Posted on 06/19/2017 12:53:55 AM PDT by gattaca
In a video posted to Facebook, a Missouri lawmaker cuts off the head of a chicken while announcing he wants to stop abortions in the state.
State Rep. Mike Moon, an Ash Grove Republican, posted the video Monday afternoon. In it, he segues from saying that God entrusted humans to protect and care for animals into making a plea to Missourians to support his bill stopping abortion.
“We’ve been called back for this special session for the primary purpose of supporting life, protecting the unborn specifically,” Moon said in the video.
As he pulled something from the chicken’s innards, he continued: “I think we need to get to the heart of the matter here, so today I’m filing a bill that will lead to the stopping of abortion in the state of Missouri, and I hope you’ll support it.”
House Bill 14, called the “Missouri Right to Life Act,” was filed Monday by Moon.
Its proposed effective date is this August.
In February, Moon introduced the “Never Again Act,” which proposed an exhibit in the Capitol museum to showcase abortion tools.
Good for him. A puppy or a baby seal would REALLY upset them. That’s about what it will take; a baby human sure isn’t moving them.
Horribly ironic, isn’t it.
Maybe he did it because he knew of the response he would get. He could then show the hypocrisy and sickness of the left.
Save them gizzards, Mike!
Good for him, he’s right. God bless and protect Mike Moon, his family and loved ones. Amen.
I love it.
I’m hoping that Trump will kill the Thanksgiving Day turkey instead of giving it a pardon.
“This turkey’s sole purpose in life, seeing as it was raised on a turkey farm, was to provide food. What an honor to live your life, and fulfill your goal! And to be served at the table of the White House!”
Although with this congressman’s actions, Trump could easily combine the ideas of life, fulfilling one’s goals, etc. with the idea of allowing the babies to live.
Flour, egg wash, flour again abd deep fry....yum
Well, that is certainly effective.
I admit that I don’t like to see the manner in which my food reaches my table....but i accept it.
And, when juxtaposed to the killing of babies, as Mr. Moon does here, it certainly brings perspective.
I was staying at a friends house and he had animal planet playing on his TV. I don’t have a TV haven’t for decades.
After watching it for awhile I know why city people have such strange views of the animal world.
The smell of hot feathers... that is what comes to mind when I think of chicken slaughter. They have such a distinctive odor.
One of my best memories I have as a young boy gathering around the Sunday dinner table after my Mom had fried up three ‘spring chickens.’ These started out as chicks bought by mail order in late winter and they just reached butchering size by late June. You have not had chicken unless you have eaten range raised spring chicken, butchered in the morning, battered and pan fried with the left over drippings made into a milk based flour gravy, poured over new red spring potatoes with fresh sweet spring peas on the side.
>>The leftists are more concerned with the chicken that the actual babies. They are going nuts over this.
I think that was his point. Excellent piece of political theatrics! Every call to end abortion should include the butchering of a piece of livestock that is intended to be food. Make the Left argue that a chicken is more important than a human baby.
If you want to make it really fun, get photos of prominent Leftists at fundraisers eating chicken.
Remember that Sarah Palin video from a turkey farm - where you saw the turkeys getting their heads chopped off in the background?
The libs went bonkers!
One of the reasons why I’ve been suggesting that the Missouri Legislature start touring, now that Ringling Brothers have quit the circus business.
and what was the point of that
I have the following study posted on my profile page. It's very outdated now. One can reasonably speculate that it's only gotten worse. At the time that I posted it, many people doubted that anything so shocking could be true. Now, many people doubt that this could ever have been considered shocking. It's just commonly accepted that people with severe brain impairments are expendable. It's still acceptable for some of us to believe otherwise, as long as we don't try to act on our beliefs. How much longer before it's illegal for us to even harbor these beliefs? I expect it to become a hate crime to interfere with the extermination of "useless eaters." That may sound crazy now, but give it a few years. How long did it take to declare the Christian view of homosexual behavior to be a hate crime?
Please excuse the rant. Here's the study.
- - - - -
In 1999, 10.4% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
In 2000, 11.0% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
In 2001, 11.4% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
I haven't found data yet for other years, but I think it's a fair guess that the killings continue to climb.
This doesn't represent a percentage of patients who died (which would be bad enough). It doesn't mean that 11.4% of the patients who died were starved and dehydrated. It means 11.4% of all the people living in the U.S.A. with severe cognitive impairments were killed this way. And it doesn't include the ones who were killed using other methods, such as denial of antibiotics for simple infections, removal of breathing assistance, etc.
The standard used for determining severe cognitive impairment for the purpose of this study is a score of 5 or less on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Patients in a coma or PVS cannot possibly score 1, much less 5. You've probably seen people in the grocery store with a score of 5 or less. So these killings include a wide range of brain damaged people. I wonder how many thousands of people are living with a score of 5 or less. And for every 1,000 people living with a score of 5 or less in the year 2001, 114 of them were starved and dehydrated to death that year.
All I have before me are the percentages. I'd like to see the corresponding numbers. Or would I?
Following is the breakdown by state for 2001. Notice that Rhode Island tops the list, with just over a third of that population exterminated this way. That might have something to do with the fact that RI has appointed the pro-euthanasia group Choice in Dying the official State agency in charge of informing the public about “end-of-life choices.” They supply forms for “living wills” and “assist” the public in filling out those forms. This is what happens when you put the fox in charge of the henhouse.
Believe it or not, Florida and Texas are both below the national average. Every state is on the list. Georgia is at the bottom of the list, exterminating only 1.30% this way.
RI - 33.80%
OR - 32.50%
MI - 28.30%
MT - 28.00%
WI - 27.20%
CA - 23.40%
UT - 23.40%
AZ - 20.90%
PA - 17.40%
MN - 17.20%
AK - 17.10%
CT - 15.40%
WY - 14.90%
MD - 14.60%
NM - 14.20%
SD - 14.10%
WA - 13.20%
OH - 12.90%
ID - 12.30%
IA - 12.10%
MO - 11.90%
National Average - 11.4%
VT - 11.20%
HI - 11.10%
DE - 10.80%
ND - 10.80%
MA - 9.90%
IN - 9.70%
ME - 9.20%
NH - 8.70%
NY - 8.50%
NE - 7.70%
CO - 7.20%
AL - 7.10%
TX - 7.10%
IL - 6.70%
WV - 6.70%
KY - 6.60%
SC - 6.50%
TN - 6.30%
FL - 6.20%
NV - 6.20%
AR - 5.70%
NC - 5.20%
KS - 4.80%
NJ - 4.80%
OK - 4.10%
LA - 3.70%
VA - 3.60%
DC - 3.10%
MS - 3.00%
GA - 1.30%
Facts On Dying ~ This study was funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, who adamantly opposes the rights of vulnerable people to continue living. So if any trolls show up, complaining that the data is skewed in favor of life, check the facts and get back to me.
- - - - - - - - - -
Rep Moon sounds like a rising star...any info on him?
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.