SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The abortion issue: pro-choice vs. anti-abortion

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: Honey_Bee10/14/2011 9:41:27 PM
2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 286
 
Truth is really hard to speak sometimes. This Congresswoman couldn't bring herself to actually say "heartbeat" when referring to an unborn baby whose mother is deciding whether or not to kill him/her:

Pro-abort Rep. can’t bring herself to say ‘heartbeat’ during Protect Life Act debate by John Jalsevac

October 14, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The other week I drew attention to a shocking video in which a number of Planned Parenthood representatives repeatedly urged university students to ignore the science about when life begins. Not only did they suggest that the science has no bearing at all upon the debate about abortion, but they appeared even to cast doubt on the very ability of science to learn for certain key facts about the unborn child - such as when the heartbeat begins.

Now comes another video, in which a leading lawmaker, a Representative in the United States House of Representatives, struggles to find a way to describe a bill in Texas that requires doctors to allow women to listen to the heartbeat of their unborn child before deciding to have the child killed through an abortion.

Of course, the fact that an unborn child has a heartbeat is deeply problematic for pro-aborts (“blobs of tissue” don’t generally have heartbeats), so how does Rep. Sheila Jackson manage to obscure this reality? She says that the bill allowed women to listen to “uh, sounds that, uh, might discourage this needed action.”

You get that? “Sounds.”

Pray tell, Rep. Jackson, what nameless “sounds” were the women allowed to listen to that were so powerful as to change their minds and dissuade them from having an abortion that they “needed”? Was it, perhaps a recording of pro-life propaganda?: something designed by anti-abortion extremists to beat women over the head and fill them with guilt for exercising their “right to choose”?

No, Rep. Jackson, it was nothing of the kind. It was the quiet, steady sound of the heart of their unborn child beating. And if that dissuades them from choosing an abortion, it is not because of any propaganda, it is because women are now in full possession of the facts - the facts that abortion extremists like you desperately want to ensure women do not have.

Read more and see the Video:

lifesitenews.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext