Governor of Oregon Holds Ceremony to Celebrate Law Making Abortion Free in State
So liberals, what is the difference in the above, and the below? Why is one ok and the other wrong?
Woman Charged With Attempted Murder After Trying to Flush Newborn Son Down Toilet
Why should this woman be jailed and not celebrated and cheered like those in the top article?
PORTLAND, Ore. — The Democratic governor of Oregon held a signing ceremony on Monday to celebrate the enactment of a law that that requires insurance companies in the state to cover the murder of the unborn at no cost.
While Gov. Kate Brown already signed H.B. 3391, also known as the “Reproductive Health Equity Act,” into law on Aug. 15, a special event was held this week before members of the legislature and abortion advocacy groups to commemorate the bill.
“To lead productive and thriving lives, Oregonians must have the ability to control their bodies and make informed decisions about their health care,” she said in a statement. “I am proud to sign legislation that expands access to basic reproductive health services for all Oregonians regardless of where they live, where they come from, or how they identify as a person.”
According to the Washington Times, those in attendance “regularly broke into rousing cheers and applause.”
As previously reported, the bill, which was passed by the House and Senate in July, requires all health benefit plans in Oregon to provide coverage for various services that include abortion, contraception and testing for sexually transmitted diseases.
It allows an exemption for religious businesses and nonprofits, outlining that “[a]n insurer may offer to a religious employer a health benefit plan that does not include coverage for contraceptives or abortion procedures that are contrary to the religious employer’s religious tenets,” but only if if the insurer sends a detailed notice to employees to advise which services their employer declines to cover.
Employees can still obtain the desired contraceptives and abortions, however, as the bill also mandates that the Oregon Health Authority “shall design a program to provide statewide access to abortion coverage for Oregon residents enrolled in [such] health benefit plans.”
The legislation created much contention in both the House and Senate as Republicans were horrified that an estimated half a million dollars would be used for abortions.
“I can’t reconcile in my mind how anyone who has a walk with God can support this,” said Rep. Andy Olson, R-Albany, who emotionally shared that he lost his premie granddaughter as an infant. “I just can’t get there with you.”
“We pursue a culture of death in this country. It’s pervasive. It’s everywhere. It’s in our movies, our TV shows, our video games, our magazines. It’s down the street,” also lamented Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend. “The souls of 50 million babies in our country cry out for justice, and I know God hears them. The question, colleagues, is will we hear their cries for justice?”
In addition to the signing ceremony on Monday, Brown tweeted, “To lead productive lives, Oregonians need control of their bodies, ability to make informed choices. This law secures these basic rights.”
Her remarks were met with a mixed response by followers, with one commenter writing, “This is non-negotiable. Women must have complete autonomy over their bodies.”
“Unborn babies should also have the opportunity to live productive lives,” another wrote.
“We should be helping people making good choices about the act of conception and accept consequences, not endorsing baby murder as a way out,” a third stated.
As previously reported, female government leaders have claimed for years that abortion is necessary to allow women to work outside of the home and pursue careers. In the 1992 ruling of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a Reagan appointee, asserted that abortion has kept women in the workforce.
“For two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail,” she wrote on behalf of the court.
“The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives,” she said.
In June 2016, while speaking before a gathering of Planned Parenthood supporters, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton similarly said that she believes legalizing abortion has helped to keep women in the workplace, and thus has aided the economy.
“[Roe v. Wade] transformed [women] because it meant that women were able to get educations, build careers, enter new fields, and rise as far as their talent and hard work would take them—all the opportunities that follow when women are able to stay healthy and choose whether and when to become mothers,” she asserted.
Clinton opined that birth control has likewise helped the economy because it has kept women in the workforce instead of at home raising children.
“Today, the percentage of women who finish college is six times what it was before birth control was legal,” she stated. “Women represent half of all college graduates in America and nearly half our labor force, and our whole economy, then, is better off.”
“The movement of women into the workforce, a paid workforce, over the past 40 years was responsible for more than $3.5 trillion in growth in our economy,” Clinton contended.
Planned Parenthood’s own feminist founder, Margaret Sanger, similarly decried what she characterized as women serving as “incubators.”
“Woman’s role has been that of an incubator and little more. She has given birth to an incubated race,” she wrote in “Woman and the New Race.” “In the mass, she has brought forth quantity, not quality. The requirement of a male dominated civilization has been numbers. She has met that requirement.”
“This is the dawn. Womanhood shakes off its bondage. It asserts its right to be free. In its freedom, its thoughts turn to the race. Like begets like. We gather perfect fruit from perfect trees,” Sanger said. “The relentless efforts of reactionary authority to suppress the message of birth control and of voluntary motherhood are futile. The powers of reaction cannot now prevent the feminine spirit from breaking its bonds. ”
Sanger, who was a staunch advocate of eugenics and authored the newsletter “The Woman Rebel,” also made a correlation between birth control and the purification of the races, referring to those with disabilities as being “morons,” “idiots” and “imbeciles.”
“Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives,” she wrote in the aforementioned publication. “If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman.”
So liberals, what is the difference in the above, and the below? Why is one ok and the other wrong?
Woman Charged With Attempted Murder After Trying to Flush Newborn Son Down Toilet
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — An employee at a California McDonald’s has been charged with attempted murder after she allegedly tried to flush her newborn child down the toilet. The baby miraculously survived and is now in stable condition.
According to prosecutors, Sarah Lockner, 25, complained of abdominal pain while at work at the Redwood City McDonald’s on Sept. 4, and excused herself several times to use the restroom.
A concerned co-worker soon went to check on Lockner, who noticed blood on the floor. Lockner claimed that she was only suffering from heavy menstruation.
Another co-worker later likewise went into the restroom, and reportedly looked over the stall and saw a baby in the toilet face down with Lockner’s hand on the child’s back. She then heard the toilet flush.
Locker told her not to call the police, the co-worker said, but authorities had already been contacted at that point.
Police arrived to find Locker holding the baby, a boy, who at the time had no pulse and was not breathing. Officers performed CPR and were able to revive the child, who was then rushed to Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital in Palo Alto and placed in a medically-induced coma. Prosecutors say that the baby is miraculously expected to survive.
“We were told that the chances of survival were not strong. Somehow, through the grace of God, people [at the hospital] were able to help the baby and the baby boy is now conscious, and it looks like the boy is going to survive,” District Attorney Steven Wagstaff told reporters.
Lockner is now being held in the San Mateo County Jail on $11 million dollars bail and is facing an attempted murder charge, along with child abuse and inflicting bodily injury. According to the Los Angeles Times, Lockner told police that she didn’t know she was pregnant, and had made the same claim three years ago when she likewise gave birth in a restroom. She has been raising that child as a single mother.
“This story is incredibly important because it reveals the cognitive dissonance shared by millions in the United States,” writes Frank Camp of The Daily Wire. “McDonald’s restroom or abortion clinic, the desired outcome is the same—the death of the child.”
“In the case of Lockner, though her son survived, she was allegedly attempting to drown him and flush his remains down the toilet. Were she to have had a late-term abortion, a doctor would have dismembered her son limb by limb, and disposed of his remains in a waste container,” he notes. “Lockner’s method of infant disposal shocked the nation, while a nearly identical practice is defended as a human right.”
Camp opined that the case further demonstrates “a sign of an incredibly sick society; a society that has so contorted human morality that it is no longer recognizable.”
As previously reported, in an introductory lecture to his course on obstetrics in 1854, Philadelphia doctor Hugh Lennox Hodge lamented that even the mothers of his day were lacking of natural affection toward their own children and sought out means to kill them.
“They seem not to realize that the being within them is indeed animate, that is, in verity, a human being—body and spirit—that it is of importance, that its value is inestimable, having reference to this world and the next,” he said. “They act with as much indifference as if the living, intelligent, immortal existence lodged within their organs were of no more value than the bread eaten, or the common excretions of the system.”
“We can bear testimony that in some instances, the woman who has been well educated, who occupies high stations in society, whose influence over others is great, and whose character has not been impugned, will deliberately resort to any and every measure which may effectively destroy her unborn offspring,” Hodge sorrowed.
“he recklessly and boldly adopts measures, however severe and dangerous, for the accomplishment of her unnatural, her guilty purpose … that she may be delivered of [a child] for which she has no desire, and whose birth and appearance she dreads.”
Why should this woman be jailed and not celebrated and cheered like those in the top article?
