pedophile. The only difference is that in the gun owner’s case, no crime was committed.

Janet Hasson, publisher and president of the Journal News Media Group, defended making the databank information available when she said:

"One of our roles is to report publicly available information on timely issues, even when unpopular. We knew publication of the database (as well as the accompanying article providing context) would be controversial, but we felt sharing information about gun permits in our area was important in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings."

For Ms. Hasson, publishing names, addresses, and telephone numbers wasn’t enough. It sounds as if Ms. Hasson is highly suspicious that every gun owner in America is a prospective Adam Lanza.

The disappointed newspaper publisher/president said that in the “aftermath of the Newtown shootings” her newspaper had “wanted to publish even more information.” Maybe Janet feels the drive-by harassers she has already provided with directions to private residences would have also appreciated the political affiliation of all Rockland and Westchester County gun owners.

The Florida-based school for journalists, the Poynter Institute, disagrees with Journal News’ tactics.

According to a Poynter Institute faculty member, “Unwarranted publishing of the names of permitted owners just encourages gun owners to skip the permitting.” That means that thanks to the newspaper’s irresponsible actions, in order to maintain anonymity normally upstanding citizens may be driven to illegal gun ownership.

Despite the controversy, many defenders of the Journal News took to Twitter to express their anti-gun approval. One Tweet said: “The gun permit maps are an effective way of showing how horribly widespread gun ownership is.” Excuse me, but “horribly?” Another relieved parent thanked the Journal News, saying, “Please thank them. This could be a turning point. I do not want my daughter playing in a house with guns.” Earth to Mom: kids have been known to drown in toilets, so are houses with bathrooms a problem too?

What is stunning about all this is the duplicitous left backing private information being made public. Apparently, in “right-to-privacy” circles, confidentiality only applies when it comes to the names, addresses, and phone numbers of individuals spotted at Rockland and Westchester abortion clinics.

And here’s where the deceit really kicks in. Aren’t these the usual suspects who scream “intimidation” when an old grandma spends her mornings praying the rosary outside an abortion clinic?

If, as Janet Hasson contends, “timeliness and popularity” surrounding an issue determines whether private information should be made public, wouldn’t it be wonderful if Journal News could also provide all pro-life members of the community the names and addresses of those seen at the local Planned Parenthood clinic? After all, having a gun owner live next door is certainly a concern to anti-gun people, but to anti-abortion people, having a neighbor who’s had an abortion living on the other side of the fence generates a ton of anxiety too.

Therefore, in lieu of a public database, the only hope that an intrepid journalist like Dwight R. Worley has to find a treasure trove of confidential abortion information is in a recycling bin or a dumpster.

So, it appears that all it takes to be branded a potential danger to society is a reckless newspaper publishing an article entitled “The gun owner next door: What you don’t know about the weapons in your neighborhood.” And, if that’s the case, then fair-minded anti-gun liberals should be open to warning concerned Rockland and Westchester County anti-abortion residents about ‘That woman next door: What you don’t know about the abortions in your neighborhood.’

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Alfonzo Rachel - Pro-Death Democrats Need to Stop Accusing Republicans of Extremism

The mainstream media is doing its best to make GOP candidates like Indiana's Richard Mourdock appear to be pro-rape. Is there no low to which the Democrats won't stoop? Find out on this ZoNation as AlfonZo Rachel explains the logic behind the opposition to abortion.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Joe Biden - Joe Biden, ‘Practicing Catholic’

Originally posted at American Thinker

---

Amid all the smirking, chortling, and “give me a break, kid” sniggering that ill-mannered Joe Biden exhibited at the 2012 vice presidential debate, when he piously explained his stance on abortion, he exposed in totality the hypocrisy of liberal thinking.

Toward the end of the debate, Biden’s friend and one time houseguest, moderator Martha Raddatz, posed the following question to the candidates: “We have two Catholic candidates … [a]nd I would like to ask you both to tell me what role your religion has played in your own personal views on abortion[.]”

After Paul Ryan expressed how personal faith impacts his pro-life views, Joe Biden sobered up for a second and said, “My religion defines who I am, and I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life.”

Like many liberals, whether it’s a game of constitutional Twister or flexible religious creed, Joe fashions his faith to accommodate his personal beliefs. Therefore, the vice president and the enthusiastically pro-abortion Barack Obama both feel comfortable calling themselves Christian.

Mr. Biden identifies with Roman Catholicism but doesn’t let that identity get in the way of his support of policy that directly contradicts church teaching on the sanctity of life. Joe may believe he’s been “practicing” Catholicism his whole life, but he’d better keep those training wheels on his theological bicycle.

Echoing fellow Catholic Nancy Pelosi, Joe told Martha that except when it comes to the legally sanctioned death of innocent human beings, Catholicism has “particularly informed [his] social doctrine.”

According to Joe, “[t]he Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who-who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help,” which Biden agrees with except when he’s approving of brutally dismantling helpless innocents “who can’t take care of themselves.”

But isn’t that what liberals do? Quote Scripture and fund Planned Parenthood? Talk about caring for the “least of these” and then lobby for dilation and curettage? Receive communion and vote “yea” for partial-birth abortion?

After attempting to convince America of his firm commitment to the largest Christian church in the world, Joe Biden repeated twice that, “with regard to abortion,” the church’s position that “life begins at conception” is de fide, or “belonging to the essentials of the faith, by virtue of a papal ruling.” Happy-go-lucky Joe said he accepts “divinely revealed teaching,” but only in his “personal life.”

In other words, Joe Biden’s liberal form of religion says that in the political realm he can grant himself dispensation to approve of, fund, and justify the murder of the unborn, all of which he claims he shuns when he’s at home or attending Mass. Sorry, Joe, but Pontius Pilate found out that personal disapproval doesn’t erase the stain of innocent blood from guilty hands.

Biden further extended Christian charity to Raddatz, Ryan, and the Sandra Flukes of the world, as well as to “equally devout Christians, Muslims, and Jews,” whom Joe believes also condone abortion on demand. Joe Biden explained that as a Christian, he cannot impose his unwavering devotion to Catholic doctrine on others. However, he is perfectly comfortable with imposing an agonizing death on those whom, if he’d walk in the faith he professes, he could save.

For the entirety of the debate, Joe hid his Roman Catholic “light under a barrel,” especially when, referring to Paul Ryan, he said that “unlike my friend here, the-the congressman, I-I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that — women they can’t control their body.”

Winding down his touching soliloquy on faith, Joe stressed that when it comes to abortion, “[i]t’s a decision between them and their doctor. In my view and the Supreme Court, I’m not going to interfere with that[.]” And Joe Biden is certainly not going to let God or the Catholic Church sway or interfere with that opinion.

In light of Biden’s lopsided philosophy, one can’t help but wonder whether the form of trendy religiosity he professes also believes that Jesus had no right to tell the adulterous woman to go “and sin no more.” After all, she was a woman, and it was her body.

In the end, Joe Biden can smirk, sneer, and disparage Paul Ryan and his stance on abortion that marries truth, core conviction, and selflessness with personal faith all he wants. For those who had ears to hear, Biden’s apostate theological view concerning abortion confirmed during the debate that, as Peter said in 2 Peter 3:3, “in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.” And those scoffers occupy the pews of the liberal Democratic Party, right alongside “practicing Catholics” like Joe Biden.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.