The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
"Pro-life means anti-gun? Pastor loses support after film takes aim at NRA and Sarah Palin."
Again, I recommend Greg Hopkins' book, A Time To Kill, as a specific antidote to this poisonous drivel.
Their argument is a two-way street. If we can't be pro-life and pro-gun, then the reverse also applies... Those anti-gun far left liberals can't be pro-abortion. But where are their calls to shut down planned parenthood?
Guns aren't used to perform abortions. Thus the two are disconnected. It's a specious play to relate the two. Regardless, that I am pro life does not change the fact that I am pro choice. My liberty is valuable to me and I reject ALL attempts to usurp it. No doubt exists that abortion is the ending of a possible living breathing human being. Of course a miscarriage is the same thing in outcome. I'm a man so I will never face the choice of avoiding either. It will never be my burden to choose such a thing. I won't ever have to live with what comes after making such a choice. Look to those who kill a home invader or attempted rapist. Life isn't all unicorns and skittles for any of them. I can only decide this way - nobody, especially government and the democratic mob reaches inside my skin and makes decisions FOR me, in spite of me or despite me. My skin, my choice. That's the line. Period. Now, how do we bring an end to abortion? To what is the literal tearing apart of a baby? Well, first we have the courage to call it what is- the tearing apart of a growing baby. That helps make the argument for those facing that choice. That IS what they contemplate as a choice. Many will turn away on that basis alone. The next step is expanding choices that are available. If we have learned anything in the great American experiment its that expanding liberty is always better than curtailing it. Adoptions is one such augmentation of choice. Financial aid including job training to support a family is another. Encouraging man wife child family unit is yet another. I'll explain one we could unite around in the next post...
We aren't using science as well as we could. First, the instant a baby can live outside the mother it cannot be called anything but simple murder of a already able to live without a host mother. It ain't late term abortion - that's a lie. Let's be honest about it. Enough lies. Yank the baby as a matter of "medical procedure" either way and a willing human being will raise that precious baby if the host mother doesn't want to. A great many people want a child but cannot make one due to their own health problems. But what about early on? What of those pregnancies? What is a choice not yet possible this day? How about removing that precious little growing baby from the mother who is rejecting it and implanting it into a mother who does want it? Think In vitro. Consider the pregnant woman seeking an abortion as a means of not being pregnant as the in vitro fertilizing "dish". Why isn't this idea in play? Why is it so dismissed as not legitimate? Oh wait, I know. Cuz a successful uniting around this idea would utterly destroy the abortion mill industry and the campaigns that revolve around it - that's why. Maybe many of these transfers would fail but you know what.... Each and every abortion ends the same way. At least we would be trying to save those lives instead of trying to destroy them.
+1 on Greg's book
Using the 'pro-choice' own arguments, we can also twist logic into saying young black men killing each other aren't committing murder, they are simply performing extremely late term abortions.
Post a Comment