Abortion

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Here's a legitimate question. How do we know these pictures are actual abortions and not the removal of a child that has died in the womb from natural causes? I don't put it beyond the Right to use whatever disinformation possible to advance their cause. The last picture is particularly suspect, and one of the fetuses has a monitor attached, as in a doctor was trying to save it.

These are sad photos, but they're not legitimate and you know it.

Oh brother......

But this might help. As if you should need it.

The person behind the aborted baby photos

Bristol Palin Made Close To $1 Million Pushing Abstinence-Only Policies, Now Is Pregnant With Child No. 2

Bristol Palin has for the past few years been the face of abstinence-only policies, making close to $1 million through her outreach efforts to prevent teen pregnancy.


And now she’s pregnant again, expecting her second out-of-wedlock child.

The daughter of former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin announced this week that she is expecting a child. Bristol Palin announced her pregnancy in a Patheos blog post, saying it was a disappointing revelation.

“I wanted you guys to be the first to know that I am pregnant,” Bristol wrote. “Honestly, I’ve been trying my hardest to keep my chin up on this one… Life moves on no matter what. So no matter how you feel, you get up, get dressed, show up, and never give up.”

She added, “I know this has been, and will be, a huge disappointment to my family, to my close friends, and to many of you. But please respect Tripp’s and my privacy during this time. I do not want any lectures and I do not want any sympathy.”

Ironically, it was lectures on abstinence that helped to make Bristol Palin a millionaire. In 2009, she went to work for The Candie’s Foundation as a teen pregnancy ambassador, giving speeches to warn against teen pregnancy.

“There may be multiple forms of contraception, but I’m here to say that one fact remains. Those that practice abstinence have no chance of becoming pregnant,” Palin said at an appearance in 2010. “Abstinence is not about morality, it is about reality. It is the only thing that works every time. My message is a simple one: Don’t make the same decision I made, just wait. Young ladies, please hear me.”

Her work generated a bit of controversy in 2009 when her take-home pay for Candie’s was seven times what the charity actually brought in donations.

Forbes reported, “Apparently, the organization was only able to find $35,000 to grant to charities from the $1,242,476 donated from the public. Meanwhile, the young Ms. Palin managed to pull in a $262,500 paycheck for her role as an ambassador for their teen pregnancy prevention campaign in 2009.”

Bristol Palin continued to rack in the earnings from her appearances, making between $15,000 and $30,000 for every speech she made advocating abstinence-only policies, which the Daily Beast estimated to total about $100,000 per year.

While Bristol made close to $500,000 directly from abstinence-only appearances, her advocacy against teen pregnancy also helped lead to an appearance on Dancing with the Stars and a memoir, Not Afraid Of Life, earning her well over $1 million in total.

But those who want to call Bristol Palin a hypocrite for her abstinence-only earnings may have a bit of a quandary. While she has told teen that abstinence is the best policy, she has also said, “I hate the word ‘abstinence.’ I’m not an abstinence preacher, ya know?”

I noticed she hasn't had an abortion yet.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I noticed she hasn't had an abortion yet.

Good for her. I think it's great that some people have a family structure in place that can support these mistakes.
The problem is the abstinence only policies she is being paid to promote don't work on a large scale.... they didn't even work for her.
The end result is more abortions. She is making money peddling policy that results in abortions.

 

[Lineandinitial]

Can we assume that this was before you were in the picture?

Yes it was.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Good for her. I think it's great that some people have a family structure in place that can support these mistakes.
The problem is the abstinence only policies she is being paid to promote don't work on a large scale.... they didn't even work for her.
The end result is more abortions. She is making money peddling policy that results in abortions.

The policy of promoting abstinence doesn't cause abortions. Failing to practice abstinence doesnt either. Failing to be responsible when giving in to sexual desire doesn't either. Going to an abortion clinic, or doctor that practices them, and letting it happen definitely does.

 

[wkmac]

What fascinates me about the issue of abortion is the hysteria assigned to it that the problems appears to almost be growing when in fact abortions are on the decline. Since it's high of 1.6 million annually in 1990' to just barely over 1 million in 2014'. Which IMO is a very good thing and hoping the trend continues to zero.

There are different conclusions as to why that is from strong abortion laws in a handful of states to better education and public knowledge. Regardless of the State and its laws involved, the decline seems steady across the board, which again is a good thing. Personally I'd like to see abortion clinics go out of business by the market actions of no customers coming in the door in need of the service as opposed to some gov't edict handed down using state force to close the doors.

I also found it interesting that abortions biggest growth began in the late 70's and enjoyed it's biggest years all through the 1980's and it was about 1992' when the numbers started their decline to where they are today. What is most interesting of this is a result of the other hysteria that the republicans or so called political right is going to end abortion rights. Since 1973' republicans have had numerous opportunities to encroach on abortion law and other than political lip service around election time, they've exuded no real political will to do anything meaningful about abortion itself. The issue has only served as a rallying point for both political sides to herd their respective masses in a meaningless debate that is not intended to go anywhere.

Here are numerous sources of abortion in decline with some offering reasons why.

Abortions declining in nearly all states, survey finds

U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Decline While Debate over Means to the End Escalates

What’s Behind the Declining Abortion Rate?

Abortions Decline to Historic Low: 33% of Pregnancies Used to End in Abortion, Now Just 18%

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

What fascinates me about the issue of abortion is the hysteria assigned to it that the problems appears to almost be growing when in fact abortions are on the decline. Since it's high of 1.6 million annually in 1990' to just barely over 1 million in 2014'. Which IMO is a very good thing and hoping the trend continues to zero.

There are different conclusions as to why that is from strong abortion laws in a handful of states to better education and public knowledge. Regardless of the State and its laws involved, the decline seems steady across the board, which again is a good thing. Personally I'd like to see abortion clinics go out of business by the market actions of no customers coming in the door in need of the service as opposed to some gov't edict handed down using state force to close the doors.

I also found it interesting that abortions biggest growth began in the late 70's and enjoyed it's biggest years all through the 1980's and it was about 1992' when the numbers started their decline to where they are today. What is most interesting of this is a result of the other hysteria that the republicans or so called political right is going to end abortion rights. Since 1973' republicans have had numerous opportunities to encroach on abortion law and other than political lip service around election time, they've exuded no real political will to do anything meaningful about abortion itself. The issue has only served as a rallying point for both political sides to herd their respective masses in a meaningless debate that is not intended to go anywhere.

Here are numerous sources of abortion in decline with some offering reasons why.

Abortions declining in nearly all states, survey finds

U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Decline While Debate over Means to the End Escalates

What’s Behind the Declining Abortion Rate?

Abortions Decline to Historic Low: 33% of Pregnancies Used to End in Abortion, Now Just 18%

Looks like more reason to keep putting the pressure on.

 

[wkmac]

Seems to be going down regardless of what you do.

 

[MrFedEx]

Yeah A lion is an animal ,, a child is a gift from The Lord !!
Good thing your parents had you instead of getting a big cat !!!

No. A child is the result of a male and a female having intercourse.

 

[MrFedEx]

Looks like more reason to keep putting the pressure on.

Why were your "abortion" pictures taken down? Too graphic, or because they were not abortions at all?

Added: I checked out your link, and the story proves nothing. I also noticed that it's an anti-abortion website, so it's veracity is questionable. Also, since when are abortions preserved? Sorry, but this is crap "evidence".

 

[MrFedEx]

Oh brother......

But this might help. As if you should need it.

http://www.theinterim.com/issues/abortion/the-person-behind-the-aborted-baby-photos/


I noticed she hasn't had an abortion yet.

Why does an "aborted baby" have a monitor on it in the pictures? Also, how do we know that some of these pictures weren't children who died in the womb or had their mother die during a pregnancy? There is zero proof that these are actual abortion photos.

 

[superballs63]

Why does an "aborted baby" have a monitor on it in the pictures? Also, how do we know that some of these pictures weren't children who died in the womb or had their mother die during a pregnancy? There is zero proof that these are actual abortion photos.

What the hell is the difference? Are you saying that since there aren't pictures of aborted babies that the point is moot?!

I couldn't even LOOK at the picture on that site, and believe me, I've seen some VERY graphic things in my life.

If you aren't completely mortified by those pictures, than there's something fundamentally wrong with you.

 

[MrFedEx]

What the hell is the difference? Are you saying that since there aren't pictures of aborted babies that the point is moot?!

I couldn't even LOOK at the picture on that site, and believe me, I've seen some VERY graphic things in my life.

If you aren't completely mortified by those pictures, than there's something fundamentally wrong with you.

The difference is if the pictures are fakes, Einstein. Obviously, you did look at them as well, and yes, they are very disturbing. Here's why you don't belong in the gene pool.

1. Aborted fetuses don't have monitors attached to them. What would be the purpose?

2. The story references "preserved" fetuses. Who knows where they came from. They could have been stillborn, the mother could have been killed etc. There are many reason why they are probably NOT aborted fetuses.

3. The focus was on fully/nearly fully formed babies, which, again, could have come from many different sources besides an abortion.

4. The story came from an anti-abortion site.

Yes, there's something fundamentally wrong. With you.

 

[superballs63]

The difference is if the pictures are fakes, Einstein. Obviously, you did look at them as well, and yes, they are very disturbing. Here's why you don't belong in the gene pool.

1. Aborted fetuses don't have monitors attached to them. What would be the purpose?

2. The story references "preserved" fetuses. Who knows where they came from. They could have been stillborn, the mother could have been killed etc. There are many reason why they are probably NOT aborted fetuses.

3. The focus was on fully/nearly fully formed babies, which, again, could have come from many different sources besides an abortion.

4. The story came from an anti-abortion site.

Yes, there's something fundamentally wrong. With you.

Oh, the pictures are not of a dead fetus? No, I didn't look at the pictures. I refuse to subject my eyes to such offensive pictures.

1. Probably not, how many aborted fetuses have you seen?

2. Yeah, sure

3. Yeah, sure

4. So that makes it a BS story?

The problem is your sides comfort with dead children

 

[MrFedEx]

/

Oh, the pictures are not of a dead fetus? No, I didn't look at the pictures. I refuse to subject my eyes to such offensive pictures.

1. Probably not, how many aborted fetuses have you seen?

2. Yeah, sure

3. Yeah, sure

4. So that makes it a BS story?

The problem is your sides comfort with dead children

Dear Brick,

Why would an aborted fetus have a monitor attached? This would mean that someone was trying to save the fetus rather than abort it, hence my questioning of the veracity of the picture. A fetus destined for tissue research purposes could be preserved as a specimen, but not one as fully formed as the pictures indicate. It's also possible that these photos are of fetuses destined for medical schools.

Isn't it possible (probable) that someone with an axe to grind would intentionally misrepresent photos of dead fetuses as abortions, when they could have died from numerous other reasons? The site isn't exactly neutral on the issue.

You haven't read my other posts, or you'd know I'm no fan of dead children. But you're not capable of figuring that out. I've done plenty to save children, real living ones.

Now, go back to your patio or wall, or wherever it is that bricks reside when they're not posting.

Love,
MrFedEx

 

[superballs63]

You haven't read my other posts, or you'd know I'm no fan of dead children. But you're not capable of figuring that out. I've done plenty to save children, real living ones.

Now, go back to your patio or wall, or wherever it is that bricks reside when they're not posting.

Love,
MrFedEx

If you're in favor of abortion, or pro "choice" then you are completely comfortable with abortion, and to not see that shows what's wrong with the liberal POV

Riddle me this: If I'm such a huge racist, who hates all minorities, then why in the world would I be so against any woman (blacks, Mexicans, or whoever) killing babies?

You can call infanticide whatever term helps you sleep at night. You can also choose to focus on the dumb stuff (That's not a picture of a REAL aborted baby, that's a biased website), rather than being disgusted with how humans can so coldly treat a human life, or "clump of cells" if that makes you feel better

 

[MrFedEx]

No. A child is the result of a male and a female having intercourse.

It isn't? I guess you need some edumacation.

 

[wayfair]

those training pics did look authentic....

the edumacation you talk of is probably the edumacation you seek..

 

[superballs63]

those training pics did look authentic....

the edumacation you talk of is probably the edumacation you seek..

I'm curious as to why he quoted, and then responded to his own post?

 

[bottomups]

If you're in favor of abortion, or pro "choice" then you are completely comfortable with abortion, and to not see that shows what's wrong with the liberal POV

Riddle me this: If I'm such a huge racist, who hates all minorities, then why in the world would I be so against any woman (blacks, Mexicans, or whoever) killing babies?

You can call infanticide whatever term helps you sleep at night. You can also choose to focus on the dumb stuff (That's not a picture of a REAL aborted baby, that's a biased website), rather than being disgusted with how humans can so coldly treat a human life, or "clump of cells" if that makes you feel better

Humans have been killing each other since we evolved from apes. We always have and always will. I don't see much difference if we kill in utero, wait until birth and bomb them from 10,000' or starve them to death in early childhood.

 

[MrFedEx]

If you're in favor of abortion, or pro "choice" then you are comong to mepletely comfortable with abortion, and to not see that shows what's wrong with the liberal POV

Riddle me this: If I'm such a huge racist, who hates all minorities, then why in the world would I be so against any woman (blacks, Mexicans, or whoever) killing babies?

You can call infanticide whatever term helps you sleep at night. You can also choose to focus on the dumb stuff (That's not a picture of a REAL aborted baby, that's a biased website), rather than being disgusted with how humans can so coldly treat a human life, or "clump of cells" if that makes you feel better

So, when a little "Jamal" is born, what will you do to make sure he doesn't grow-up to be the stereotyped black person you hate? As someone else said, you on the Right are pro-birth, not necessarily pro-life. Once the child is born, you're done.

My take is that this website is posting pictures of dead babies, not aborted babies. Abortion isn't desirable, but it is necessary,and there is a major difference between an abortion and infanticide. Killing a child once it's born is infanticide, and is not an abortion.

Like I said, I view abortion as a necessary evil, not something desirable. For example, I'm glad Bristol Palin has chosen to keep her unborn child. It will be born into a family with more than adequate resources to support it. As much as Sarah Palin disgusts me, I admire her for keeping her Downs Syndrome son.

But, there are a ton of people out there (like you) that want to kill every social or education program that exists in order to reduce unwanted births, and as a direct result...reduce the number of abortions that you find intolerable and I find repugnant but necessary. Instead of praying, protesting and screaming, how about doing something constructive to make unwanted children wanted children who can grow-up and have a decent life?

A lot of Righties are all tied-up with their ideology and don't stop to think that the policies they support often produce results that conflict with that ideology. Abortion is a perfect example.