Posted on 02/27/2020 6:03:30 AM PST by karpov
CNN caught heat from conservatives Tuesday for publishing a report that refers euphemistically to a newborn baby as a “fetus that was born.”
As it turns out, though, CNN is not even close to being the first newsroom to deploy this nonsensical term to refer to newly born infants. There is a long history of newsrooms deploying this dystopian gobbledygook in service of promoting the pro-choice line, which depends on denying the humanity of both unborn and newborn children.
The Associated Press reported in 1999 that Wisconsin officials argued in court that a man should be prosecuted for attempted murder based on the "born alive" rule, which, according to the Associated Press, “says that a person can be charged for injuries to a fetus that is born alive.”
Congressional Quarterly reported in 2001 that supporters of a bill banning the cloning of human embryos argued the measure would prevent “the deliberate destruction of fetuses that are born alive, often during botched abortions.”
The Associated Press in 2008 defended then-Sen. Barack Obama’s opposition to born-alive bills, arguing that Illinois already had legislation “protecting aborted fetuses that were born alive and were considered able to survive.”
At what point, exactly, do we stop referring to them as “fetuses that were born alive”? When it no longer complicates the pro-choice argument?
National Public Radio in 2008 also hosted journalist Cynthia Gorney, who argued that born-alive bills proposed in the Illinois legislature “would have made an explicit crime for failing to protect a fetus that was born alive.”
HuffPost reported in 2013 that a federal law signed by George Bush “extends legal protections to fetuses that are born alive after attempted abortions.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
I’m 48 years old.
Am I still a fetus, CNN?
Demons.
Fetus + 53 yrs, 7month, and 25 days here, just checking in to see tha, indeed the secular humanists are still trying to cheapen life, so they can destroy it.
But that’s what we all are—fetuses that were born.
Eugenicists and Hillaryous Rotten refer to a newborn baby as a deplorable that was born. The “masters of the universe” could do selfies with the proud women who aborted at the Georgia guidestones. Smile Bill & Melinda. Can you turn that mass of tissues for another pose?
They make birth sound as if one has successfully run a gauntlet which it has just about become.
Disgusting.
‘It’s harder to rationalize killing babies when you admit that they are babies.’
very recently I got into a Youtube argument with someone in which I mentioned how much easier his position was to justify by use of the term ‘fetus’ as opposed to ‘baby’...he took umbrage at this, and accused me of “argumentum ad populam’, essentially, a false argument deemed to be true because many believe it (an argument for a spheroid earth could be called the same because many believe it, I said in reply)...
his essential point was calling it a baby rather than the perfectly valid fetus muddled the issue, to which I replied “of course then, that explains the well known phenomena of excited expectant parents calling their friends and relatives and exclaiming ‘we’re going to have a fetus....’”
I watch a lot of nature shows. They ALL refer to animal infants as “babies”. I’ll bet a lot of people let their children watch these without supervision.
I went to a 62 year old born fetus birthday party yesterday. She was happy she could still get by without diapers.
‘They make birth sound as if one has successfully run a gauntlet which it has just about become.’
it is more than that, much more; these people are of the opinion that a ‘fetus’ is guilty of a crime, that of using another’s body organs without that other’s permission, which they bitterly claim is a right afforded to ‘feti’ that other cohorts of society do not enjoy...the corollary that they are supporting the same thing by granting females the same exclusivity, the right to kill, doesn’t seem to occur to them...
Dems are the “science people”?
How long is it before leftists pitch a “30 days no regrets” policy to kill a child up to 30 days after their birth.
I watch a lot of nature shows. They ALL refer to animal infants as “babies”. I’ll bet a lot of people let their children watch these without supervision.
If a person kicked a pregnant dog in the stomach repeatedly so the dog lost all the “babies” or “clumps of cells” - would they be indicted for abusing an animal?
The people who protect animals over people really just twist my knickers.
A person who kicks a pregnant dog that severely deserves jail. That has nothing to do with over valuing animals over humans. .
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.