Women’s Rights and Abortion: Which Females have the Rights?

At the end of the day who made the choice to get pregnant in the first place. If you play the game and take chances, there is always a price to pay. Should it be women who pay  the price or should the future women in the womb pick up the tab?  


I know Roe v. Wade was this man made law that allowed  women to decide what they want to do with their bodies.

 

And last month a wacko by the name of  Lindsay  Siler sent me an email stating:  ” … hundreds of thousands of people tuned in to witness the ugly efforts to strip women’s rights away.” I have to tell you that I never quite understood how this is only about women’s rights.

 

And let me be clear I am totally in favor of abortion especially if it involves a Democrat and or a liberal. To make the argument that an innocent child is being executed would be as futile as arguing that CO2 could not possibly be directly related to any form of climate change.

 

So it seems like the first trimester was acceptable as the cut-off date for the execution. In layman’s terms that’s about 3 months or 90 days or 12 weeks. So in some states this is 20 weeks, 24 weeks, and Texas is actually the third trimester. And today with the morning after pill being dispensed in gum ball machines, is there really any need for abortions?

 

But we had this black “physician” in Philadelphia doing partial birth abortions, He was the go to guy if it was too late to get an abortion any where else.  And if a woman didn’t die in the process, he would probably be free today to continue doing late term abortions.

 

In his case he would actually deliver the baby and then he took the liberty of cutting the spinal cord causing the death of the born fetus. Which was actually a viable baby. And that’s ok. He was doing a service and he was helping out a woman that was in trouble and chose to have sex but chose not to have the baby live. Maybe the time was not convenient!

 

But what about the women staff in this doctor’s office. They had to know that this “doctor” was executing the baby after it was delivered. How many of these women were mothers or had mothers. If it was a puppy would they have protested. So women’s rights be damned!

 

The other problem with this case was the woman that died. Most of his patients allegedly lived in poverty. That “p” word is the great equalizer for liberal arguments. But the reason she died was that she reacted adversely to the medication and died.  The question is to create wiggle room under the “woman’s life is in danger provision”,  was this doctor administering drugs to induce some kind of reaction so the baby could be legally aborted as late term. But I didn’t hear any discussion on that issue. And there were no protests from liberal organizations that this was wrong. It wasn’t an abortion. It was murder. The doctor should have killed the baby in the womb, then it would have been legal. Why did he deliver the baby first?

 

So where was Lindsay when this baby was legally murdered? Even Planned Parenthood said it was wrong. I thought it was about women’s rights. What was wrong? Do you mean the baby had  rights.  What if the baby was a female?

 

The viability issue that Roe v. Wade imagined was that the baby must be able to live outside the womb. If you don’t cut that spinal cord, I betcha there will be living going on.

 

From a societal point of view there came from all of this the notion that a man, father of the child, the sperm donor would have no say whether the baby lives or dies. It always struck me funny. If the baby was born the father was legally obligated to pay. But when it came to signing the order of execution for the baby, the father had no rights.

 

And since most of these babies are female, doesn’t the female rights of the unborn baby extend to the same liberal rights created by Roe v. Wade? I guess it is about certain female rights but not all females!

 

Since Roe v. Wade  about 54.5 million abortions have been executed. About 10 million were black and about 27.3 were female.

 

Another funny twist to all of this is that the  fertilization of the baby that brought this case to the Supreme Court was born and put up for adoption. The case took three years to get the liberal Supremes to cast their vote for execution. And now the plaintiff  is rumored as being a pro-lifer. I guess the wheels of chance can always be confusing when we want the courts to play God. 

 

At the end of the day who made the choice to get pregnant in the first place. If you play the game and take chances, there is always a price to pay. Should it be women who pay  the price or should the future women in the womb pick up the tab? 

Print Friendly


Government Secret Code Is A Documentary That Shows Code And The Way It's Utilized In Government Rule. It Reveals Big World Secrets In The Form Of Code Such As The 2010 Incident In Haiti Which Resulted In 250k Lives Lost, And Much, Much More.

2 comments to Women’s Rights and Abortion: Which Females have the Rights?

  • sedonaman

    “Should it be women who pay the price or should the future women in the womb pick up the tab?”

    Neither. The man should.

    The reason for all these contradictory answers to the questions is there is no way you can rationalize an idea based on a lie. A pro-abortion editorial appearing in the September 1970 issue of California Medicine, a pro-abortion publication, contains a revealing statement on lying in the service of killing:

    Since the old ethic has not yet been fully displaced, it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everybody knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but the taking of a human life would be ludicrous if they were not often put forth under socially impeccable auspices. It is suggested that this schizophrenic sort of subterfuge is necessary because while a new ethic is being accepted the old one has not yet been rejected.

    Most of the questions posed in this article can be explained if we just accept that a child is the de facto property of its mother. Period.

  • Anonymous

    That absolutely is not the truth. The baby/”child” is NOT the property of anyone!!! Life is not a commodity to be bought, sold or disposed of at the will of someone else for any reason!! A child is a gift from God for this world no matter what the circumstances surrounding the pregnancy and/or birth! If more people understood this no children would be killed in the womb by abortion under the pretense of the mother’s “right to do what she wants with her own body”. Besides that line of faulty thinking would mean that if the child in the womb is a girl, she should then also have the same rights for “her own body”? Hummm…that means someone has denied her rights if she is killed, doesn’t it?!! Aside from the hideousness of abortion, people who subscribe to, support, procure and promote abortion are guilty of more than a moral sin and a societal crime – they have absolutely no common sense either! OR they are deliberately and selfishly jeopardizing the safety and life of another human being which is horrid and barbaric. And each one who is involved in this crime against God and humanity will be answering to Him one day – hopefully they will have repented and asked for forgiveness before the point of no return at the time of their deaths.

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply








Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



IC Contributors