Saturday, June 3, 2017

Why Aren’t Some People More Upset by Abortion Than Kathy Griffin’s Beheaded Trump?

Why Aren’t Some People More Upset by Abortion Than Kathy Griffin’s Beheaded Trump?

 NATIONAL   JAY HOBBS   JUN 2, 2017   |   5:54PM    WASHINGTON, DC
If you’re anything like me, you’ve spent pockets of time this week trying to figure out where you’ve seen Kathy Griffin. Prior to this week’s—ahem, stunt—that is.
Before she burst onto the national scene holding a severed head of the President of the United States, Griffin’s career reached its pinnacle as the bitter, failing comedienne so desperate for attention she turned to attacking others in a bit role on two Seinfeldepisodes.
Don’t call this one a comeback, in other words.
Faced with the backlash that ended up getting her fired from her New Years’ gig at CNN, Griffin took to Twitter for an apology—a real good one if you don’t take into account that her original picture came from a staged, professional photo shoot. It wasn’t some impromptu lapse in judgment, in other words.
Yet, as the indefensible reality took hold, like zombies to the crypt, our cultural betters took to social media denouncing Griffin’s decapitation as beyond the pale. (Well, at least some of them did—guys like Jim Carrey aren’t convinced quite yet.)
It was a predictable spectacle, one that we’ve seen before and, unfortunately, should expect to see again. Apparently we’re going to go have to get used to envisioning the chopped-off heads of public figures. It’s part of the culture now.
And make no mistake about it, even though the party line is to reject Griffin’s gag as too far, they key unspoken phrase is, “this time.” It’s not really that it’s too far, it’s just… right now it’s too far. Maybe next time, Kathy.
The question we should be asking ourselves is how did we get here. How did we get anywhere within 10 miles of disembodied, bloodied heads creeping into our public discourse?
In a strange turn, we’ve arrived at the figurative by way of the literal. We’re too slow to condemn fake beheadings precisely because we ignore actual beheadings going on all around us. As we’ve looked the other way while real people are ravaged, we’ve forfeited the right to expect even a modicum of civility.
Which brings us to the actual head-and-limb removers at Planned Parenthood.
Just days before releasing its latest annual report, where the taxpayer money pit quietly admitted to 328,348 counts of pre-birth murder—and it is murder, mind you—Planned Parenthood was once again exposed for illegally buying and selling arms, legs, livers and even heads it takes from the babies it kills for money.
In the latest darkened corner to come to light thanks to David Daleiden—who will one daybe revered as the steely hero he most certainly is—Planned Parenthood and its fellow-mongers in the abortion industry are caught on tape both admitting to federal crimes and openly laughing at the brutality inherent in every abortion.
One look at this video, which was released May 25, tells you all you need to know about how we got to Kathy Griffin.
“Let’s just give them all that—the violence, the killing—let’s just give them all that,” Planned Parenthood’s Lisa Harris tells a fawning crowd at a National Abortion Federation meeting, captured on hidden camera.
At five different points in the three-minute video, high-ranking representatives of Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Abortion Federation jaw-jack about what happens with babies’ heads during abortions.
What’s particularly gruesome about the footage isn’t so much the laughing—there’s a lot of cackling when the ACLU lawyer talks about a baby’s eyeball falling out during an abortion. No, the laughing is disturbing enough.
What’s much more gruesome, and far more revealing, is the overall nonchalance.
This is a child we’re talking about—the least among us, the most vulnerable who is therefore the most worthy of our protection. And it’s no big deal when their heads are chopped off, or when their arms and legs are pulled off even when the baby’s still alive.
Yet, rather than prompting horror and dismay, what happened with this video? Well, it was taken down from YouTube within hours, not because it was graphic, but because a judge in California—a former donor to Barack Obama—has the abortion industry’s back.
Shockingly, the judge is considering slapping Daleiden for contempt of court charges just for releasing the video. Contempt of court? Where may I register my contempt for such an unjust court?
While the judge tramples the First Amendment to protect his pals in the abortion industry—a scandal far more Watergate than Russian-conspiracy—where is the outcry from the everyday Americans?
Where is the demand to immediately strip funding from this demon-possessed industry, which profits on the death of the innocent and then gloats about it over a glass of Chianti? Where is the demand that we hold these guillotine operators to account?
We’ve made it to the figurative by way of the literal. Until we see national repentance for the ghoulish sin of abortion, we don’t deserve a return to civility.
Until we end the actual beheadings, we have no right but to expect the fake beheadings to continue unabated.
LifeNews Note: Jay Hobbs writes for PregnancyHelpNews, where this originally appeared.


at

Scientists Engaging in Controversial Attempt to Re-Animate “Brain Dead” Patients (When the Soul Leaves, What will come in its place?)

Scientists Engaging in Controversial Attempt to Re-Animate “Brain Dead” Patients

 HOME POSTS   MICHAEL COOK   JUN 2, 2017   |   6:12PM    WASHINGTON, DC
Killing off death will require research and clinical trials. But these may be difficult to do ethically, as a controversial attempt to reanimate brain-dead patients suggests.
Philadelphia-based biotech firm Bioquark told STAT that it plans to begin a trial somewhere in Latin America within months. The idea is to inject the patient’s own stem cells into the spinal cord to stimulate the  growth of neurons. Other therapies could accompany this — an injected blend of peptides, electrical nerve stimulation, and laser therapy for the brain.
As STAT points out, a description of the trial begs many questions. Who decides whether the patient is actually brain dead? How can a dead person participate in a trial? What happens if they do recover and are significantly impaired? Are the researches toying the hopes of families? Even in Latin America, will they get ethical approval?
Scientists and bioethicists are sceptical. Last year bioethicist Art Caplan and neuroscientist Ariane Lewis wrote a blunt editorial denouncing the Bioquark trial as “quackery”.
Dead means dead. Proposing that DNC may not be final openly challenges the medical-legal definition of death, creates room for the exploitation of grieving family and friends and falsely suggests science where none exists.
Dr Charles Cox, a pediatric surgeon in Houston who works with stem cells, was even more sceptical. “I think [someone reviving] would technically be a miracle,” he said. “I think the pope would technically call that a miracle.”
However, Bioquark’s CEO, Ira Pastor, responded that the idea was daring, but possible. He points out that there are dozens of cases of patients, mostly young one, who recovered after being brain-dead. “Such cases highlight that things are not always black or white in our understanding of the severe disorders of consciousness.”
The experiment is part of Pastor’s Reanima project, which he describes in transhumanist terms on various websites.
It is now time to take the necessary steps to provide new possibilities of hope, in order to counter the pain, sorrow, and grief that is all too pervasive in the world when we experience a loved one’s unexpected or untimely death, due to lesions which might be potentially reversible with the application of promising neuro-regeneration and neuro-reanimation technologies and therapies.
LifeNews Note: Michael Cook is editor of MercatorNet where this story appeared.


at

“Miscarriage Management:” What Planned Parenthood Will Call Abortion When It’s Illegal (Please God, let this madness end)

“Miscarriage Management:” What Planned Parenthood Will Call Abortion When It’s Illegal

 OPINION   KRISTAN HAWKINS   JUN 2, 2017   |   3:39PM    WASHINGTON, DC
The nation’s largest abortion vendor, Planned Parenthood, finally got around to releasing their 2015-2016 annual report so their stakeholders (taxpayers) can get a look at what their hard-earned dollars are going toward.
The report is a doozy, as many in the pro-life movement guessed it would be. After all, 2015 was the year the public got a behind-the-scenes look at how Planned Parenthood abortionists sort through baby body parts to find ones they can sell and make money on — that’s illegal by the way.
Planned Parenthood kindly addresses this scandal on page 11, where they take the opportunity to repeat their talking points that the videos were “highly edited” and have been “discredited.”
Both are false. Planned Parenthood’s own forensic analysis, which was done by a sketchy Democratic firm, even said “that there was no ‘widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.'” Another forensic analysis declared the videos from the Center for Medical Progress to be authentic.
There are plenty of things to note about the annual report: The number of abortions have increased, taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood has increased, cancer screenings have decreased, clients have decreased, breast exams have decreased, prenatal care was nearly cut in half.
But Planned Parenthood added an entirely new subcategory under “Other Women’s Health Services” called “Miscarriage Care.” Students for Life and other pro-life organizations have no intentions or will ever shame a woman who miscarries, but this stood out for a specific reason. A former Planned Parenthood director talked about a similar term that would be used when abortion was eventually made illegal: “miscarriage management.”
This protocol was simply called “Miscarriage Management.” It was preparation for when abortion made illegal. What would all of these women do if they couldn’t walk into a Planned Parenthood for an elective abortion? We had an answer for that written in this three-page protocol.
We would instruct women to take medications and/or vitamins to end their pregnancy… We would give them instructions on how much they needed to ingest in order to terminate their pregnancy.
We would give them warning signs … signs to help them decide if they needed to go directly to the emergency room. If everything went as planned, they would be instructed to come to our facility for an ultrasound to confirm fetal demise and an MVA (Manual Vacuum Aspiration). This would not technically be considered an abortion since the death of the child had happened outside our facility.
Of course, there would also be a fee for this “miscarriage management” service. You certainly didn’t think they would do this out of the kindness of their hearts, did you?
There were more than 2,000 “miscarriage care” cases in this year’s annual report from Planned Parenthood. They also added “well-woman exams” to the same category, something totally new from previous reports.
Overall, Planned Parenthood is still holding their own as the nation’s largest abortion provider, and they intend to stay that way. When presented with a deal a couple months ago from the Trump administration to keep their federal funding if they stopped doing abortions, they quickly said “Hell no.” Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said that abortions were as vital as cancer screenings to Planned Parenthood. Uh-huh, sure — that’s why Planned Parenthood keeps cutting their cancer screenings and increasing the number of abortions.
The non-profit’s entire rationale for existing is just smoke and mirrors. There are thousands of other federally-funded centers that offer true healthcare, are more accessible and affordable than Planned Parenthood, and aren’t riddled with scandal.
Those are the healthcare centers that our federal dollars should be redirected towards, not Planned Parenthood.
at
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *