Kudos To Northam!

[PoliticalChic]

Unintentionally the Virginia Democrat Governor has done a great service to morality and clear thinking.



Democrat Northam, in explaining his support for infanticide, the new doctrine of the Democrat Party:

“So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he went on. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Soooo......what are the possible outcomes of that 'discussion'????????

This: leave the child to die.....exactly the same position Candidate Obama had when he ran for President: infanticide.



When Northam put the spotlight on the Democrat position....this change ensued:

From The Knights of Columbus:

“The number of Democrats now identifying as pro-life is 34 percent, up from 20 percent last month, while the number identifying as pro-choice fell from 75 percent to 61 percent. Younger Americans also moved dramatically, now dividing 47 percent pro-life to 48 percent pro-choice. One month ago, the gap was almost 40 percentage points with only 28 percent identifying as pro-life and 65 percent identifying as pro-choice.

“The recent legal changes to late-term abortion and the debate which followed have not gone unnoticed by the general public,” said Carvalho. “In just one month, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of Americans who see themselves as pro-life and an equally notable decline in those who describe themselves as pro-choice.”

This is the first time since 2009 that as many or more Americans have identified as pro-life as have identified as pro-choice. More than a third of Democrats (34 percent) as well as two-thirds of Republicans (67 percent) identify as pro-life. Independents divide (46 percent pro-life, 48 percent pro-choice)."



Thanks, Northam.

 

[The Original Tree]

Leftists do not understand that continuing to make war on innocent human life, is making war with God.

At some point, God will make war with them.

 

[gipper]

Leftists do not understand that continuing to make war on life, is making war with God.

At some point, God will make war with them.

I don’t believe they are concerned about that.

 

[BlackFlag]

Leftists do not understand that continuing to make war on life, is making war with God.

At some point, God will make war with them.

Odin and I are at peace

 

[night_son]

Unintentionally the Virginia Democrat Governor has done a great service to morality and clear thinking.



Democrat Northam, in explaining his support for infanticide, the new doctrine of the Democrat Party:

“So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he went on. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Soooo......what are the possible outcomes of that 'discussion'????????

This: leave the child to die.....exactly the same position Candidate Obama had when he ran for President: infanticide.



When Northam put the spotlight on the Democrat position....this change ensued:

From The Knights of Columbus:

“The number of Democrats now identifying as pro-life is 34 percent, up from 20 percent last month, while the number identifying as pro-choice fell from 75 percent to 61 percent. Younger Americans also moved dramatically, now dividing 47 percent pro-life to 48 percent pro-choice. One month ago, the gap was almost 40 percentage points with only 28 percent identifying as pro-life and 65 percent identifying as pro-choice.

“The recent legal changes to late-term abortion and the debate which followed have not gone unnoticed by the general public,” said Carvalho. “In just one month, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of Americans who see themselves as pro-life and an equally notable decline in those who describe themselves as pro-choice.”

This is the first time since 2009 that as many or more Americans have identified as pro-life as have identified as pro-choice. More than a third of Democrats (34 percent) as well as two-thirds of Republicans (67 percent) identify as pro-life. Independents divide (46 percent pro-life, 48 percent pro-choice)."



Thanks, Northam.

There has never existed a greater cause in human history to lay one's life on the line for than the defense of unborn and born children. Should civil war 2.0 break out, this issue will be key on the table set of reasons to fight radical Leftism. Who would not fight and die to protect the most innocent among us? What brand of monsters would champion the genocide of our own children? Neo-Barbarism and Neo-Draconian times. That's where we're at, that's what we're living nowadays.

 

[william the wie]

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

 

[Penelope]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

 

[Oddball]

Leftists do not understand that continuing to make war on life, is making war with God.

At some point, God will make war with them.

Their god is The State.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

Not that far off the truth even if you mean it tongue-in-cheek.....

Check out this story from Fordham...

1. “…the Jesuit college Fordham University welcomed infanticide and bestiality advocate Peter Singer for a panel discussion on Friday.
   
   2. According to Fordham’s media relations website, Singer, a tenured Princeton bioethics professor, spoke from 4 to 6 p.m. in a panel the university promised “will provoke Christians to think about other animals in new ways.”
   
   3. Singer has long lamented the societal stigma against having sex with animals. “Not so long ago,” Singer wrote in one essay, “any form of sexuality not leading to the conception of children was seen as, at best, wanton lust, or worse, a perversion. One by one, the taboos have fallen. But … not every taboo has crumbled.”
   
   4. In the essay, titled “Heavy Petting,” Singer concluded that “sex across the species barrier,” while not normal, “ceases to be an offence [sic] to our status and dignity as human beings.” “Occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop” when humans have sex with their pets, he claimed.
   
   5. In addition to supporting bestiality and immediately granting equal legal rights to animals, Singer has also advocated euthanizing the mentally ill and aborting disabled infants on utilitarian grounds.
   
   6. In his 1993 essay “Taking Life,” Singer, in a section called “Justifying Infanticide and Non-Voluntary Euthanasia,” wrote that “killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.”
   
   7. “Very often it is not wrong at all,” he added, noting that newborns should not be considered people until approximately a month after their birth.
   
   8. Both Singer and his supporters maintain that ethics experts must often confront taboo topics to arrive at greater philosophical truths.” Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks
   
   The very same Fordham effectively barred conservative columnist Ann Coulter from speaking on campus last week,
   
   9. The Jesuit university’s president, Joseph M.McShane wrote in a statement the day before the Coulter speaking engagement was canceled. “There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative — more heat than light — and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.” Op.Cit.
   
   Read more: Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks

 

[gipper]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

Republicans? Really? They have done almost nothing to stop the mass murder of the unborn. They like the DParty, don’t really care.

Either you are for life, or you aren’t.

Any mother who would willingly murder their child in the womb, needs to have their head examined. Apparently some women have aborted more than once. That makes them serial killers. Ugh!!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

1. There is no such thing as "abortion to ensure the life of the mother ."

2. " for rape and for incest. "
The concept that there are "cases of rape or incest" is a chimera.
They really don't exist.....well, the fact is that 98.5% of abortion don't involve either abhorrent event.
The cases in which abortion is for rape, 1%; and .5% incest.http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

Nearly every abortion is for nothing more than convenience.

 

[Penelope]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

1. There is no such thing as "abortion to ensure the life of the mother ."

2. " for rape and for incest. "
The concept that there are "cases of rape or incest" is a chimera.
They really don't exist.....well, the fact is that 98.5% of abortion don't involve either abhorrent event.
The cases in which abortion is for rape, 1%; and .5% incest.http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

Nearly every abortion is for nothing more than convenience.

The Abortion Debate Isn’t As Partisan As Politicians Make It Seem

you'd be surprised on how many plug the plug on babies, republicans included.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

I think the archway to baal was recently erected in washington dc.

 

[Oddball]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

I think the archway to baal was recently erected in washington dc.

Ever seen the aerial view of the Capitol building and surrounding streets?

 

[william the wie]

Defining the placenta as the pre-natal life support tube would cut down on abortions by a lot given the rate at which seniors vote.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

I think the archway to baal was recently erected in washington dc.

Ever seen the aerial view of the Capitol building and surrounding streets?

Yeah, the geometry and how everything fits. After seeing it, I knew it wasn't coincidence.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Meanwhile, republicans are all for abortion to ensure the life of the mother and if the fetus is non viable, for rape and for incest.

now what you complaining about?

1. There is no such thing as "abortion to ensure the life of the mother ."

2. " for rape and for incest. "
The concept that there are "cases of rape or incest" is a chimera.
They really don't exist.....well, the fact is that 98.5% of abortion don't involve either abhorrent event.
The cases in which abortion is for rape, 1%; and .5% incest.http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

Nearly every abortion is for nothing more than convenience.

The Abortion Debate Isn’t As Partisan As Politicians Make It Seem

you'd be surprised on how many plug the plug on babies, republicans included.

Really?


Let's check.....or shall we simply assume you're as wrong as you always are?



"Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) introduced the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would provide medical care to babies born after botched abortions. Doctors would be required to provide medical care to a baby who survived an abortion, just as they would with any other patient. If doctors failed to provide care he or she would face criminal charges.

"I want to ask each and every one of my colleagues whether or not we're OK with infanticide," Sasse asked his colleagues.

But when the bill came to the Senate floor for a vote on Monday, Democrats filibustered."
Disgusting: Dems Prove, Once Again, They Support Infanticide With Their Latest Filibuster



"...all six Democrats running for president in 2020 voted against the bill. The list includes Sens. Cory Booker (NJ), Sherrod Brown (OH), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Kamala Harris (CA.), Amy Klobuchar (MN), and Elizabeth Warren (MA.). Independent Bernie Sanders (VT) also voted in line with Democrats."



Now.....where do you stand on the slaughter of babies????

 

[The Original Tree]

Leftists do not understand that continuing to make war on innocent human life, is making war with God.

At some point, God will make war with them.

I don’t believe they are concerned about that.

No they are not concerned with that at all. They Follow the god of this world, who was a liar and murderer from the beginning.

But there may be a fence sitter that does not actually realize what they are doing. And though there is a slim possibility of them changing their ways, that possibility still exists.

 

[william the wie]

Making all pregnancies under 18 eligible for abortion as rape is probably politically necessary but not in the third trimester except for very limited circumstances

 

[The Original Tree]

When does Fordham plan on putting up the traditional statue/furnace of Baal?

Not that far off the truth even if you mean it tongue-in-cheek.....

Check out this story from Fordham...

1. “…the Jesuit college Fordham University welcomed infanticide and bestiality advocate Peter Singer for a panel discussion on Friday.
   
   2. According to Fordham’s media relations website, Singer, a tenured Princeton bioethics professor, spoke from 4 to 6 p.m. in a panel the university promised “will provoke Christians to think about other animals in new ways.”
   
   3. Singer has long lamented the societal stigma against having sex with animals. “Not so long ago,” Singer wrote in one essay, “any form of sexuality not leading to the conception of children was seen as, at best, wanton lust, or worse, a perversion. One by one, the taboos have fallen. But … not every taboo has crumbled.”
   
   4. In the essay, titled “Heavy Petting,” Singer concluded that “sex across the species barrier,” while not normal, “ceases to be an offence [sic] to our status and dignity as human beings.” “Occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop” when humans have sex with their pets, he claimed.
   
   5. In addition to supporting bestiality and immediately granting equal legal rights to animals, Singer has also advocated euthanizing the mentally ill and aborting disabled infants on utilitarian grounds.
   
   6. In his 1993 essay “Taking Life,” Singer, in a section called “Justifying Infanticide and Non-Voluntary Euthanasia,” wrote that “killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.”
   
   7. “Very often it is not wrong at all,” he added, noting that newborns should not be considered people until approximately a month after their birth.
   
   8. Both Singer and his supporters maintain that ethics experts must often confront taboo topics to arrive at greater philosophical truths.” Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks
   
   The very same Fordham effectively barred conservative columnist Ann Coulter from speaking on campus last week,
   
   9. The Jesuit university’s president, Joseph M.McShane wrote in a statement the day before the Coulter speaking engagement was canceled. “There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative — more heat than light — and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.” Op.Cit.
   
   Read more: Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks

The Days of Noah, the days of Sodom and Gomorrah are upon us.