Category Archives: Abortion

Infanticide: The Video

Jill Stanek tells the story of her experiences as a nurse in an Illinois hospital with a baby who was delivered alive at 21-22 weeks and left without any treatment to die. The baby had Down’s syndrome and had other problems, and the doctor delivered the baby instead of aborting it. This was legal in Illinois at the time, and two Born Alive Infant Protection Acts were introduced into the Illinois legislature. As far as I know, it is still legal in Illinois. Obama voted against the first act three times. The second one, which was identical in wording to the federal act, died in Obama’s committee when he refused to send it to the legislature for a vote. How apropos, to kill a bill with willful neglect in the same way that delivered, living babies were left to die in Illinois hospitals.

Watch it. I dare you. I double-dare you.

Update: See this video with Obama’s argument in the Illinois Senate. Continue reading

Who Speaks for Abortion Victims?

Every abortion has two victims, one of whom dies a horrible, cruel death and one who lives and endeavors to forget.

Christina Dunigan tells soul searing true stories about botched “safe and legal” abortions.

How about the shock 15-year-old Tamiia Russell’s mom got when her daughter confessed that she had been brought for an abortion by her abuser’s girlfriend? Tamiia had been so far advanced in her pregnancy that several other Detroit abortion clinics had turned her away — one even offering prenatal vitamins. But the abuser’s sister persisted, the abortion was arranged. And Tamiia hemorrhaged and died. Another dead teenager beneath your notice.

When will it become acceptable to mourn the dead, miracles of God destroyed as a result of Margaret Sanger’s eugenicist project? Abortion is no good for anyone. Real Choice makes that clear to anyone who reads with an open heart and mind. But the psychic and death toll of abortion falls disproportionately on the poor and on city dwellers, especially on blacks.

As I’ve written before, one of three black children is killed in the womb by the abortionist’s blade. The death toll of abortion mills such as Planned Parenthood has decimated the black population in America for forty-five years. When will it become acceptable to state this in public?

I’ve recommended other websites before. I also highly recommend reading as much of Real Choice as you can stand.

§

Technorati Tags: , ,

Buchenwald and Yale

Mr. Dubost, the prosecutor from France, interviewed the witness Bachalowsky during the Nuremberg Trials.

  • Mr. Dubost (French prosecutor): Could you please tell us about the tattooed skin?
  • Witness Bachalowsky: Yes.
  • Mr. Dubost: Please tell us what you know.
  • Witness Bachalowsky: In Buchenwald, human tattooed skin was placed in Block 2. This block was called the “pathological block”.
  • Mr. Dubost: Could you tell us if there was much tattooed skin in this block?
  • Witness Bachalowsky: There was always human skin there. I can’t tell you exactly how much there was because there was a lot of traffic in this block. There was not only tattooed skin but also tanned human skin without tattoos.
  • Mr. Dubost: Does this mean that they skinned prisoners?
  • Witness Bachalowsky: They skinned prisoners, then they tanned the skin.
  • Mr. Dubost: Could you give us more details about that?
  • Witness Bachalowsky: I saw the SS leaving Block 2 with human skin in their arms. Some comrades who worked in this block told me the SS received orders for human skin, and that tanned skin were given to the guards and visitors. Human skin was also used to make book covers.
  • Mr. Dubost: We have been told here that the former commandant, Koch, was punished for that.
  • Witness Bachalowsky: I don’t know about that case, I was not in the camp at this time.
  • Mr. Dubost: So, were there human tattooed and tanned skin in the camp after Koch left?
  • Witness Bachalowsky: There was always skin. When the Americans liberated the camp, they still found tattooed and tanned skin…

Horror happened at Buchenwald. Some of it was photographed by the American soldiers who liberated the camp. And in the days since, Holocaust deniers such as AhmediNajad, President of Iran, have claimed they didn’t happen, and have even denied the reality of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington DC that happened 56 years later.

Compare this to an extended description of a horror that maybe didn’t happen, but was publicized as if it did. Or maybe it did happen. At the moment the jury is still out.

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself “as often as possible” while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process. [...]

Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for “shock value.” [...]

The “fabricators,” or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.

Aliza Schvarts rants about heteronormative male-normative enslavement of women instead of making a sandwich for a nice guy who deserves one. Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself. [...]

“I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity,” Shvarts said. “I think that I’m creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be.”

The display of Schvarts’ project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts’ self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.

It’s important to realize that Schvartz believes that this “art project” makes a political statement. It isso hard to figure out what political statement her “art project” is making because it is so repellent and degenerate.

Huffpo revealed a disappearing story from the NY Sun that claimed the story was a “creative fiction.” Now the NY Sun story is gone. In its place, a story straight from Google.

The purpose of doubt in Buchenwald is to demonize and re-victimize the victims of the horror. The purpose of doubt at Yale is something altogether different.

Schvarts said, once again, that “her goal was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. [link]“

She thereby put herself in a position where people suspected that she was either a sociopathic auto-abortionist or a hoax artiste and joker. Today and tomorrow her identity will be that of a monster, alternating between killer and joker. So it will continue in the future, her identity and reputation ping-ponging between killer and joker. Nobody likes a joker. Nobody likes a killer. Nobody wants to be around either. For what is a joker but a liar who tells spectacular and embarrassing lies? And what is a killer but a liar who arbitrarily claims the ultimate knowledge of whether someone else deserves to die and the right to kill?

In the future, there will always be whispers behind her back, “Is she a killer?”

And the answer will come back, “I don’t know.”

§

Also on it: Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Vanderleun.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Where is Scalia wrong on abortion?

Joseph Farah has an idea. The Preamble to the United States Constitution goes like this.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”

Note that the blessings of liberty are secured for ourselves and our posterity. Who would our posterity be? The answer is our posterity is our children, both those who are and those who are yet to be.

Add the Fifth Amendment’s “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” and the Fourteenth Amendment

“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.”

Together, Farah argues, these guarantee the child in the womb the right of due process against the deprivation of life. Add in the Sixth Amendment, which defines how due process works.

“Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

Scalia has not found the subject of abortion in the Constitution. Farah believes he has found it. Not being a lawyer myself, I’m not sure I can tell a sound legal argument from an unsound one.

Anybody else know if from the originalist position Scalia is wrong on this and Farah is right?

§

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Adam’s Blog, Right Truth, Cao’s Blog, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, D equals S, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, A Newt One- Don’t miss this show!, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Technorati Tags: , ,

When is the life of a child worth national resources to protect?

Rebecca Smith writes for the Telegraph:

The abortion debate is reignited today as figures show that survival rates of babies born very prematurely have doubled in the past 20 years.

She continues.

Of eight babies born alive at 22 weeks at University College London Hospital between 1996 and 2000, four survived to go home. Between 1991 and 1995 only two were born at 22 weeks and neither lived.

For babies born at 23 weeks the survival rate increased from 44 per cent in 1991-95 to 46 per cent in the late 1990s. At 24 weeks, half the babies born between 1991 and 1995 lived. This rose to 81 per cent for those born in 1995-2000.

Britain has a 24-week limit on abortions. 24 weeks was chosen because at the time it was chosen 50% of premature babies delivered at 24 weeks survived. Now that the survival rate for 24-week babies in British hospitals has risen to 81% and 22-week babies have a 50% or better survival rate, the wheels have been put in motion to lower the age limit for abortions in Britain.

Compare the conversation in Britain to the United States, which has no time limit on abortions. Would it not be a hopeful development, one that encouraged women to bear children prematurely in preference to killing them?

I have seen my children develop in ultrasound videos at 18 weeks and later, almost all the way to delivery. At 18 weeks we could count their fingers and toes, see their faces, watch them sleep, watch them move around, tell their sex, watch and hear their hearts beat, and see their bones and internal organs.

And yet, some people say children at this state of development are not children, but fetuses or even blastocysts, and fair game for abortionists.

Deuce writes in the Elephant Bar, after a very powerful photo of a 22-week baby who was killed in an abortion:

The Chinese are more correct at recognizing when human life begins. Be born in China, and you are one year old.

Let’s look at a 31-week baby in ultrasound. Continue reading

Abortion is killing one out of three black children in the womb

People believe some pretty strange things based on their prejudices. A commenter claimed that most abortions are done by white teenagers whose parents pay for it (spoiled white anglos was his term). This prompted me to analyze the numbers myself.

I found useful sources for some of this data at Kaiser Family’s statehealthfacts.org. Note their statistics are weird because they are based on statistics reported by the states. California does not report on the number of abortions performed, though it had been responsible for 23% of the abortions performed in the USA before 1998, when it stopped reporting. Yet if it were to be added back in, California alone would increase the number of abortions performed by 23%, or almost 200,000. One wonders what caused famously Democrat-dominated California to stop reporting the number of abortions performed there.

Update: Correction, adding California back in would increase the number of abortions by about 30%, or 250,000.

Agewise, 17% of all abortions involve a mother up to the age of 19. 56% involve a mother between the ages of 20 and 29, and 23% are between 30 and 39. Racewise, 53% of abortive mothers are white, 35% are black, and 13% are other or unknown. Taking 53% of 17% shows that roughly 9% of abortive mothers are white teens. 9% is not a majority.

Let’s look at this further. According to the US census data, 13% of Americans are black. If 35% of abortions are on behalf of 13% of the populace then abortions are disproprionately affecting that 13%. Let’s see how it works by analyzing abortions as a percentage of live births by race. In 2004, 4.112 Million children were born. 2.296 Million were white. .578 Million were black. Also in 2004, .839 Million children were aborted, 53% by white mothers, 35% by black mothers.

Working out the numbers, the proportion of abortions compared to live births overall is 20.4%. Of white mothers, it is 19.37%. Of black mothers, it is 50.8%. Half as many viable black children are killed before they can be born as get the chance to live. This calculation does not include miscarriages, which are fairly common. But the result falling out of Kaiser’s data, reported from the states, is that one out of three viable pregnancies among black women ends in abortion and one out of six viable pregnancies among white women ends the same way.

In the US, 69% of all abortions are performed at 441 abortion clinics. 89 out of 320 metropolitan areas and 86% of all counties (the rural ones) in the USA have no abortion providers, leaving about 230 metropolitan areas with at least one abortion clinic each. Who lives there? The women who live nearby, those are the women who are being encouraged, far out of proportion, to abort their children instead of giving birth to them. Reminder, only 17% of these women are teens. The vast majority of these women are grown women.

Note that the CDC’s calculations are similar to mine, though its analysis was done for 2000.

In the 41 areas for which race was adequately reported, approximately 55% of women who obtained legal induced abortions were known to be white, 35% were black, and 7% were of other races; for 3% of the women, race was unknown. (Table 9). The abortion ratio for black women (503 per 1,000 live births) was 3.0 times the ratio for white women (167 per 1,000 live births). Additionally, the abortion ratio for women of other races (329 per 1,000 live births) was 2.0 times the ratio for white women. The abortion rate for black women (30 per 1,000 women) was 3.1 times the rate for white women (10 per 1,000 women), whereas the abortion rate for women of other races (22 per 1,000 women) was 2.2 times the rate for white women.

The question that comes to my mind is how is this not a massive, publicly financed program of defacto extermination aimed at black and minority children?

Who is responsible for killing black children like this? They are NARAL, Planned Parenthood and the Democratic party, who have supported the progressive principle of eugenics by encouraging the abortion of black babies ever since the time of Margaret Sanger.

Even leftist-feminist Julianne Malveaux admits that Margaret Sanger, founder of the organization that became Planned Parenthood, was at best a eugenicist and at worst a racist who favored a reduction in the black birth rate.

In a 1921 article in the Birth Control Review, Sanger wrote, “The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.” Reviewers of one of her 1919 articles interpreted her objectives as “More children from the fit, less from the unfit.” Again, the question of who decides fitness is important, and it was an issue that Sanger only partly addressed. “The undeniably feebleminded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind,” she wrote.

Sanger advocated the mandatory sterilization of the “insane and feebleminded.” Although this does not diminish her legacy as the key force in the birth control movement, it raises questions much like those now being raised about our nation’s slaveholding founders. How do we judge historical figures? How are their contributions placed in context?

It is easy to see why there is some antipathy toward Sanger among people of color, considering that, given our nation’s history, we are the people most frequently described as “unfit” and “feebleminded.”

A pretty good student paper here covers much of the same ground.

Summing up, 1 out of 3 black babies are aborted before being born. This has been going on since 1972, for a total death toll of 14 Million black babies. If only the same proportion of black babies had been aborted as all babies, there would be 8.4 Million more black people in the US, for an increase of 23% in the number of black people in the US. If a racist who hated black people wanted to kill as many off as possible, then he or she could do no better than voting Democrat. Legal abortion has killed just about one out of five black Americans before they even got the chance to live their lives. Not even the KKK ever approached numbers of that magnitude.

Related: Abortion is Killing the Child in the Womb

Trackposted to The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog’s Weblog, Faultline USA, Chuck Adkins, The World According to Carl, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Baby Selling and Slavery

Over at Overcoming Bias, Robin Hanson responds to the WaPo:

A year after Guatemala’s emergence as the second-largest foreign source of babies for adoption to the United States, a new push by the Guatemalan government to wrest control of the process from private agencies has stirred an emotional backlash from thousands of prospective adoptive parents in the United States. …Guatemala’s solicitor general, Mario Gordillo, … worries that thousands of desperately poor Guatemalan women are being induced to conceive children for adoption by private brokers offering as much as $3,000 a baby.

“Guatemala has converted into a baby-producing nation,” Gordillo said at his office in Guatemala City. “Our children come into this world to be products for sale. . . . It’s as if they were a car. What model is it? And who wants to buy it?” The debate raging in Guatemala echoes previous controversies that have led to the suspension of adoptions from Romania to Cambodia. …

This is amazingly sad. It is in general a good thing if willing women are induced by money to have babies families want to adopt. Not only do the woman and the family benefit, but the baby gets a life! Positive externalities don’t get much larger than this. We need lower, not higher, barriers to such exchange.

This is followed by a number of very learned arguments focusing on abstractions, and on bizarre arguments that posit that human life is a net neutral or net negative in the Universe. My response is:

I find it curious that I’ve come to the end of this thread about the buying and selling of babies and nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room: Slavery. Given that slavery is a great moral evil, is there a way to buy and sell children that prevents the evil of slavery? I don’t see any evil in adoption. Nor do I see any evil in a woman giving up a child for adoption, or in getting paid for her time and effort. The tout, the lawyer, and the social worker (whose livelihoods depend on putting up barriers against adoption and collecting money from people for serving as middlemen) are in less morally clear positions. I do not believe that human life is a bad thing, but rather a good. And I certainly believe that free exchange of goods and services, leading to specialization, is a good thing.

If the baby grows up to be a free, educated adult (not enslaved) who can make a positive contribution to society and humanity, without being abused along the way, then it’s all good.

But if the baby grows up to be an enslaved adult, or one who is unable to make a positive contribution to society or becomes a parasite or criminal, then it’s bad.

So given those value judgements, how can adoption, even adoption with pay going to the mother, be structured to maximize the first probability and minimize the second? Are government adoption agencies able to achieve these goals or should adoptions be handled by churches or some other types of (for profit) organizations rather than governments?

Isn’t that the important question, rather than the question of whether babies should be adopted out for money instead of adopted out for no money, or killed before they can be born?

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog’s Weblog, Leaning Straight Up, Chuck Adkins, Stageleft, Pursuing Holiness, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Technorati Tags: , , ,