Posted on 10/27/2016 7:47:40 AM PDT by Sean_Anthony
Hillary Clinton is both the epitome and the most perfect example of all that is wrong with America today
According to the CDC and other reliable sources the daily abortion rate in the U.S. is between 3,562 and 3,700. Taking the lower figure and multiplying that by the number of days in a possible Hillary Clinton presidency provides one stunning and gruesome fact.
What that means is that 5,200,520 healthy unborn babies will be sucked out, ripped out or torn out of women and discarded (If not sold to body parts harvesters) like so much bleeding flesh at a meat processing or seafood plant.
Yes.
Next question?
I am more worried about the 5 million ISIS butchers she would bring here frankly. And that’s saying something because I detest abortion.
Voting for Hillary is voting to destroy the United States of America!! Case closed.
I saw an article that Christian author Beth Moore is supporting Hillary because of Trump’s 2005 comments. IMO, she is therefore supporting abortion and illegality and should not be taken seriously as a Christian writer. Interesting how the left makes more of of what someone says rather than what someone does.
The democRAT party is unalterably dedicated to killing babies. If you can't stand the Republican on your ballot, vote 3rd party or abstain. Voting for democRATs is voting for murder.
That, too. But, YES! to the question posed.
Yes, not to mention what it does to the health of the mother..physically, mentally and spiritually.
And i know the father has no say in the matter but it has to have an affect on him,too.
Yes. But equally worrying are all the other nasty things she has in mind.
Five million babys? That’s awful, yes it is, but we are also talking millions upon millions of dead with open borders worldwide and a nuke war with Russia.
Her death toll will make the combined death tolls of Hitler, Stalin and Mao look like childs play.
Seriously, no one, except no one can expect to rule a country or a world with 100% open borders and a nuclear war. It’s impossible. This witch is just totally nuts. She makes Hitler look normal.
One year after her inauguration, there will be billboards with Hitler’s picture with a caption saying: “Miss me yet?” That’s assuming there is enough landscape left to put up a billboard or enough people around to read it.
Wel...the way I see it, the one is most likely punishment the for the other, don’t you think?
Clearly Beth Moore supports sexual deviance, infant slaughter, and every imaginable type of graft. NOT a Cristian writer.
On the underlying question moral question discussed here, nothing addresses it better than the simple logic of this quotation from Mother Teresa, who, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, DC on February 3, 1994, as cited above, stated: "And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
Mother Teresa's declaration may be the most powerful statement in 2016 from which to begin discussions of where a candidate stands on all the questions of life and liberty.
The sole reason these rights were deemed unalienable is that both are derived from the Creator--not from the mother or father, and not from government or judicial decision. What is "granted" by human decision also can, by implication, be withheld.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them (life and liberty)," said Thomas Jefferson.
"The world is different now. . . and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forefathers fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." - John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address
That understanding underlies every other consideration embodied in our Declaration of Independence and every protection of our Constitution. It is the very basis of our rights to life and liberty, of laws to protect them, and it distinguishes ours from other forms of government.
When we fail to acknowledge that foundation of our liberty, then we risk liberty itself for future generations, for where does the right to choose who lives and who does not really end?
That is why the question is of vital importance in each election. Already, we have deprived millions of their Creator-endowed rights to life and liberty, and our nation must be weaker for their loss. We need leaders who understand the implications and potential consequences of departing from our founding principles.
In recent decades, technological advances have enabled us to observe the characteristics and actions of God's tiniest creations in the womb. Unlike previous generations who could not see, we have no excuse for imagining that these are mere blobs of tissue labeled "fetuses." In their early weeks, we now can see that they are living babies who will continue on to possess life and liberty if we do not "destroy" both. Indeed, they are simply smaller versions of ourselves.
Questions on the economy, taxes, threats from terrorists, health care--all are considerations at this election time. One, however, may be basic to all others. Who will best protect the underlying premise of our Constitution--and the lives and liberties of millions yet unborn?
Promises are illusive and cheap. One fact is indisputable, however: Hillary Clinton is committed to the Progressive agenda on this matter, and that agenda is not compatible with our Constitution's premise.
How do these soulless savages ever expect to answer to this come Judgement Day?
I detest both of them, but we also need too fear the FEMA camps, and if I remember right, didn't some weather underground say they thought maybe 20 million Americans would need to be killed off, to complete the communist take over?
They don't believe it, so they don't fear it. I have news for them, however. They are going to be in for the most terrifying shock of their existence on that day.
Christian Speaker Beth Moore Stands in the Gap for Hillary Clinton
Here's a somewhat similar story about another person, whose support for Trump publicly wavered because of comments:
If You Don’t Like Either Candidate, Then Vote for Trump’s Policies
After I saw the shocking 2005 video with Trump talking about his sexual aggression against women, I wrote, “There is no morally good presidential candidate in this election.” I condemned Trump’s immoral conduct and said I did not know how I would vote. I asked Townhall.com to remove my earlier article, “Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice.” I urged Trump to withdraw, hoping we could get a better candidate.The liberal media loved this. “Evangelical theologian calls on Trump to withdraw.”
--SNIP--
And if these are my only two options, then voting for a third-party candidate has the clear effect of helping to elect Clinton, because it is taking my vote away from Trump. That is why the liberal media loved it when I said I was finding it hard to decide.
I don't object to his return, but why did he leave? Couldn't he have predicted the reaction from "the liberal media"? I find liking Donald Trump much easier than liking his detractors, especially the seemingly holy ones who find old comments more damning than support for abortion.
Yes, obviously and I hope voters get back to what is important. Jill Stein pointed out that a vote for Hillary is a vote for war, yet, Hillary is now poaching Jill’s voters. I don’t get it.
emmyloukay, please read post 12.
And another Million elderly EVERY YEAR, by way of denied healthcare, and enticement into Doc assisted suicide.
Yes. It is probably also a vote for the extermination of all humanity in a global nuclear war as a result of NeoCons pining for war against Russia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.