Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘feminazi police’

NOW President: Babies Wouldn’t Die So Much If We’d Just Kill Them Before They Died


http://www.lifenews.com/2014/05/14/now-president-babies-wouldnt-die-so-much-if-wed-just-kill-them-before-they-died/

by Matt Yonke | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 5/14/14 1:17 PM

National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill published an editorial on the Huffington Post today entitled, “Abortion, Like Contraception, Is Essential Health Care That Saves Lives.”

Let that sink in for a second. A procedure that’s taken over 50 million lives in the U.S. alone since 1973 . . . saves lives.

O’Neill’s “life saving” abortions

terryoneill

National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill. Notice the typical smug look on her face. The face of a child hater.

How does O’Neill get to the conclusion promised in the title, that “abortion care” saves lives? Easy! She ignores 50% of the people involved in every abortion.

The first place she looks for saved lives from abortion is high infant mortality rates. They’d be so much lower if more of those pesky underprivileged women would just get more abortions. That’s right, her solution to high infant mortality rates is to kill the babies before they get the chance to die!

From the article (emphasis mine):

We have a premature birth crisis in this country that can be directly linked to our failure to provide adequate contraception and abortion care. About half of pregnancies in the U.S. each year are unintended, and for those women who carry their pregnancies to term (more than half do), the prognosis is anything but great. They not only experience higher rates of premature birth, but also are more likely to have inadequate prenatal care, low birth weight and small size infants, maternal depression and anxiety.

From a public health point of view, abortion care, no less than contraception, is an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality . . .

To avoid the “heartbreak of infant mortality,” we should just kill the infants before anyone starts keeping statistics about them.

Again, from the article (emphasis mine):

. . . as more states like Texas and North Carolina restrict access to abortion care, more women are dying in childbirth or pregnancy, and more infants are not surviving to their first birthday.

They’re not surviving to their first birthday because you didn’t even give them the chance to be born, Terry!

Killing the poor would be an efficient way to reduce poverty, disease, recidivism, and any number of other problems, except that it’s wrong to kill the people who have problems in order to solve problems!

O’Neill mentions maternal mortality, which I won’t address in detail because it’s never right to kill someone in order to solve your problems, and so abortion cannot be a solution to the problem of maternal mortality. But it should be noted that the data actually shows that direct abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life.

The Myth of “Abortion Care”

But, at its heart, O’Neill’s piece is an attempt to make the phrase “abortion care” happen. Planned Parenthood and their ilk have been using the phrase for a while, though apparently not everyone is getting on board with this bit of Newspeak, or O’Neill’s piece would not have been necessary.

“Abortion care” is yet another attempt to shift focus off the human being who’s being killed in every single abortion procedure. Abortion can only be called “care” if you’re not thinking about the person who’s being dismembered.

But controlling the narrative is at least half the battle in a culture war, so it’s imperative that we who recognize the inherent value of the child in the womb combat their twisting of language.

Don’t let the phrase “abortion care” go by unchallenged if it’s used in your presence. All that’s required for a pernicious phrase like “abortion care” to slip into the American lexicon is for you and me to say nothing.

Ask about what care is being provided to the child. Show the images of abortion victims to “abortion care” advocates, and ask what kind of care they would call that. Ask how killing a child so it doesn’t die solves the problem of infant mortality.

But whatever you say, keep the focus on the child in the womb, whose life is an end in itself, not a tool to be used to fix statistics we don’t like.

LifeNews Note: Matt Yonke writes for the Pro-Life Action League

 

Leftist RevisionistComplete MessageVOTE 02

 

 

Category:

Family

Tagged with:

What did Kirsten Dunst Say that Brought Out Militant Feminist Rage?


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/14/what-did-kirsten-dunst-that-brought-out-militant-feminist-rage/

April 14, 2014 By

Kirsten-Dunst
Actress Kirsten Dunst is feeling the wrath of militant feminist who sent a resounding reminder that their views are the only correct views when it comes to gender and gender relations. Any other ideas are shot down as blasphemy and the messenger degraded relentlessly. During a recent interview with the UK division of Harper Bazaar, Dunst shared her ideas about feminism in a way that is counter to the Hollywood and Democrat perspective that is tossed in the faces of Americans by the likes of Lena Dunham, Sandra Fluke, Kathy Gifford, and others.

Dunst’s perspective was a view of women and men in the more traditional sense and that won the ire feminists who came out in droves to attack her. What she shared is a belief held by many others who are not associated with the radical, militant feminists.

“I feel like the feminine has been a little undervalued… We all have to get our own jobs and make our own money, but staying at home, nurturing, being the mother, cooking – it’s a valuable thing my mum created. And sometimes, you need your knight in shining armor. I’m sorry. You need a man to be a man and a woman to be a woman. That’s why relationships work…” 

Tyranney Alert

The militant feminists immediately went on the attack and made it clear that, in their ‘minds’, Dunst has no right to share what she thinks after feminism.

* Erin Gloria Ryan, who writes for the far-left feminist site Jezebel, said, “Kirsten Dunst is not paid to write gender theory so it shouldn’t surprise anyone that she’s kind of dumb about it.” She unleashed her disdain for Dunst’s opinion, which apparently Ryan believes she shouldn’t share since she is not paid to do so, in the title of her article “Kirsten Dunst Thinks Ladies In Relationships Should Wife the F**k Out.” 

* Stacy Ritzen from Uproxx called Dunst “insufferable” for daring to have these traditional opinions and, even worse, voice them.

This type of hate-filled rant from the left should come as no surprise since the left and their militant feminist wing have in the past displayed their hypocrisy in the policing of thought and action to fit their need. On one hand, many of them chided Sarah Palin, during her run as VP on the GOP presidential ticket in 2008, for having so many kids and not staying home. The left wanted to destroy Sarah, so that was one method of attack that they used. Then, four years later, militant feminists and others on the far-progressive left attacked Ann Romney, wife of then presidential candidate Mitt Romney, of never holding a ‘real job’ because she was a stay-at-home-mom.

The militant feminists on the left have waged a war on traditional values when it comes to marriage and gender. Dare to engage in conversation with ideas counter to what they believe and they’ll make you pay with their wrath. 

Kudos to Kirsten Dunst for standing strongly by her beliefs and not caving to the feminazi police.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud