Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York Reveals Its Blood Lust for Baby Killing
Townhall.com ^ | January 25, 2019 | Michael Brown

Posted on 01/26/2019 12:26:32 PM PST by Kaslin

New York was already doing a fine job of slaughtering its unborn, especially its black babies. Why, then, did it need to pass a new, more extreme abortion law? And why did New York do this on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade? There’s one simple answer: blood lust.

Secular media outlets are reporting that New York just updated its “archaic” abortion law.

Yet somehow, even with that “archaic” law, New York was already the abortion capital of America, aborting babies at twice the national average.

Somehow, New York was still managing to kill one baby for every two babies born.

And, despite that “archaic” law, New York City was able to kill more black babies in the womb than bring them to birth.

But no, that was not enough. The law must be expanded.

Today, a perfectly viable baby of nine-months, ready to be born at any minute, can be slaughtered by the will of the mother.

That is blood lust.

That is the spirit of baby killing.

There is nothing humanitarian or compassionate about it.

It is cruel. It is unwarranted. It is murderous.

And it utterly Orwellian to refer to it as the “Reproductive Health Act.” Why not call it for what it is?

The moral bankruptcy of New York’s new law – the pride of “Christian” governor Andrew Cuomo – is fully exposed in the last phrase of this sentence: “an abortion may be performed by a licensed, certified, or authorized practitioner within 24 weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or [if] there is an absence of fetal viability, or at any time when necessary to protect a patient’s life or health.”

Yes, the baby may be terminated “at any time when necessary to protect a patient’s life or health.”

And what, exactly, does that mean? What if the mother’s mental heath needed to be protected? What if she felt, the day before her due date, that she just couldn’t take the stress of having a child. Would that merit abortion?

But that is to beg the question, since the baby could easily be delivered and adopted. We’re talking about a totally viable baby! A baby that, under normal circumstances, would soon be crying and nursing outside the womb.

Today, however, that baby’s well-being is at risk until the moment of the birth.

This is madness. This is murderous. Shades of Kermit Gosnell on steroids!

Princeton professor Robert P. George expressed it so well. He wrote: “A huge irony: The NY law authorizing the killing of babies in the third trimester PROVES that the aim of the abortion lobby is NOT the protection of maternal health in circumstances of hazardous pregnancy, but is rather the right to destroy an unwanted child whose existence poses no risk to maternal health (in any sense of the term ‘health’ that amounts to anything other than a rationalization for killing unwanted babies). The only reason to kill rather than deliver a child in the third trimester of pregnancy and gestation is that the woman (or someone who is pressuring her to abort) wants the child to be dead rather than alive. It's the child's *existence*, not the pregnancy, which poses the alleged, ‘health’ risk. The pregnancy can be ended (‘terminated’) by delivering the baby alive, rather than killing him or her. So do you see the see the sophistry in the argument for abortion here? It's glaring.”

Yes, why not simply deliver the baby? If the mother’s health is allegedly at risk and the baby is viable outside the womb, why not deliver it?

Plenty of parents would love to adopt the child.

Plenty of parents would gladly open the doors of their home to this precious little one.

Why kill it?

And let’s not have some romanticized view of how a third-trimester baby is terminated. As noted by Steven Ertelt (with reference to a former abortionist), “the baby is injected with a poison directly into his skull or torso. He then suffers a hideously painful death, which he will certainly feel because of his developed nervous system. The mother carries the corpse around in her womb for a day. The next day, there is an ultrasound to check if the baby is dead. If he isn’t — if he has been writhing and suffering in agony for the past 24 hours, clinging onto life — then he will be injected again. The following day, the mother delivers her dead child. Sometimes she delivers him at the clinic, but if she can’t make it on time, the clinic is perfectly happy to recommend that she give birth into her toilet.”

How can this possibly be for the good of the mother? And under what moral code is this not barbarous and inhumane? Or should we mention the grisly details of “partial-birth abortion,” where the child is delivered feet first, then the skull is pierced with scissors and its brains sucked out – while still alive?

And if a baby somehow survived the murderous attempts of the abortionist, who does not even have to be a doctor? What if it was still born alive? Under previous New York law, efforts would be made to care for the child. But no longer! Under this new law, those provisions have been removed. The baby must die!

Yet New Yorkers were celebrating this moral madness. They were shouting for joy!

And in a final statement of depravity, the 400-foot spire of One World Trade Center was lit up in pink, as if to honor the women of New York.

It should have been lit up blood red.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; US: New York
KEYWORDS: abortion; andrewcuomo; antipope; cuomo; homosexualagenda; infanticide; newyork; ny; popefrancis; prolife; romancatholicism; snopes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last
To: IrishBrigade
Biblically when Israel turned their backs to God they were invaded.... Is the point.....
41 posted on 01/26/2019 4:35:29 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade

I hope you’re right I am just thinking that the last days are the days of dreaded reckoning. It’s heartbreaking to think what is happening in those “Family Planning” institutions. How in hell did we ever get this way?


42 posted on 01/26/2019 5:13:59 PM PST by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Berosus

Liberalism is an evil religion. Babies are their sacrificial element; Christians have Jesus. I believe these babies are in heaven. I just hope that these vile Libs are met at the Pearly Gates by these innocent children to notify them of their fate.


43 posted on 01/26/2019 6:18:16 PM PST by IAGeezer912 (One out of every 20 people on the face of the earth are Americans. We have won life's lottery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All; Kaslin

Good article here, including this tweet:

“.. Bishop J. Strickland @Bishopoftyler

The video of the “celebration” of New York legislators as they condemned even full term unborn children to Death by Choice is a scene from Hell. Woe to those who ignore the sanctity of life, they reap the whirlwind of Hell. Stand against this holocaust in every way you can.
9,996
5:29 AM - Jan 25, 2019 ....”

more: https://www.lifenews.com/2019/01/25/bishop-rebukes-legislators-cheering-after-passing-abortions-up-to-birth-they-reap-the-whirlwind-of-hell/


44 posted on 01/26/2019 11:17:55 PM PST by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade

God often waits till the very end before he reacts to injustice. A case in point is the “Special Council” that this country has to suffer. When will we ever get to the truth? The country is harassing a duly elected president while crooked Hillary is allowed to live in peace. Where is the justice in all this?


45 posted on 01/27/2019 6:45:11 AM PST by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The law was passed out of spite and hatred for Trump and Kavanaugh, and as a gift to man-hating feminazis who vote dem.


46 posted on 01/27/2019 7:44:04 AM PST by I want the USA back (Lying Media: willing and eager allies of the hate-America left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: milagro; All
"If you can legally murder a child post-partum, [???] ..."

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment gives newly born all constitutional protections.

From the 14th Amendment:

Also regarding Section 1, the Supreme Court could argue that unborn children are persons and give unborn children basic protections for persons.

”14th Amendment, Section 1: 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 [emphasis added].”

47 posted on 01/27/2019 7:58:50 AM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson