This post is going to be a short post, that hopefully will give you something to think about. I have been debating on a few blogs about waterboarding. I am not going to debate it in this post, that is not the point of it. What I am going to do is call into question liberal thinking.
How can someone who is pro-life bang their fist about waterboarding yet support a candidate that is in favor of abortion?
The picture of the baby above: This little boy was one of several third trimester BABIES found in medical waste bags outside a legal abortion center in Houston, Texas. He was 14 inches long, weighed 2 pounds 2 ounces
Dude.
not only is this a disgusting picture but a disgrace to humanity as a whole.. the lady who got the abortion was at least 6 months pregnant?
How can you carry a baby for 6 months and then decide to abort? That’s an abomination!
I also thought that 3rd trimester abortions were illegal?
I do have to admit that I havent really thought about this subject much lately, mostly because my core group of friends and family do not believe in abortion and it’s just not something that’s talked about or accepted.
You have made me think!
About how this is just a way to rid yourself of an unwanted obligation, and just how accepted this practice is in todays society!
Jay – I debated last night wether or not to put it up or not. I can’t help but get a lump in my throat seeing it. You are right it is an awful picture. Yet, hopefully it drives my point home. Those who think waterboarding is bad shouldn’t be able to support someone to is in favor of doing to other babies like the one above. We really need to think about how we pick and choose morality and what is important to us.
PS I am not a big John McCain fan but at least he is consistent with this. He doesn’t like waterboarding and is pro-life.
[...] Waterboarding vs. Abortion « THE PATRIOT Short and to the point. (tags: pro-life abortion) [...]
How do you know the baby wasn’t dead before it was delivered? At this stage, there are almost no elective abortions. How do you know it wasn’t aborted to save the life of the mother? You don’t. You just enjoy the shock value. It’s disgusting, but if you get off on this sort of thing, there’s a whole pantload of this stuff on rotten.com.
I want to know what kind of sick weirdo goes picking through medical waste bags. And I want to know what kind of person gets their perspective on reality from that weirdo.
Guest – I’m guessing you are not going to come back to listen to reason. So I will comment for others that read on.
First, this wasn’t a “shock value” kind of picture. It was meant to put things in perspective. If I knew how I would have put both the act of waterboarding and a picture of an aborted baby on. So to put into perspective this issue. The issue being how abortion is much more brutal than waterboarding and how we bang our fist about waterboarding yet give a pass on abortion.
Secondly, really is it the person going through the trash or the person who tossed a baby in one that is the “sick weirdo”. You seem to have a very warped sense of reality.
Finally, “at this stage there are almost no elective abortions.” Almost being the key word. Partial birth abortion can and has been used up to and including the third trimester. So your theory is seriously flawed.
Here’s what “almost” means:
1.6 million abortions per year
- 91% first trimester
- 9% second trimester
- 0.01% third trimester (~100 out of 1.6 million)
Third-trimester abortions are generally performed for one of three reasons: the fetus has died, the fetus has a defect that will prevent it from living outside of the womb, or the mother’s life or health is in jeopardy.
That picture that you so shamelessly display on your web site is most likely someone’s terrible tragedy. A baby carried with anticipation for many months, until a simple doctor’s visit ruined the lives of hopeful parents. They must have been devastated.
I hope you’re proud of yourself.
Guest – First let me apologize. I didn’t give you the credit to show back up. Sorry.
Again. There are times in the third trimester that babies will be aborted for a simple reason of being a “nuisance”. Even if it is one baby, it is shameful.
Also, you are missing the point of the post. The point of the post is to bring perspective back to this debate on waterboarding. Where a candidate for president will howl all day about waterboarding yet support abortion. That is the point. Try not to miss it this time.
First, no one supports abortion. Everyone who supports the right to choose wants to see fewer women have to make that choice. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume by opposing abortion, you don’t mean to say that you want to subjugate women, rob them of sovereignty over their person, and cause them to suffer. Anti-abortion does not mean anti-women. And pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. Try not to miss that point.
Whatever point you intended to make with this post was completely overshadowed by your choice of illustration. What was your point, anyway? That torture isn’t so bad after all, and that we should all support it because abortion is awful? Is that how we justify our atrocities these days?
Guest,
Again, I will say this once more. The point was to bring into perspective liberal thinking. How can one be upset about waterboarding but support abortion on demand? That is and has always been the point. This wasn’t a debate about abortion but about challenging liberal thinking.
Further more, I am not going to debate you on abortion. That wasn’t the point of the post.
PS Maybe later I will post on abortion and you and I can debate it further.
And conservatives would have a lot more credibility if they focused some small portion of their outrage on famine, poverty, disease, war and genocide. Bang your fist about whatever issue you like, but morality is not a one trick pony.
So how can someone who believes X endorse a candidate who supports Y? By not oversimplifying, for starters.
Now if you ask me, this sort of divisive rhetoric is really getting tiresome. I’m not the only one who is sick of this “conservative vs. liberal” and “red vs. blue” nonsense. I think that’s a large part of Obama’s broad appeal. He’s the only candidate who has expressed any interest in unifying a fractured nation.
OK, I’m done after this.
I bring up subjects as I see them. In this case waterboarding has been making the news. The thought struck me.
To the rest of what you wrote. I tend to stick to the subject that is relevant to the post. If you want to put a list together and I will post on them. I like hearing ideas about posts that promote thought.
Thanks.
@guest – I believe the point of the post was abundantly clear concerning hypocrisy. The point is valid and powerful.
Concerning your political statement…. Even though Obama is clearly an articulate and fresh orator…we should base our support on his values and not his rhetoric. He does not support the right to life for the most defenseless of people. Therefore, no matter how well he speak, I can’t support him.
I could care less about conservative vs. liberal, red vs. blue…I am gravely concerned about life and death….all life!
I am a liberal, and this is my thinking! I stumbled across your hideous, supposedly valiant attempt at enlightening peoples minds accidentally. Although I also find the picture horrible, I must call into question the facts here. You have NO idea what the circumstances around this pregnancy are. I have had two close friends who have been in pregnancies that were WANTED, but due to circumstances out of their hands they had abortions, late stage abortions. It was gut wrenching to them and heart breaking. Pregnancies that are legally done at this stage of pregnancy are done for reasons of fetal health. There are diseases, malformations of vital organs and chromosomal abnormalities that can take place in a pregnancy that make the life of the unborn child non viable. That means they will be unable to live outside the womb. If that was not the case with this baby, then it was illegal.
The matter of abortion is one that should not be looked at by religious eyes. If you want to be allowed to retain your rights t o religious freedom, then you MAY NOT infringe on others beliefs to the contrary. If you are a non religious person, and do not believe in a soul, then you would not see a child as such until it was in your arms. Anything growing in your body is tissue that belongs to you, and yours to do with as you see fit. Obviously when an infant has a viable chance at life and adoption, say if a pregnancy is post 26 weeks, then that should be the legally enforced limit. Unless their are true medical reasons as I stated before. But before that time, it cannot be considered life without the ability to sustain it’s life on it’s own. That is how the laws should work, PERIOD. And THAT is what our new president supports. When you start mandating laws about life, then you are allowing government to enforce religious beliefs upon people. To say an abortion is wrong because you are erasing life is false if the pregnancy is in early stages. It cannot maintain life outside the womb, therefore NOT A LIFE! It is only a life at this point if you believe in a soul. Which is religious. Which returns itself back to your rights to believe in this. Lets assume you do get abortion illegalized. Then it is only small steps until you are living in a country who jails and executes it’s people for having the wrong religion. You better hope at this point that your chosen religion is the one the government chooses. Otherwise your in trouble. You CANNOT tell other people in this country what to believe in regards to religion, and this Does include abortion. We live in a country, THANK GOD! (yes, I am a LIBERAL CHRISTAN), Religious freedom is why this country exists, we fled Europe to have those rights. I will not live in a country that begins to make laws that infringe upon those rights. I will also NOT support any law that could scare some confused teenager into suicide rather than face their parents with an unplanned pregnancy.
I am a Christian, but I also have a brain in my head that I use. I would never get an abortion, unless there were NO alternative, no matter what stage it was. I myself do believe an embryo, fetus and infant all have souls and ARE life. I pray for those lost lives, and the people who take those lives. God forgives, sometimes we make our own punishment with our tortured souls. The people who have abortions will pay for those choices every day in ways you cannot fathom. But I do not judge and I do not intend to take those rights away from them. Let the Lord deal with them as he sees fit. He sees the whole picture that YOU DO NOT SEE!!! That is why we answer to him, not to each other for or sins.
Oh and one other note, no matter how you supposedly hide your attempt to discuss abortion the fact remains that you were stating that those of us who are pro-choice are also anti-life. Which is a load of crap. On the subject of water boarding. It is wrong the people are being tortured, and there is no debate as to whether or not these people are alive, THEY ARE! There is however as I expressed, a religious and non religious debate over whether or not a fetus is a life. So there my dear deluded friend is the most basic difference between the two issues!
My son was 2 lbs when born. My daughter was 2.2 They were born three months early. My son is now 7 and his twin sister? 7…
They are both in the first grade, happy, healthy, big strong kids….. I held my son close to me on my chest when he was 2 pounds…
I don’t like the picture – but I am against murder. Abortion is murder.
February 21, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Guest wrote
And conservatives would have a lot more credibility if they focused some small portion of their outrage on famine, poverty, disease, war and genocide. Bang your fist about whatever issue you like, but morality is not a one trick pony.
MY OPINION: I DESIRE TO FEED MY FAMILY, TEACH MY CHILDREN RIGHT FROM WRONG AND TO BE HONEST AND TELL THE TRUTH. I AM AGAINST FAMINE, POVERTY, DISEASE, WAR AND GENOCIDE. AND I AM AGAINST ABORTION. SHOULD I DELETE THE ABORTION ISSUE AND CLING TO ALL THE OTHERS? SHOULD I FEED AFRICA AND KILL MY WIFE’S UNBORN BABY ON THE SAME DAY?
So how can someone who believes X endorse a candidate who supports Y? By not oversimplifying, for starters.
WHAT IS X AND Y. CAN YOU BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC?
Now if you ask me, this sort of divisive rhetoric is really getting tiresome. I’m not the only one who is sick of this “conservative vs. liberal” and “red vs. blue” nonsense. I think that’s a large part of Obama’s broad appeal. He’s the only candidate who has expressed any interest in unifying a fractured nation.
UNIFIED TO WHAT? I OPPOSE SOCIALISM. PERIOD.
Wow.
First: I stumbled on this post while looking for images of what my baby looks like now that I’m 30 weeks pregnant. Thanks, “thepatriot”.
Second: Bravo “Guest”. It’s motivating to see that some people still support their opinions with sound logic, facts, and an open mind, instead of semantics, insults, and unilateral thought.
The rest of you are silly to debate abortion. Do you believe that blowing off steam on internet message boards is going to create the world you want? You merely widen the chasm between problem and solution. You speak to hear yourselves, or rather, write to see your own words, and you will probably never realize that this is one of the most destructive forms of vanity in which we indulge.