Thursday, April 19, 2007

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

The Pro-Abortion lobby objects to the US Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. With predictable mendacity, they have assailed it as a threat to womens' health (which it isn't) and acted as though they speak for all American women (which they don't). They are fond of using clinical sounding euphemisms to obscure the ugly truth of what they defend and what they stand for. They don't like the term partial birth abortion because it's too, er, accurate for their liking. They prefer dilation and extraction. That by which we call a barbarism would stink just as badly by any other name.

This is how nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer, who by her own account was 'very pro choice', described a Dilation and Extraction in 1993:

" I stood at the doctor’s side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant. The baby’s heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby’s body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby’s body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby’s head, and the baby’s arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby was completely limp. I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen."

That is what the US Supreme Court has banned; a procedure which involves crushing a baby's skull and sucking out its brains as it exits the birth canal.

No civilised society should allow such barbarism. We wouldn't treat animals like that.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Paddy Garcia said...

I'm not easily shaken, but am still in a state of shock after reading that description.
Wonder what our comrades think?
The pro abortionists lies need to be challenged at every opportunity.
Next step is hopefully the repeal of Roe v Wade, an extremely undemocratic judgment if there ever was one.
The correct place to decide abortion laws is in the appropriate elected state legislature.
Can you think any other occasion where the left, liberals, bourguois feminists and such like support laws made by unelected judges?

4/20/2007 5:41 AM  
Blogger voltaires_priest said...

Brown vs Topeka Board of Education springs to mind. Or are you for "states' rights" on that one too?

5/07/2007 2:25 AM  
Blogger voltaires_priest said...

Meaning the final Supreme Court ruling on Brown vs Topeka, obviously.

5/07/2007 2:28 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home