http://news.yahoo.com/california-mom-convicted-daughters-microwave-death-223054117.html
that's some depravity ...
that's some depravity ...
Speechless..
- Thread starter PhilFish
- Start date
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Epilepsy my a$$.
No more so than abortion.
Caroljo
Senator
It's something that sane people will never be able to understand...there's no reason for it other than mental illness. But as Jen said....people have their kids killed every day through abortion. The only difference here is the child was already born. If she'd somehow killed it before it was born, she wouldn't have been prosecuted for it.
I just read a headline...."Infant found dead in dumpster was beaten to death." I couldn't read the story.
The pro abortion folks used to hold up stories like these to defend and promote abortions. But they've been largely shut down on that end. The fact is, when we live in a society where day after day, year after year, for half a century, we have to hear how women ought to maintain the right to decide if their own children are worthy of life or not, some people start to believe it. And of those people who believe it, not all view the birth canal as some magic place that turns a "clump of cells" into a human being. Some of them think they can hang onto that right to kill if they decide that motherhood isn't for them, and so they do.
Also, stories like these make the pro abortion folks uncomfortable. They have to make a choice to either ignore these stories or feel that bite in the ass and know it's their own ideology doing it. On the one hand, they'll defend women's rights to kill their babies through abortion up til the time of birth. They'll defend people like Barack Obama who argued against protecting living but unwanted newborns who survived abortion. So how can they express any sorrow for a newborn who's mother killed him or her if they were fine with the idea of shoving an icepick up into his or her skull at birth?
The pro abortion folks used to hold up stories like these to defend and promote abortions. But they've been largely shut down on that end. The fact is, when we live in a society where day after day, year after year, for half a century, we have to hear how women ought to maintain the right to decide if their own children are worthy of life or not, some people start to believe it. And of those people who believe it, not all view the birth canal as some magic place that turns a "clump of cells" into a human being. Some of them think they can hang onto that right to kill if they decide that motherhood isn't for them, and so they do.
Also, stories like these make the pro abortion folks uncomfortable. They have to make a choice to either ignore these stories or feel that bite in the ass and know it's their own ideology doing it. On the one hand, they'll defend women's rights to kill their babies through abortion up til the time of birth. They'll defend people like Barack Obama who argued against protecting living but unwanted newborns who survived abortion. So how can they express any sorrow for a newborn who's mother killed him or her if they were fine with the idea of shoving an icepick up into his or her skull at birth?
BobbyT
Governor
Nice way to make completely inhuman those who believe a woman should be able to choose when she wants to have a child. Instances like that described in the TP are horrific and sad and unbelievable. How dare you suggest that those who support a woman's right to choose don't feel horror at something like this? You're a little to free with you "they" this and "they" that. I've seen you object to such characterizations when the "they" is someone you support.
I didn't say you're inhuman, Bobby. And I don't believe I implied it either.
Tell me what I DID say that wasn't true.
You support a woman's right to choose to kill her unborn child.
Yet you feel that a woman killing her born child is horrible and sad.
Why the difference? In both cases a defenseless human being dies.
Was the method by which the child in the TP was killed more violent and painful for the child? No. Saline abortions used to burn the baby from the inside and outside at the same time, not unlike the way a microwave oven cooks.
The variable here for you is whether the child has been born yet. And to make the way through that, many pro abortion people have wholly fabricated alternate realities concerning what makes a child a human being, worthy of life so that they can be at peace in the disparity. One of the cornerstones of that "reality" is whether or not a child can survive outside the womb. Well, evidently, defenseless newborns can't survive outside the womb when someone wants them dead. That's something they have in common with their not yet born peers. When someone wants them dead, they die. So that whole 'viability' thing falls apart, doesn't it?
And then there's this "right" you have written about regarding a woman's right to opt out of motherhood through abortion if she doesn't want or can't care for a child, or doesn't want the impact motherhood has on her body. Well, evidently, some mothers make that same decision after their child is born. But it's the same decision...a decision you support as long as the circumstances are ones YOU approve of. And anyone who doesn't approve of the circumstances you're comfortable with is "anti-choice." Anyone who sees small defenseless human beings for what they are before they're born is also "anti-choice."
All I did was say that the ideology of proabortion people bites them in the ass when stories like these come up, and why.
Since Barack Obama and the Democrats he leads believe it's okay to leave an abortion survivor on a shelf to die what's the difference between that and the mom throwing him in a trash can? You've made good points here but I don't expect something this obvious will change any minds of the heartless.
BobbyT
Governor
No, it's not the same decision. Yes I am pro choice. Yes I think murder of born child is horrific. There's a difference between a born alive child and a zygote. No one I know is "pro abortion."
When there's no more "welfare mother" accusations, when there's no "she's having another baby just for the benefits" accusations, when there's celebration of another baby being born instead of "who is sheeeeee to have anoooooooother baby" criticism, when there's time off from work to care for a newborn, when there's medical leave to have a baby, when having a baby is celebrated, no matter who has that baby and when they have it, let's talk. But that's not the case, is it? Women are judged for having sex, just they always have been. Pregnancy is a result of sex and it used to be that when a woman became pregnant she either 1) married 2) had an illegal abortion or 3) disappeared. I like pro-choice (whether that choice is birth or abortion) better, because it doesn't stigmatize women for having sex-a natural function.
In the mean time, while we still judge the 'wrong' women for having sex (not the ones who can afford to have a child alone), women have to choose when is the right time to have their children; that choice comes with a whole lot of judgment and not a lot of support. People say (and I've heard it on here time and time again): she should have just kept her legs shut! She should have known better than to have sex! She should just wait until she's financially ready!! Well, what happens if she didn't? What happens if she enjoys sex? SHAME ON HER! No Support For HER!! And there she is. I don't believe women should be held hostage to pregnancy nor do I think they should be shamed for enjoying sex. So yes, I support choice. I am pr0-choice. That does not mean that I am pro murder of born children, particularly the horrific murder in the TP, which is what you said.
BTW, I suspect the mother in this case was suffering from a severe case of postpartum depression, as I can't envision another reason for her horrific act. But, as with most things related to pregnancy and childbirth, such things as postpartum depression remain in the "it's her problem" realm and there's no concerted followup for new mothers to discover and treat such ailments. But, you know, we only care about the zygote, not the baby and certainly, most certainly, not about the mother.
Saying "zygote" makes you feel better. Most women don't even realize they're pregnant until their babies' hearts are beating. They are by far no longer in the zygote stage. Most abortions take place in the second month of gestation. And by that time, the "product of conception" tech at the abortion mill goes through everything that has been vaccuumed out of the mother to make sure there's two arms, two legs, torso, head...That's what you support, the choice to rip a tiny living human being apart. While zygotes are certainly human beings, too, you only refer to all abortion victims as such because in your mind, it's easier to imagine a "clump of cells" being removed than face the truth.
It never fails to shock me how someone can make up so much bullshit about what we care about and how we feel about mothers, and then use it as a justification for supporting the killing...the burning...the tearing apart....the lethal injection....the abandonment in metal dishes.....of small and vulnerable human beings. You know why you do this? Because you just can't face your own thoughts and prejudices. So you make up ugly ones to ascribe to us and then pretend you're defending women from us by supporting abortion. It only works in your minds though. We know better.
As I told you already, the baby put in the microwave and the baby killed by saline both die the same way: They are both burned to death. You support one method of burning them to death but not the other. And you defend your position with boloney about us and some fantasy ruling that we're not human until we pass through the birth canal. Regardless of what the ruling was, burned human flesh is burned human flesh. And no court decision can change that medical fact.
You know your friend who was by herself and had no one to help her so she made that decision-that you said was difficult- to abort for those reasons? She was YOUR friend and she had no one to help her. And you have the nerve to spew that BS about us? We help women in that position everyday, with whatever they need before and long after their children are born, at no cost to them. I can't say the same for you. We could have helped your friend. But maybe she didn't come to us because somebody told her the same lies about us that you're parroting. Maybe the mothers who are suffering from PPD and end up doing something horrible don't come to us for the same reason; liars like you who scare them off.
That's really too bad.
BobbyT
Governor
Calling it zygote doesn't make me feel better, it's just accurate. When we as a society treat pregnancy as something special, you just let me know. Right now, it's not treated as such, it's treated as "her problem for her to solve." How am I a "liar"? How am I "scaring" women off? You're living in your head. Women who are living with PPD and do horrible things are living with PPD because we don't bother to have adequate followup care for women. Because followup care costs money. And we as a society have decided that spending money to care for women after childbirth isn't a priority. Don't complain to me about inadequate health care. That would be the conservative side that doesn't want to 'waste' taxpayer money on adequate healthcare including post-natal health. Our society doesn't have respect for pregnant women or for the babies they bring into the world. We only have respect for the 'right' women having babies at the 'right time'. There's no support for the 'wrong' woman having a child at the 'wrong' time. And that's a conservative thing. And as long as that's the case, I will strongly support a woman's right to choose when to bear children - because we sure as hell don't give her any support when she bears them just because she's pregnant.
We do treat pregnancy as something special. You and the other proaborts treat it as nothing other than a nuisance condition. It's your side that has equated the unborn child to a wart, a growth, a clump of cells, a parasite. It's your side that can look at a sonogram of a fetus, arms and legs moving about and call it "uterine contents." And as far as the "right" women having children, don't confuse us with your idol, Margaret The Hanger Sanger. Seeing that only the "right" women had children was her pet project. And Hitler loved her.
Prolife is a very passionate and committed movement in this country visible in offices near every abortion clinic possible, there to offer women alternatives to abortion and alternatives to loneliness and poverty....for free, because we really do think mothers and children are something special.
And while your side is bellyaching for free birth control because the men on your side are disinterested in helping their partners obtain it but still eager to have them conveniently sterilized, we never hear you guys demanding better prenatal and post natal care. We never hear you demanding better mental health care, either. Obama said free BC for everyone and liberal women, who are used to getting crumbs from liberal men, I guess, thought it was the kindest thing. But still, everyday women and children struggle without medications they need to survive and be comfortable. But Obama's great because he made birth control free. I can't follow that logic.
You sit on your asses. You do nothing for women. You want to get laid but you don't want to support your partners so you scare them into abortions with tales of the big, bad world that will starve them and the evil prolifers who want to condemn them. Anything it takes to get that little responsibility out of the womb and into the freezer. You've built this ideology that babies are punishments and we should all have the choice about whether or not to embrace the ones that come along. And then you play dumb when some disturbed mother thinks you were talking to her, too, and throws her baby out the window.
And please, get out your tenth grade biology book. They are not zygotes.
