Becca Aaronson, a Texas Tribune writer, demonstrated the coldness of the pro-abortion community when she wrote, “Abortion opponents believe fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks gestation because they reflexively respond to stimuli, but there is no scientific consensus.”
“Reflexively respond to stimuli”? Wow. What a phrase. I ‘reflexively responded to the stimuli’ of my razor cutting my face this morning, but there is no scientific consensus about whether or not that is pain either.
It is chilling to see the pro-abortion community admit that babies in their mother’s wombs “reflexively respond to stimuli” and remain resolved to keep their sex options loose by protecting a practice worse than the awful practice of American slavery.
Why would a lack of scientific consensus about a baby feeling the pain of his own dismemberment mean anything besides calling a halt to all abortions until we are sure they aren’t feeling pain? For the last four decades our selfish sides have triumphed politically. The tie always seems to go to sexual license. No wonder liberals have no impulse to protect this country. The version of America they aren’t protecting doesn’t deserve protection.
And when are Texas pro-abortion cowards going to drop their scrubbed scientific vocabulary, designed to distance them from their own evil? ‘Fetus ‘means ‘baby’, a baby who needs the protection of his mother, father, and law enforcement. ‘In-utero’ means ‘in his mother’s womb’.’“Gestation’ means ‘growth’. ‘Reflexive response to stimuli ‘means ‘feeling pain’.
In the story, Rep. Sarah Davis promotes removing emotion from this debate as an overall improvement.
If killing a child in his mother’s womb isn’t supposed to be emotional, we should all have lobotomies to remove our ability to feel emotion. If Davis is right, human emotion is just like wisdom teeth.
Kermit Gosnell has turned the stomachs of everyone with the courage to face his story, not just pro-life people. The dirty little secret is, it isn’t because he was more brutal to the children than other abortion providers. It was because he didn’t keep the brutality hidden from sight. It was the same brutality. Gosnell pulled the curtain back on abortion, period, and it is worse than a horror movie, and still some in media, government, entertainment, and elsewhere are protecting it anyway.
For the House to increase funding to $75 million is unconscionable. Speaker Straus’s pretention to being pro-life would end now if he had any shame at all.
One ridiculous moment of propaganda in the story was when it was suggested pro-abortion pressure was scared legislators after last session.
There isn’t an issue with more grassroots clout that the pro-life side of the abortion debate. When pro-lifers want to organize a rally in Washington D.C. they break records, awing the news media so much that they have to black it out.
When pro-abortion forces try to organize events they get a small band of professional liberal fools to spew hate reminiscent of the movie “The Exorcist” to cover for their lack of turn out. The news media over–covers these gatherings, zooming in to avoid a telling photo op with the pathetic turn out.
Anderson’s most telling line of all was the one in which she said that researchers estimate that 30,000 lives were saved by the removal of funding last session. Of course, she wrote it in a much colder, more technical way – following Sarah Davis’ advice not to act like a human about this issue. Anderson wrote, “The researchers estimate that 144,000 fewer women received health services and 30,000 fewer unintended pregnancies were averted in 2012 than 2010.
Whether the pregnancy is averted before or after life is created doesn’t much matter to them.
Have pro-life leaders in the legislature outlived their will to fight? Has pleasing the principalities and powers become so important to them that they’ve become useless? We’ll have to see.