With a new year upon us, let’s take a look at the leading cause of death throughout the entire world in the year 2018.
In stark contrast with my article in which I outright said you would never guess who was the preferred candidate for the Democrat Party for the 2020 elections (which was literally anyone else apart from the known candidates), I don’t think it will be difficult at all for you to guess what the leading cause of death was in 2018 throughout the world. Particularly due to the image at the top.
According to a report from Worldomoters, which runs tallies regarding populations, births, deaths, CO2 emissions and other things, some 41.9 million children were aborted in the year 2018 as of December 31st.
In 2018, 23% of all pregnancies ended in abortion. Abortion has caused more deaths than cancer (8.2 mill), smoking (5 mill), HIV/AIDS (1.7 mill), malaria (less than 1 mill), alcohol (2.5 mill) and traffic accidents (1.3 mill) COMBINED. And it’s not even close. All those deaths amount to less than 20 million. So abortions DOUBLE the amount of deaths of other things put together.
What’s more, Worldometers also reports that there have been roughly 60 million deaths this year. So more than TWO-THIRDS of the world’s deaths are a result of abortion.
It’s so bad that the head of March for Life said that abortion is the “social justice cause of our time”, likening it to the Civil Rights era of Martin Luther King Jr.
And I would have to say that that’s definitely an accurate statement. The most innocent among us are being targeted and it’s only getting worse, without even having to mention the fact that the lunatic Left is moving towards normalizing and advocating for pedophilia.
The fact that more than two-thirds of the world’s deaths in 2018 were abortions should be quite eye-opening.
It also doesn’t help that supposed Republican challenger to Donald Trump, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, once again vetoed a heartbeat bill that would have allowed for infants in the womb to escape abortion if a heartbeat is detected.
I’ve said multiple times in the past that there’s not a thing anyone can say to me that would convince me that abortion is in any way okay or that a child inside the womb is anything but a human being. It’s an atrocity that humanity would be so adamant about eliminating itself in this way for any reason.
Now, some people could stupidly come to me talking about how we’re overpopulated and abortion is necessary. First of all, no, we’re not overpopulated. Places like New York City have a huge population, but elsewhere, there’s still a whole lot of land for humans.
Second of all, the whole overpopulation argument comes from the heavily flawed Malthusian theorem. For those who don’t know, let me explain what it is. Basically, Malthus argued that although populations grow exponentially (2 to 4 to 8 and so forth), our food supply grows arithmetically (1 to 2 to 3 and so forth).
There are a lot of things wrong with this theory. First of all, Malthus lived in the 18th and early 19th century (1766-1834). Back then, manual labor was necessary for crop-planting, which is the biggest reason countries had slaves. Since then, technology has advanced and made it so that far less manual labor had to be used for crop-planting, and the food supplies would actually go up. Technology allows for more crops to be planted than a human would be able to.
But even if technology is entirely taken out of the equation, Malthus is still wrong. He thinks that if there are more people on the planet, there is less food to go around. And that would be the case if those people were unable to work and grow more food themselves.
So even if technology is out of the picture, more people means more food planted and other foods like animals can be gathered, bred, hunted, etc. Malthus thought that population growth far outpaced food supplies, when that’s not how it works in the least bit.
There’s more food than there is people, and one person can grow a lot of food (even without technology), so through planting and replanting, gathering of animals for breeding etc., food supplies can go up alongside people.
Again, that’s taking technology out of the equation. Technology gives us the ability to grow far more crops than ever before. I live in areas close to farmlands and have driven in highways that are close to farmlands. Those farmlands stretch out insanely far and the technology that you see on those farms is largely why.
So the overpopulation argument is based off of a flawed theorem by someone who didn’t take into account the advancement of technology (can’t really fault him for that too much, though, considering the time that he lived in).
In other words, overpopulation is not even an argument for abortion in the least.
There’s not much else I think I need to say, if I’m honest. At least, things that I haven’t said before. There is no legitimate argument in favor of abortion.
Anything else from “what if the pregnancy is a danger to the woman?”, which I’ve never seen be the case in the modern world with modern medicine that is getting better and better, to “my body, my choice”, which I would argue that it’s not your body that you’re affecting, it’s the baby’s that you’re destroying, is simply not a solid argument whatsoever. There is no legitimately good argument in favor of abortion.
It’s a sickening thing and dangerous to humanity itself, considering it’s responsible for two-thirds of the world’s deaths last year, and really you cannot convince me that it’s anything but murder.
I pray that we will eventually be able to kick back against this human tragedy and never allow for it to resurface. And there is not much else that can be used to accurately describe abortion than a modern day tragedy.
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
This past week, a Mississippi Obama-appointed judge, U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves of Mississippi’s Southern District, struck down Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban claiming it was unconstitutional.
The judge wrote, upon reviewing the decision for documentation, that “there is no legitimate state interest strong enough, prior to viability (which he says begins at 23 weeks after conception), to justify a ban on abortions… The state chose to pass a law it knew was unconstitutional to endorse a decades-long campaign, fueled by national interest groups, to ask the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. This court follows the commands of the Supreme Court and the dictates of the United States Constitution, rather than the disingenuous calculations of the Mississippi Legislature.”
He went on to rip the state legislature, saying the efforts to ban abortion are “pure gaslighting”: “Its leaders are proud to challenge Roe but choose not to lift a finger to address the tragedies lurking on the other side of the delivery room, such as high infant and maternal mortality rates. No, legislation like H.B. 1510 (the law he struck down) is closer to the old Mississippi – the Mississippi bent on controlling women and minorities.”
Beyond that, he even argues that he finds it “sadly ironic” that men, himself included, “are determining how women may choose to manage their reproductive health…”
Boy am I gonna have fun ripping this guy to shreds.
First of all, and what really should be the driving point of any abortion debate: abortion is unconstitutional. Interestingly enough, both sides of the argument could try to make a case for their side using the 14th Amendment.
Here’s what the 14th Amendment says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
What pro-abortion people will point to is the beginning: “All persons born…”. However, that alone does not mean that abortion is constitutional. To argue this means that if you kill a child inside a woman’s womb outside of abortion, then using this argument, one could argue that they did nothing wrong. And yet, when a person kills a pregnant woman, laws dictate that that counts as a double-homicide. But why if the 14th Amendment says that such a person is not a citizen of the United States or within its jurisdiction? Because it’s still a human being. And that’s what pro-life people point to as the problem with the Left’s argument: it’s still a human being.
The part of the 14th Amendment that pro-life people point to is: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”
It doesn’t say “any person born”, or “any citizen” as defined earlier in the amendment. It just says “person”. Personhood is only attributed to human beings. And a person within the womb is a human being. Therefore, the 14th Amendment says that the State shall not deprive any human being of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. And that is where we argue that abortion is unconstitutional. Because it very clearly is. The beginning part only applies to citizenship. It says persons born in the U.S. are citizens of the U.S. (except for obvious exceptions such as a foreign government employee’s wife having a child in the U.S. doesn’t make that child a citizen of the country, and such an exception could arguably be extended to illegal immigrants who are under the jurisdiction of their home countries). But when it comes to abortion, that’s not a solid argument at all. Particularly since the amendment makes it clear that all PERSONS shall not be deprived of LIFE.
So that’s the first thing I wanted to point out. The second thing I want to point out is the irony in the judge saying it’s sadly ironic that men, including himself, were determining abortion laws. Why is it ironic from my point of view? Because in 1973, the Supreme Court was composed entirely of men. So the same gender that this judge says should probably not be doing anything to decide abortion cases is the same gender that decided Roe v. Wade.
But finally, and perhaps one of the biggest points I wanted to make here, apart from settling the unconstitutionality of abortion itself, is the ludicrous comments from the judge that more readily characterize Margaret Sanger and the abortion industry than it does “old Mississippi” (which depending on what period of time you’re talking about, has also been ruled by Democrats in the past).
The judge says such legislation, and thus anyone that supports it, is “bent on controlling women and minorities.”
Margaret Sanger once wrote in Birth Control Review: “More children from the fit; less from the unfit – that is the chief issue of birth control.” She also wrote an article titled: “America Needs a Code for Babies,” in which she wrote: “no woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for fatherhood… No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.” And she also wrote a letter to one of her associates named Clarence Gamble, where she explained her reason for hiring black ministers to be her ambassadors to the black community. This is what she wrote: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
That, combined with the fact that many (roughly 79%) of Planned Parenthood’s surgical abortion facilities are within walking distance of black and Hispanic neighborhoods, and you can’t help but think Sanger was a horrible human being, even by this judge’s standards.
It’s not us pro-lifers who wish to “control women and minorities”. It was Sanger that literally suggested that women not be allowed to have children without a permit, limiting them to only one child, and said to her cohorts that their goal was the extermination of black people. It’s Planned Parenthood, the organization that Sanger founded, that prioritizes abortions for minorities.
So for this judge to be making these arguments is entirely asinine and wrong. He is wrong about the constitutionality of abortion, wrong about what the Constitution says regarding abortion (which is nothing, by the way), wrong about his idea that men shouldn’t be influencing such abortion laws, and wrong about just which side of the argument intends on controlling people.
Considering all of these things, I cannot say I’m surprised that this is an Obama-appointed judge. Much like the others, this one has zero knowledge of the law of the United States, and only seeks to write it in favor of his Leftist agenda.
“’Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.’”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
With the debacle between the White House and CNN White House Correspondent Jim Acosta taking the limelight in recent time, one piece of news that may have been largely ignored or hardly talked about was the great pro-life win that occurred last week when the Ohio House of Representatives voted in favor of banning abortions once a heartbeat has been detected in the fetus.
State House Bill 258 passed 58-35, moving on to the State Senate for consideration. Now, I don’t know each person within the State Senate, but Republicans have 23 votes to Democrats’ 9, so logic would dictate that the Senate Republicans will vote in favor of the bill, effectively passing the bill and sending it to the Governor’s desk.
And that’s really where the problem lies, considering Ohio’s current Governor John Kasich (DeWine will be inaugurated next year) vetoed a similar bill back in 2016, supposedly out of fear that “a legal challenge would overturn it”, according to the Daily Wire.
Such a fear is reasonable (though I would argue that it’s best to fight it in court than simply give up and veto it) since similar bills have been passed in North Dakota and Arkansas, but overturned by the courts, often citing the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade case of 1973.
According to LifeNews: “The controversial legislation would ban most abortions in Ohio if it becomes law. An unborn baby’s heart begins beating around six weeks, though new research suggests it may begin as early as 18 days after conception.”
Some of the comments from the House Republicans who supported and/or sponsored the bill are extremely endearing. State Rep. Christina Hagan said: “The point is: it’s time. It doesn’t matter if the governor is with us or against us,” referring to the possibility that Kasich may also veto this bill. “Motherhood isn’t easy but it’s necessary.”
State Rep. Candice Keller said: “(Abortion) is not a constitutional right. If you don’t know that, you need to read the Constitution.”
And my favorite comment comes from state Rep. Kristina Roegner, who said: “Today, let us stand up for the most innocent among us: the unborn.”
Now, predictably, House Democrats opposed the bill, suggesting that “abortion providers will be unjustly penalized”, according to the Daily Wire. This is in reference to the fact that the bill would also punish abortion providers, charging them with a felony for breaking the law by aborting a baby with a detected heartbeat.
However, I really must ask: what about the human beings inside the womb that are unjustly penalized for just existing? Why don’t they matter? Why is it Democrats care more about what happens to the abortionists that perform these heinous crimes of nature than they care about what happens to the unborn children that are mercilessly slaughtered for no other reason than the fact that they are there? But I’ll get back to this momentarily.
Now, back in 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal for the case. But since now Justice Kavanaugh is on the court, should such an appeal come up, they might be more willing to hear it, perhaps even leading to the grander case of reviewing and perhaps even overturning Roe v. Wade. But that’s getting ahead of ourselves, and it depends on an awful lot of things, such as if the Ohio Senate passes the bill (which I expect), if Kasich decides not to veto it this time (which I don’t expect, knowing him), if it receives a challenge in the court (which I would expect if Kasich doesn’t veto) and if Kavanaugh would be willing to hear an appeal for it (which I would expect, but you really never know).
So an awful lot of variables are to be taken into consideration before we even get to the possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade.
But as it stands, this is a great victory for the unborn, at least in the state of Ohio.
Now, let’s once again touch upon the desire to protect the practice of abortion over protecting the life that is growing inside the womb.
To me, and likely to many other people, defending those who perform abortions is no different than defending a serial killer. Imagine living in a world where someone is on trial for murder, and you have a number of people there defending the guy’s supposed right to do that. Because at the end of the day, that’s what these people are supporting.
It’s not about choice, because God knows the Left hates it when you make the “wrong” choice. It’s about legal murder and, depending who you ask, population control based on the ludicrous idea that we are somehow running out of room on our vast planet and we have too many people alive today that will eat up all our food and resources, when the exact opposite actually happens.
It’s about committing unspeakable evil in the guise of justice. It’s about committing horrible sin in the guise of doing what’s right. It’s sickening.
The fact that these particular Ohio Democrats would vote against such a bill that most sensibly argues in favor of the FACT that it’s a human life that’s growing inside a woman is really all I need to know about the Democrat Party. Of course, I already knew many of these things, and I am not surprised in the least that the Democrats would oppose such a bill, but it does highlight the evil and hatred they harbor in their hearts to be willing to sacrifice a human life inside the uterus in the name of “justice” and “women’s liberation”, which would be laughable arguments if the overall topic weren’t so serious and dire.
Not a single Democrat can dare lecture me about justice when they turn around and support such evil. Regarding the migrant caravan, not one of them can convince me that it’s the right thing to do to let them in, knowing that these Democrats also support the death of humans inside the womb. Regarding transgenders, there isn’t a Democrat that can convince me it’s right to let them think they are the opposite gender of what they truly are, knowing that such people would not be considered people inside the womb.
Regarding anything the Democrat Party says is right and just, I cannot possibly believe any of them or their arguments. Beyond disagreeing on transgenderism, illegal immigration, gay rights, climate change, etc., what truly matters to me, at the end of the day, that tells me whether someone is conservative or a Leftist is whether or not they support abortion at any capacity.
The day I heard Mitt Romney defend abortion in cases of rape and incest, wrong as both things are, made me recognize he wasn’t conservative. Heck, it made me recognize he was one of them. A Democrat in disguise (it doesn’t help that the now-Senator-elect is calling for climate action as being a priority).
Hearing these Republican women made me smile, recognizing that these women are conservative, and that the Republicans who voted in favor of the bill are conservative. They are fighting for those who truly have no voice, and who abortionists make sure will never have a voice. Fighting for those who cannot fight back, and who abortionists dismember, so that they can never fight back.
If me mentioning that abortionists dismember these babies made you cringe, or made your heart ache, good for you. It’s what happens and you recognize that it’s evil. I wonder just how many people who say they are pro-choice even know that such horrors are taking place. And I wonder how many of them even care.
I hope, for the sake of our nation’s soul, that most of them are simply ignorant to the evil, and not aware and in favor of such evil.
“Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
About a week ago, I wrote an article talking about how it’s ridiculous for Leftists to claim they are siding with God or that they are doing God’s work whenever they support or do the work of the devil. Though I did not put it quite that way, that’s basically the message of the article. Well, I guess we can consider this article a sort of sequel to that one.
Recently, Chelsea Clinton had an interview on SiriusXM with a panel of fellow feminazis. One of the hosts, Jess McIntosh, asked the former First Daughter: “How do you keep going in the hopes that your daughter doesn’t have to have this fight?” Referring to the fight to allow women to kill their unborn.
Chelsea replied: “Every day, I make the moral choice to be optimistic that my efforts and my energies, particularly when I’m fortunate enough to be in a partnership with fellow travelers, hopefully will make a difference.”
“And when I think about all of the statistics – that are painful – of what women are confronting today in our country, and what even more women confronted pre-Roe and how many women died and how many more women were maimed because of unsafe abortion practices, we just can’t go back to that.”
I will just say that I’m not surprised that Chelsea Clinton continues to use long-since debunked rhetoric and “statistics” to further her cause. As I mentioned in my article titled: “Feinstein Tried To Corner Kavanaugh On Roe Question And Failed”, according to a 1972 CDC report, the maternal death rate from abortions was only 39 in the United States. This means that, in the year before Roe v. Wade happened, only 39 women died due to having an abortion.
Going further, even two pro-choice people, Dr. Mary Calderone (former PP medical director) and Dr. Bernard Nathanson (former abortionist and co-founder of NARAL) admitted that the numbers they were using were fictitious.
Dr. Mary Calderone wrote in 1960: “About 90% of all illegal abortions are being done by physicians… whatever trouble arises usually arises from self-induced abortions which comprise approximately 8%...”
Dr. Bernard Nathanson admitted his organization (NARAL)’s numbers of between 5 and 10 thousand women dying every year from back-alley abortions “were totally false… but in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted…”
So right off the bat, we can call out Chelsea on her b.s., knowing full-well that not too many women died due to abortions before 1973. It also reinforces that article’s point that it seems that abortion is to blame for women’s deaths or complications, not the legality of them.
Of course, that’s now where we’re ending this. I’ve yet to get to the most egregious part of the interview. Chelsea continued talking (and she seemingly gets her speaking skills from her mother), saying: “[outlawing abortion is] unconscionable to me, and also, I’m sure that this will unleash another wave of hate in my direction, but as a deeply religious person, it’s also unchristian to me.”
I have quite a few things to say about this, only a handful of which I allow myself to write in an article so as to not be vulgar.
First of all, I’m surprised she didn’t use this psychic power of precognition to let her mother know that she would lose the 2016 presidential election.
Second of all, what’s truly unchristian is supporting the cause of allowing women to end the life of their own children under the guise of “women’s healthcare”. Not only is this willful support of an evil practice that is literally meant to end a life, but it’s also deception in fooling people into supporting this. As egregious and disgusting as the Left is, they are conscious enough to recognize that only a handful of really messed up people would ever openly support the idea of killing children.
The Left always tried to dehumanize an unborn child, saying that “it’s not a kid, it’s a fetus.” Well, using all-knowing Google to do some basic research, fetus literally means: “an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.” Would you like to know the synonyms? They are: embryo (though technically that’s the gestation period that comes before being a fetus and after being a zygote) and UNBORN BABY/CHILD!
Fetus literally means child. So not a single heartless or ignorant Leftist can possibly tell me a fetus is not human or not a child. Even the Leftist overlords at Google disagree with such a point.
Not that it matters too much to the Left. Not many people would sign on to the idea of killing a child in the womb, so they have to disguise it to make it not look so horrible, so they say it’s “women’s healthcare”, even though healthcare is meant to do the opposite of killing someone. They say it’s “women’s liberation”, going by the insinuation that having a child is somehow comparable to being a slave.
There is nothing Christian about the killing of the innocent. For Chelsea to call herself “deeply religious”, it must mean something entirely different from what she thinks. No religion in the world, as far as I know, supports abortion. Even Islam does not support it and even forbids it unless the pregnancy puts the mother’s life in danger.
Which reminds me, how does pregnancy put someone’s life in danger? I could maybe understand if it made complications for someone who is extremely skinny or overall unhealthy, but most women, when they have children, tend to be relatively healthy. I don’t think I’ve seen any cases in which a woman HAD to terminate a pregnancy due to her life being at risk. I’ve only seen cases of women WILLINGLY ENDING THE PREGANCY BECAUSE IT’S INCONVENIENT!
Regardless, I’ll return to the main point. Willingly killing a child inside the womb is not something religious people tend to support. So either Chelsea belongs to a secret religious group that supports abortion (the Left religiously supports the idea that people affect the climate, so I guess that’s not too far-fetched) or she’s lying about being religious. She’s certainly lying about outlawing abortion being unchristian.
Now, the interview did not end there. Since Chelsea mentioned that she would get some flak over these comments, the interview went into attack mode, attacking the pro-life crowd.
First, Chelsea tried to make herself the victim by saying she has been “compared to slave owners and Nazis” over her positions on abortion. Well, considering Planned Parenthood is basically the legacy of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, a Nazi scientific institution focusing on anthropology, human heredity and eugenics, and that the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute was basically Nazi Germany’s version of Planned Parenthood, only with the pretense that they were making the human race “better”, I’d say the comparisons are fairly accurate.
One of the panelists also directly attacked pro-life people, calling us “anti-choice” instead of pro-life, and calling us “ugly” and that “we love guns”. I guess that last part is true, though I don’t know what that has to do with this current conversation.
But the reality of the situation is that we’re FOR THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE! And the reality is that the only people that are ugly here are the Left. I don’t usually attack someone based on their looks, and I won’t here now. What I’m talking about when in say they’re ugly is what’s in their hearts: evil.
What is truly ugly is trying to convince women that it’s okay to kill their unborn because “they are not alive yet” and that doing so is a kick to the “patriarchy” or some such nonsense. Abortion is nothing short of death. Abortionists are glorified killers. And those who support this effectively support the death of human life.
No matter what way anyone says, that it’s “humane” or some other bullcrap, nothing will ever convince me that abortion is right in any case.
Oh, and if it’s “humane”, wouldn’t that imply that whatever is in the womb is ALIVE?! Because you don’t humanely kill what is technically not alive. We humanely kill animals when they become too old or when they get run over on the streets and are still alive. To say that abortion is humane is 1) erroneous, considering the methods of abortion and that PP has sold the parts of fetuses and likely still do and 2) would be conceding the point that a fetus is alive. You don’t do anything humane to something that isn’t alive.
“Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one’s youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies at the gate.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. Unlike Chelsea Clinton’s fake religion, the contents of this newsletter are 100% Christian, conservative and pro-American. It contains a compilation of the week’s articles and easy access to our online store. Check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
It’s no secret that just about everything the Left touches becomes rotten. We only need to look at Hollywood, San Francisco, Detroit, Chicago, New York and other Democrat-owned cities to see the culmination of decades of Leftist policy ruling over people. Cities that were once great visions of the American Dream torn down to fit the style of a socialist dystopia.
But it’s not just cities that are negatively affected by the Left. It’s causes and organizations as well, including the NAACP, which once stood up for the cause of civil rights and is now nothing but a Democrat platform to send black people into electoral slavery.
This past weekend, Rev. Clenard Childress Jr. slammed the NAACP’s support for abortion and Planned Parenthood, which they once were firmly against.
Can’t say I blame him for these reasons:
And perhaps most importantly: Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton’s idol, was one of the most notorious racists and white supremacists the country has ever seen. She literally spoke to the women’s chapter of the KKK in New Jersey and wrote a letter to her friend Clarence Gamble that “we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister (a black man working for Sanger) is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
The very founder of Planned Parenthood was a notorious racist who sought to eradicate the black population, saw them as a “weed” to be uprooted, and employed Nazi sympathizers (Gamble and Lothrop Stoddard) who wanted to bring the Nazis’ eugenics program to the U.S. so that they, too, could rid the country of “undesirables”.
In her words: “More children from the fit; less from the unfit – that is the chief issue of birth control.”
And as we can see, her ideals are rooted in Darwin’s Natural Selection theory, where the strong dominate the weak.
Knowing how horrendously racist and evil Sanger was (and this is without mentioning her proposed “parenthood” license), it’s frankly a wonder why anyone would support Planned Parenthood, especially an organization such as the NAACP, which is composed of the key demographic Sanger despised to the point of seeking ethnic cleansing that puts Hitler to shame.
Well, it WOULD be a wonder if we didn’t know that Planned Parenthood, the Left and even Sanger herself were trying to deceive people. In her very letter to Gamble, she mentioned that they don’t want word of their true motives getting out. She herself knew that openly embracing ethnic cleansing through eugenics and abortion would not be a good thing and would only lead to her failure, which she considered unacceptable.
This is why I blatantly attack the Left on the issue of abortion. They call it “healthcare” and “women’s liberation”. It’s nothing short of murder, having tallied up to 60.6 million deaths in the U.S. since 1973 (and this is only counting abortion after it became legal, not before) and up to 1.5 BILLION deaths worldwide since 1980 according to the website NumberOfAbortions.com, which takes its information from the Guttmacher Institute, a division of Planned Parenthood of America.
It’s egregious that anyone would be supportive of this mass genocide. It’s entirely selfish to demand abortion in any way just because a woman does not want to take responsibility for a child and just wants to have fun screwing dudes left and right. If a woman does not want children, then don’t have sex. Wait until marriage, when you are in a better position to have a child.
Now, I know the argument the Left will always fall back on: “What about rape?! If a woman is raped and gets pregnant from it, you really expect her to still have that child?!”
Yes. Pregnancy from rape does not change the fact that abortion is murder. It’s a horrible thing that happens, and I would not wish this upon my worst enemy. And I wish we lived in a world where this does not happen and there is no fear of this ever happening. But killing your own child because you were forcefully and horribly impregnated is never justified.
To women who are raped and subsequently impregnated when they did not want a child, I offer my sincerest apologies for what happened. But the child should not be the one to suffer as a consequence of the horrible act of sexual violence that occurred.
A child in a womb is not a consequence; it’s not a disease to be rid of. It’s a wonderful life that’s just begun. It’s tremendous potential. I wonder how many of the aborted babies could have been the first woman President, or the first openly-gay President. How many of them could have gone on to find the cure for the different types of cancer or the cure for HIV/AIDS. How many of them could have gone on to establish peace in war-torn nations. How many of them could have been the next Billy Graham, Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan. The next Michael Jordan, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant. The next Joe Montana, Tom Brady, Tim Tebow.
Over 60 million deaths in the U.S. since Roe v Wade and 1.5 billion worldwide since 1980, that’s a lot of potential utterly wasted because of evil people who sought to eradicate certain populations of the world and intended for the government to control people’s lives to the point where they would need to have a license to have a child (and that’s for one child, too).
Potential wasted because of ignorant people within the NAACP who think the systemic eradication of their own race is excusable.
It’s not surprising for me to say that I want Roe v Wade overturned. Of course, that does not necessarily mean that abortion is made illegal. It means that individual states can decide what kind of abortion laws to have, either severely limiting them, eradicating them altogether or keeping them the same as they currently are.
While abortion would not necessarily be done away with entirely, it would at least present the opportunity for even more people to be spared from the death camps called abortion clinics. It would mean more lives saved.
But the fight would not just end there. To truly defeat abortion, it not only needs to be made entirely illegal, but the people also have to have a change of heart and mind. People who want abortion will always fight for it. Changing their hearts and minds is the only true way of defeating abortion.
Unfortunately, I am not such an optimist that I believe it can happen. I am a realist. As such, I understand that, for as long as Man walks the Earth, there will be evil. Man is naturally evil, after all. And considering the events that are prophesied in the Book of Revelation, I doubt we will ever get to the point where all hearts and minds on Earth are changed to despise abortion. After all, such a change of heart would require the recognition of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Not everyone alive will be saved, so we will never see a world where abortion is truly defeated… well, let me rephrase that.
We will never see our CURRENT world get to the point where abortion can and will be truly defeated. The new world described in the Book of Revelation made by the Lord, on the other hand…
“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be His people and God Himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.’”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
This week has truly been devastating for the Left. With regards to Supreme Court matters alone, they faced loss after loss with 5-4 decisions on pro-life pregnancy centers no longer being forced to promote abortion and public sector unions no longer being able to force non-union-members to pay fees.
But both of those news are tame in comparison to hearing that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy would be retiring at the end of the Court’s annual term (end of June). This opens the door to President Donald Trump nominating another possible Constitutionalist like Gorsuch to the Court, handing conservatives a reliable majority in the Supreme Court.
Despite the fact that Justice Kennedy was nominated by President Ronald Reagan, he has proven to be wildly unpredictable, a moderate and often a swing voter in the Court alongside Chief Justice John Roberts.
He upheld Obamacare as Constitutional, was the key vote that legalized same-sex marriage and upheld women’s “right” to abortion in 1992.
He was a liberal in all but name. And now, Trump has the prime opportunity to nominate yet another Gorsuch and deal a major blow to decades of Leftist Justices getting their way. Of course, that includes such things as Obamacare, DACA, illegal immigration, sanctuary cities and states, same-sex marriage, and perhaps the single biggest issue: abortion.
Now, the White House has narrowed a list of over 20 picks down to 5. This list includes people like Brett Kavanaugh, Amul Thapar, Amy Barrett, Thomas Hardiman and Raymond Kethledge.
From what we know about them, while they all have voted conservatively in many issues, people like Kavanaugh and Hardiman have shown to be relatively moderate in other areas, with Kavanaugh upholding Obamacare in a couple of cases, saying that Obamacare penalties were actually “taxes” in one of those cases, and with Hardiman seemingly buckling to typical Leftist hysteria of racism and discrimination when he struck down a fire department’s residency requirement, which he termed “racially motivated” and went on record saying: “minority workforce representation that low suggests discrimination”.
So, in my mind, both Kavanaugh and Hardiman are too unreliable. The other three seem to be the most conservative, as well as true Constitutionalists who will stick with the written text in the Constitution, as well as the intentions of the people who wrote the Constitutional amendments, in their decisions rather than go with what they like or don’t like.
But in any case, most of these picks are true conservatives who will surely and seriously challenge the horrendous 1973 Roe v. Wade case that has resulted in 60.5 million abortions since 1973 in the U.S.
Successfully criminalizing abortion will likely be Trump’s lasting achievement, particularly since Court justices can serve for an entire generation or even more depending on their age. Gorsuch’s selection has already solidified a relatively conservative Court for decades to come. This will further solidify a conservative Court, leaving Roberts as the last swing voter, who has occasionally shown to be conservative himself. Add that to the fact that the two oldest Justices in the Court are liberals (Ginsburg, 85, and Breyer, 79) and you could potentially replace those two at some point at the end of Trump’s second term or beginning of Pence’s first term. Almost certainly by the end of Pence’s second term and most definitely by the beginning of Ivanka’s first term.
Jokes aside, it cannot be overstated how massive this is for America. For life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. While a Presidential election will only guarantee a political side’s success for 4 years, and midterm elections for 2 years, whoever’s side gets to pick a new Supreme Court Justice could influence the country for decades.
Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court will almost certainly guarantee a very conservative Court for the next half century. This means that almost regardless of who wins elections in the next ten to twenty years, the Supreme Court will likely maintain the Constitution even in the case of a President Bernie Sanders (which will almost certainly never happen).
Now, with these news comes yet another reason for conservatives to vote in the November mid-term elections. Securing a Republican majority, or perhaps even a supermajority, as I think will occur, means that for the next two years, we will have one of the most conservative Presidents in history, a very solidly pro-Trump and conservative Congress and a very conservative Supreme Court for decades to come.
Man, if I were a liberal, I’d be panicking right now. I suppose the only thing that has kept them from completely running amok (yes, it can get worse) is the hope that Democrats might be able to take back the House at the very least. But if and perhaps when Republicans not only retain Congress but add more seats to amount to a supermajority, the Left might honestly panic and start another Civil War.
I don’t know, I wouldn’t put it past them to do it again. If the situation I describe becomes reality, the Left will be at its most powerless it has ever been. They might panic and do something stupid.
Not to compare this situation to a video game I know, but I will draw a fair comparison anyway. There’s this video game series titled Fallout, in which you play as a character in a post-nuclear war America set hundreds of years from now. In this series, America is utterly devastated by nukes after a war over resources with Communist China. According to the game’s lore, China invaded Anchorage, Alaska in search for oil and the U.S. counter-attacked, eventually invading main-land China. While it is unclear exactly what caused the Chinese to launch nukes at the U.S., it was most likely out of desperation to try to win an unwinnable war.
Now, what the heck does a game have to do with a real life situation? Like the Chinese Communists, the Left might feel cornered and trapped and feel as though they need to explore extreme situations to try and fight back. If they feel they don’t really have much to lose, the Left might go to any extreme necessary to try and reclaim the country they believe is theirs. Ironically, in the video game series, launching nukes wound up destroying China as well. This could also be the fate of the Democrat Party.
In resorting to desperate measures far worse than the incivility we’re already witnessing, the Democrat Party might well see itself destroyed.
Of course, the ideologies won’t die until God has destroyed the world, but the major political party of the Left might well cease to exist in the near future.
Regardless, that’s not what I want to take away from the retirement of Justice Kennedy. While it’s still something to be aware of, as of right now, I just want to delight in the fact that horrible Leftist cases decades-old will likely face their biggest and toughest challenge yet.
“And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
With the growing evils of today’s Left, the term “pro-life Democrat” almost seems like an oxymoron at this point. But recently, southern Democrats have shown their respect for life inside the womb in a very unexpected way: with a 15-week abortion ban being signed into law.
Breitbart News explains that the bill, which was authored by Democrat state Senator John Milkovich, “was signed by [Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards] Wednesday afternoon.”
What is also interesting is that Edwards is the Democrat governor of Louisiana.
“The legislation creates criminal penalties for anyone performing an abortion beyond 15 weeks. Mothers of unborn babies would not be charged,” according to Breitbart News.
Milkovich spoke during hearings of the bill, saying: “The farther along the pregnancies the more risks to the mother and the more tortuous it is for the babies.”
May I remind you that this IS A DEMOCRAT REFERRING TO PEOPLE IN THE WOMB AS “BABIES”! It’s honestly a sad, sad world when something like that seems almost unbelievable.
The News-Star reported on this story, having Dr. Wayne Gravois testifying in favor of the bill, saying: “They can yawn, smile, grimace (at 15 weeks). It’s a baby.”
The measure wound up being overwhelmingly popular, passing in the state House by a vote of 70-9, and passing in the state Senate by a vote of 24-1.
Now, despite these good news, there also are some bad news regarding this. Babies can’t simply be allowed to remain safe, if Leftists have anything to say about it.
Back in March, Mississippi passed a similar law and became the first state to ban all abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy. According to Breitbart: “The state’s only abortion clinic immediately challenged the law in court, and a federal judge granted a temporary restraining order to keep it from going into effect. The Louisiana law will go into effect if the Mississippi law is upheld by the courts.”
And back in May, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed a bill that bans most abortions once a fetal heartbeat can be detected. The biggest child-killing organization in the world simply couldn’t stand idly by and joined forces with ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) to file a lawsuit against the state over the law.
In case you are unfamiliar with ACLU, don’t let their official name mislead you. The acronym may as well mean “American Communist Liberal Union” with how Leftist they are.
Returning to Louisiana, a Leftist group called Lift Louisiana is “launching a social media campaign against the law, claiming it prevents women from accessing abortion.”
The director for the pro-abortion group stated: “It is painfully clear that anti-abortion state legislators will stop at nothing to push their radical agenda, despite growing evidence that these laws hurt women. It must stop. With this campaign, we’re aiming to raise awareness about our state’s dangerous abortion restrictions and how Louisianans can fight back.”
First, the only ones with a radical agenda is the Left. Killing children inside the womb in the name of healthcare and women’s liberation can’t be described as anything other than a radical agenda… well, except maybe “murder” but that’s beside the point. It’s not a radical agenda to want to save as many babies as possible from women who feel as though it is their only option and choose to make a horrible mistake. It’s a radical agenda to want to allow people to indiscriminately kill the unborn, which even they know is wrong, otherwise they would not hide behind “healthcare” and “women’s liberation”.
If they honestly didn’t think it was wrong, they wouldn’t try to convince people it was anything other than murder. (Whether they care if it is wrong or not is a different matter. Chances are they do know it’s wrong and still don’t care).
Second, what evidence suggesting these laws hurt women? She doesn’t offer any, of course. Why? Because there honestly isn’t any. To say that such a law hurts women is to defy logic. How could it possibly hurt women? Most women have a feeling that they are pregnant about a week after conception, when the embryo implants itself in the uterus. They can confirm their pregnancy to a pretty accurate degree soon after.
If they don’t want the baby or feel they can’t afford to have one and choose abortion for some reason, they still have roughly 14 weeks, or about 3 months to come to such an evil decision and perform it. So time restraints are not what supposedly “hurts” women.
So in what other regard could it possible “hurt” women? It doesn’t. It only hurts Planned Parenthood’s bottom line and the Left’s dream to see the African-American race go extinct (since African-Americans are the biggest victims to abortion and Margaret Sanger was a noted racist who founded what would eventually be Planned Parenthood to exterminate what she considered as “weeds” of the world).
Finally, given the overwhelming support for the bill, which was CREATED BY A DEMOCRAT AND SIGNED INTO LAW BY A DEMOCRAT, I don’t think very many Louisianans will look to “fight back” against what they consider to be “oppression”.
By stark contrast, Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser said that all the pro-life lawmakers of Louisiana, including the Democrat ones, ought to be applauded for this accomplishment.
“They followed through on their pro-life principles and united across party lines to protect unborn children. Louisiana is leading the way in their bipartisan effort to bring our nation’s laws into line with basic human decency.”
The key there is “basic human decency” of which the Left severely lacks. The Left only believes in basic human decency when it is to protect rapist illegal immigrant gang members.
Alas, that is a different conversation for another time. For now, I will simply commend Governor Edwards and Louisiana State Senator John Milkovich for their part in the creation and signing of the bill to protect the most innocent of us all.
I simply hope and pray that it will be allowed to take effect soon and that the evil organizations who are against this child-saving policy will fail in their efforts.
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
If you needed any more proof than there already is that abortion is evil, I’ll share a story with you about some Twitter comments made by Dr. Leah Torres, an abortionist.
To give some context, Dr. Evil… – eh… – Torres was defending the position against pro-life advocates that she didn’t perform abortions for the money of it: “Your ignorance is showing. Look up what docs get paid for delivering babies vs performing abortions. I’ll take $3K for the delivery over $100 for the abortion. Why do anti-choice folks always think it’s for money?”
Maybe because the alternative would be that you do it for fun, which is even worse. Doing it for the money doesn’t redeem you at all, but doing it because you like it makes you look far worse. I’d like to think that most abortionists do it for the money, not because they hate babies and love to end their lives. Abortionists are legal murderers, after all. If you don’t go into it for the money, there’s something seriously wrong with you. Even as a child of around 8 years old, I understood that abortion was legal murder.
At one point, one Twitter user raised the very point I’m making here. They wrote: “So [if] it’s not for the money, is it because you just like infanticide? Do you hear their heartbeats when you lay down at night? Do you hear their screams?”
And to this particular comment is when Leah made the more horrendous comment: “No. You know fetuses can’t scream, right? I transect the cord 1st so there’s really no opportunity, if they’re even far enough along to have a larynx. I won’t apologize for performing medicine. I’m also a ‘uterus ripper outer,’ if that’s how you’d like to describe hysterectomy.”
In other words, she’s admitting that she doesn’t hear them scream because she slits their throats first. I hate the fact that that’s somehow normal and should be encouraged.
Let me repeat it in case it didn’t sink in entirely. SHE SLITS BABIES’ THROATS SO THEY DON’T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SCREAM!
This is not medicine! THIS IS SERIAL KILLER MENTALITY! Since when is medicine a tool to KILL someone? But I’ll likely get to that later since there’s a clear bigger issue at hand.
And please excuse my language here, but WHAT THE HELL?! How is that a normal piece of conversation?! How is that an excuse whatsoever?! Those are the kind of words that would warrant someone to be INSTITUTIONALIZED!
But you see, for her, that’s not weird or crazy or evil at all. She even follows up what she said with “I won’t apologize for performing medicine”. She FUNDAMENTALLY BELIEVES this is normal! THIS IS NOT NORMAL! IT’S CRAZY! IT’S HEARTLESS! AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, EVIL!!
Sorry for yelling here, but I don’t know how else I should respond to such blatant evil. It’s only been a few days since I wrote ANOTHER article about a crazy Leftist who was defending abortion. I called her evil too. This makes that other woman look like Mr. Rogers by comparison!
Ok, let’s take a breather. Let’s regather our thoughts. Considering that I’ve long acknowledged this sort of work to be work worthy of Satan, I should not be so surprised at the calmness of this she-devil’s voice in detailing how she kills children. It’s sick, no doubt. But it shouldn’t be so surprising. This is evil. There’s not a darn person in the world who could possibly convince me otherwise.
This is NOT medicine. This is NOT women’s rights. This is NOT liberation of women. This is NOT normal. This is NOT something to brag about. This is NOT something to support. You can’t possibly say that “it’s your body, your choice” when it’s the BABY’S throat that is being cut. You can’t possibly say that horrible line to me when it’s the BABY’S body being manipulated, its life ended and its body parts desecrated.
It should never be ANYONE’S choice to end the life of another human being. Much less if that life is the life of a woman’s CHILD! Abortion is not merciful. Abortion is not out of love. Abortion is hatred. Hatred for life.
Of course, they can’t possibly admit that. No one would support the end of an innocent human being’s life. So they redefine what it means to be alive. They take away the humanity of a baby inside the womb. They declare it to not be alive just yet. That it needs to be outside the womb for it to be alive. And so, they justify taking away their lives. They treat babies in the womb in a very similar way as to how they treated slaves - by dehumanizing them.
No, babies in the uterus aren’t forced to pick cotton. But the life of a baby in the womb today equals that of a slave. It’s not alive. It’s not human. But in some ways, the way they treat babies in the womb is even worse than how they treated slaves.
Slaves at least were considered “property”. While they were dehumanized and stripped of their basic rights, they weren’t disposed of unless necessary and weren’t flat-out killed either. So a closer comparison for pre-born babies would have to be with Jews inside concentration camps. Or at the least, those inside death camps like Auschwitz.
Babies in the womb aren’t considered property. Property at least is something to take some care of. No, babies are treated as nothing more than Jell-O at best and a disease at worst. To the Left, the women who choose to keep their babies choose to keep the “random assortment of crap” growing inside them. And the women who choose to kill their babies choose to get rid of a disease.
The ironic thing is that they at least consider a disease to be alive, since it’s a virus and it’s a cell. They consider a single cell to be alive but not a baby inside the womb.
The life of a human baby inside the womb is less than property. Less than nothing. Much like Jewish lives were less than nothing for the Nazis, or at least something to rid the world of, babies inside the wombs are less than nothing for the modern-day Left.
It’s true when people say that whatever the Left touches becomes corrupted and broken. That extends further than what the government takes over. The Left has touched and shaped our culture. Life is meaningless. This is the corruption of society at the hands of the Left.
You can party, get drunk, get high, have sex and utterly shame yourself if you so desire. If your life means nothing outside the womb to the Left, how could we expect them to value life inside the womb? If people don’t value their own lives, they’ll certainly not value others’. And since a fetus is “not alive”, then it’s more than ok to get rid of it like a bad case of the flu.
This is the sort of darkness the Left envelopes themselves in. And the ludicrous thing is that they claim to be the light. They claim their cause is that of justice and freedom, not malice, hatred and evil. You can’t outright sell evil to people, so you have to call it good. As the prophet Isaiah said: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” Isaiah 5:20.
And there’s no logical reason not to call abortion evil. Normalizing the mutilation of a child’s corpse is just as evil as the act itself.
Thankfully for people, even someone like Leah, they’re not irredeemable. Such an act and the defense of it rightfully belongs in Hell. For anyone to do this, that’s exactly where they belong. But even something like this can be redeemed. Even someone like any abortionist can be redeemed. Even the most evil figures in history could have been redeemed.
People like Stalin, Ted Bundy, Nikolas Cruz, Osama bin Laden, and even Adolf Hitler could all have been redeemed (in the case of Cruz, he still could be). There’s not a single action coming from their part that would redeem them. Nothing they could do in their own accord. Nothing other than repent; ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness, not from the world, as it would not forgive, but rather forgiveness from God.
He is the only One who could possibly redeem anyone’s soul. He sent His son Jesus Christ to the cross not so that the whole world would be saved, but so that whoever believeth in Him would be.
Now, do I expect Leah to turn to Christ in repentance? No. While I don’t know the woman personally and she’s already given me a horrible first impression, I don’t know if she will at any point in her life. But let’s not forget that Saul would hunt down and order the execution of Christians before he eventually came to Christ himself - and became the Apostle Paul.
If a man as vile as Saul could find salvation, surely anyone could as well. Again, I don’t expect Leah to repent and come to Christ. If she does, I’ll surely never know. But one can only hope and pray that she finds salvation.
“Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
At this point in my career in talking about the Left and their evil ways, it really shouldn’t come as a surprise to see an MSM article defending a woman’s “right” to kill her own baby for any given reason, including Down syndrome in the yet-to-be-born human.
I’m not surprised; I’m not shocked, but I am appalled. I am outraged. The very defense of any murder such as this is horrible and I can’t fathom the reason anyone has to defend this.
Ruth Marcus wrote an article on the Washington Post titled: “I would’ve aborted a fetus with Down syndrome. Women need that right.”
I’ll likely restate this point later in the article, but I’ll present it here initially: how could you possibly say you’re a loving parent if you’d be willing to abort a baby with Down syndrome?
People say that you should love your child regardless of who they are, what they are and what they do. So how come that love is instantly taken away if the child has Down syndrome? If you’re a pregnant woman, excited at the life growing inside of you and you love the fact that you’ll soon be a mother (or mother of more than one child), how could you simply take away that love you have for the child if you were to find out it had Down syndrome?
Either you didn’t actually love that child or you wouldn’t choose to abort that child. The abortion of any child is never done out of love or mercy. Quite the opposite, in fact. It’s done out of evil, hatred and selfishness. By that title alone, Ruth admits she would’ve hated the idea of raising a child with Down syndrome and would’ve chosen to not love that child. A Down syndrome baby is "too inconvenient" for her selfish, self-centered life. For the fact that the Left says love isn’t a choice, she sure is choosing not to love any child she could have if they had Down syndrome.
But let’s dive in to the horrible article. The first paragraph is honestly rather insulting.
“There is a new push in antiabortion circles to pass state laws aimed at barring women from terminating their pregnancies after the fetus has been determined to have Down syndrome. These laws are unconstitutional, unenforceable – and wrong.”
First, who the hell is this evil woman to determine what is right and what is wrong? That’s not up to a single man, woman or child to define. It’s up to GOD to define. Do you see why I said this paragraph was insulting?
Second, I find it interesting how she would call us “antiabortion” people. Does that mean she is admitting that her position isn’t “pro-choice” but rather “pro-abortion”? Because if she considers herself to be outside of the “antiabortion circle”, naturally, one would expect her to be in the “pro-abortion circle”, in that case. So you see, it’s not about a person’s choice. It’s about sentencing any innocent child to DEATH upon a person’s whim.
Finally, I can understand that she’s essentially going by the Roe v. Wade case to legalize abortion when she says “barring women from terminating their pregnancies… [is] unconstitutional.”
But I would like to dispute the very Supreme Court case. How could one possibly say that aborting a baby is constitutional? Where in the Constitution of the United States of America does it say that a woman has the right to kill her own child while inside the womb? What Amendment, what section in that Amendment and under what clause does it say a woman has such a right? Murder is not a constitutional right!
Regardless, I’ll return to the stomach-churning article. Eventually, she mentions that she had performed tests for Down syndrome while she was pregnant with her two children. She then says: “I can say without hesitation that, tragic as it would have felt and ghastly as a second-trimester abortion would’ve been, I would have terminated those pregnancies had the testing come back positive. I would have grieved the loss and moved on.”
Could you imagine being her child and reading that you were this close to being unloved and thrown away like trash by your own mother just because of something you had absolutely no control over? I don’t know how old her children are, but I can imagine the shock they must’ve felt if they read the article and read how their mother would’ve killed them due to such imperfection.
Then she goes on to say: “And I am not alone. More than two-thirds of American women choose abortion in such circumstances. Isn’t that the point – or at least inherent in the point – of prenatal testing in the first place?”
NO! The point of prenatal testing is to check and see if there will be possible issues in the future of the child’s life and ACT ACCORDINGLY WITH THE RESULTS! You perform these tests to see if your child is ok. And if it’s not, you act accordingly for the BENEFIT of the child’s FUTURE! Not to justify your decision to END that child’s future.
I may not be a parent yet. Not even close. But I understand common sense, which is more than any Leftist can claim. When my future wife and I are expecting a baby, we’ll perform these tests. If they come back negative, we’ll praise the Lord and thank Him for giving us a perfectly healthy baby. But if they come back positive, we’ll pray to the Lord for strength and guidance in what would almost certainly be a very pressing and trying future for us.
But regardless of the results of the test, we’ll love that child more than we’ll love ourselves. Ruth here is admitting that she loves herself more than her children, in a sense. If she’s unwilling to raise a child with Down syndrome which would certainly be a life-long commitment and job to do, that’s indicative of the limited “love”, if there is any at all, within her heart.
It’s indicative of the sort of selfish “love” that is honestly very much expected from people who support abortion.
Indicative of the sort of selfish “love” that was present in noted-racist Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, as well as just about anyone in the 30s and 40s that supported Nazi Germany’s eugenics program – a program that essentially championed the very thing Ruth is defending: the extermination of “undesirables”.
Those undesirables began with the lame, cripple and stupid (not Joe Biden stupid, but actual mental retardation). Then, they moved on with the “socially undesirable” i.e. the Jews, Gypsies, blacks and such.
Now, moving away from the article directly, people on Twitter made sure to utterly destroy the article and the arguments it presents.
“Monstrous evil unashamedly displayed. You would never say that women need the right to abort, say, a fetus predisposed to be gay, or a fetus predisposed to be alcoholic, or a fetus predisposed to be (*cough* China *cough*) female,” said one Twitter user, referencing the fact that sex-selective abortion takes commonplace in China, given that the government does not regulate it despite the fact that it’s illegal and that the Chinese culture tends to prefer males over females… for some reason.
Another Twitter user sought to use a study to defend children with Down syndrome: “A 2011 study found that nearly 99% of people with Down syndrome over the age of 12 said they were happy with their lives. 99% said they loved their families. 97% said they liked their brothers and sisters. 86% felt they could make friends easily.”
Ok, now I see why the Left hates children with Down syndrome. 99% say they were happy with their lives? I doubt a double digit percentage of Leftists can say they feel the same. They are always angry and hateful and poisonous towards everything, seemingly. “99% said they loved their families.” Well, the Left has been trying to utterly bugger up the very definition of a family, so it makes sense that the Left hates people with Down syndrome. They’re envious.
They’re envious that 99% of people with Down syndrome over the age of 12 live happy lives. The Left is never happy, even when Obama was President. They have always been angry and outraged at everything. If they got absolutely everything they wanted, they’d still be miserable. Not because they don’t have what they want, but because they do and there’s nothing left for them to campaign for and try to win elections. No new “issue” that would need to be addressed. We’d simply be left with a worse hell than the Soviet Union was.
You thought I was joking when I said that I see why the Left hates people with Down syndrome, didn’t you? I understand the mind of the Left, which is why I can so easily refute them and even mock them. I understand they are entirely hateful people. People who thrive on the anger and hatred of a group of people (i.e. the outraged Parkland students) to try and push their agenda.
While saying the Left hates people with Down syndrome may sound like an exaggeration, in reality, it’s no exaggeration at all. They hate just about everyone, so I would expect them to hate people with Down syndrome as well. You have to understand that these people are people who live without Christ in their hearts. As such, hatred and anger stirs up from within them without much deterrent.
I’ve mentioned before the different sorts of evil. The difference between chaotic evil and lawful evil. To simplify them, chaotic evil is evil without a conscience. Lawful evil is evil with a conscience that understands that what he or she is doing is evil and is ok with it.
An example of chaotic evil would be someone like Parkland shooter Nikolas Cruz. You can’t possibly convince me he has a conscience; a little voice inside his head that tells him when doing something is wrong. That little voice in his head is likely drowned out by all the other voices in his head that tell him he should kill people, and that, given recent news stories, he dreams of “killing people and [being] covered in blood,” according to a Miami Herald report about Cruz’s psychiatric file written 4 years ago… which honestly raises more red flags about the incompetence of the Broward County Sheriff’s office, the county school, and all involved investigative authorities.
An example of lawful evil would be someone like Ruth. She champions evil, likely knowing it’s evil, but convinces herself that it’s just and right. A better example would be Obama, who did evil things, knowing full well they were evil, and was happy to have done it.
But both are evil just the same. Evil that stems from their hearts. From Man’s very own nature. From not having Christ in their hearts. Only someone who doesn’t have Christ in their hearts would be willing to abort any baby for any given reason. Only someone who doesn’t have Christ in their hearts would be so selective in their “love” of their child to abort them for such an imperfection.
And if two-thirds of women in America choose to kill their own child based on the Down syndrome test coming back positive, I shall pray for their souls. Someone should.
“For fools speak folly, their hearts are bent on evil: They practice ungodliness and spread error concerning the Lord; the hungry they leave empty and from the thirsty they withhold water.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Over this past weekend, two separate and very different marches occurred. One was the March for Life and the other was the Women’s March. And these two events highlight the characters of the opposing sides.
According to the Daily Wire, at the March for Life event: “Families proudly pushed their babies with Down syndrome – an abnormality we, as a society, are urgently told to dispose of – in their strollers with smiles on their faces; former abortion clinic workers held signs proclaiming that life matters; teens chanted about their love for babies and held clever and playful signs; single mothers boasted of their children they chose to keep thanks to pro-life pregnancy centers and religious organizations; a Congresswoman told the masses of the miracle birth of her daughter who was supposed to die upon delivery; and the faithful said prayers aloud in unison and sang church hymns.”
Overall, love was the main message of the March for Life.
In stark contrast, we see the hatred of the “Women’s March”, which in all reality is the “Hatred March”. Because that’s exactly what that march showcased.
Info Wars released a video of one of their team members attending the event. The video is over 20 minutes long, so I won’t talk about absolutely everything in it, but that’s fine. Most of the video is simply the same thing: angry, hateful protesters calling for the impeachment of our duly elected president, calling for supposed “women’s rights” that they already have or that they shouldn’t have - aka the “right” to kill their own children as though they were some sort of disease - and lots and lots of swearing.
Throughout the video, you would see those captured by the camera either flipping off the camera or the reporter himself (or both), you would see the protesters calling Info Wars fake news (which is hilarious), you would see the protesters voicing the same liberal talking points that Trump is a racist and a sexist despite having no proof of those claims and even going so far as to deny the fact that Trump has appointed more women to significant positions than any previous President.
They would often call Trump a rapist but ignore the fact that Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein and multiple other Democrats are rapists themselves. One of them even berated the Info Wars guys and twice spat on them.
Many of them were constantly cursing despite the fact that children were present. One of them even called the Info Wars guys “a**holes” right in front of his son who looked to be no older than 13. I saw a lot of children marching with their insane parents and some even holding signs such as “Justice = Equality”, despite the fact that that’s entirely untruthful given that Bill and Hillary Clinton are just two of many Democrats who should be in jail at the moment.
But the overall message was clear: these people hate everyone and everything that isn't like them. I saw far more hateful signs attacking Trump than loving signs calling for unity and peace. In fact, I don’t remember having seen a single sign that didn’t either bash Trump or recite a liberal talking point such as “we’re all immigrants”, which funny enough, has nothing to do with women and thus proves the point that this was not a “women’s march” but a “hatred march”.
On the other hand, all I saw from the March for Life signs was love. That unborn children should be protected no matter what. One in particular makes the great point that “True feminists protect human life”. And that’s true. A true feminist would protect unborn girls. Someone who’s truly against racism would protect unborn minorities. Someone who’s for gay rights would protect the right of a potential future gay person.
And yet, all these people support abortion. They support the idea of euthanasia for minorities. Oh, did that come out of nowhere? Yeah, that’s what Margaret Sanger’s mission was. She founded Planned Parenthood for the benefit of eugenics. In other words, she founded Planned Parenthood so that “undesirables” wouldn’t get a chance at life.
In a 1934 article titled: “America Needs a Code for Babies”, Sanger said that the government should establish a code “for the better distribution of babies… to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit… No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for fatherhood… No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.”
I recall a liberal talking point being that the government should “stay out of women’s vaginas”. Well, the very founder of Planned Parenthood suggested that the government should control women’s vaginas through the same means they control someone’s right to drive. And funny enough, this is very similar to China’s “one child” policy, yet we don’t see these Leftists calling out China’s oppressive regime.
And this might even be a tough pill to swallow for liberals, but Sanger even accepted an invitation to speak to the women’s chapter of one of the biggest racist organizations in history: the Ku Klux Klan. In a letter to one of her associates, Clarence Gamble, she wrote: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” This was a letter explaining why she hired black ministers to be her ambassadors to the black community.
And that’s not all. In 1938, she urged Americans to follow Nazi Germany’s path of eugenics. “In animal industry, the poor stock is not allowed to breed,” she wrote. “In gardens, the weeds are kept down.”
And that’s not her only affiliation with Nazis. Ernst Rudin, chief architect of the Nazi sterilization program, wrote an article on Sanger’s magazine “Birth Control Review” titled: “Eugenic Sterilization, an Urgent Need.”
Knowing this, I’m not really surprised that the protesters at the “Women’s March” were so hateful and angry. The very founder of Planned Parenthood was a hateful, angry Nazi-sympathizer who sought to eradicate the African-American population and allow the government to have control of people’s reproductive endeavors.
The evidence is clear: the Left is full of hateful bigots and the Right is full of loving and compassionate people who love life.
“Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses.”
Author: Freddie Drake Marinelli.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...