Google has declared war on the independent media and has begun blocking emails from NaturalNews from getting to our readers. We recommend GoodGopher.com as a free, uncensored email receiving service, or ProtonMail.com as a free, encrypted email send and receive service.
02/15/2017 / By Don Wrightman
A regional lobbyist for Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion business in the U.S., has expressed that it should be a mother’s choice to terminate the life of an abortion survivor. Post-birth abortion is legally murder, but Planned Parenthood aren’t the only ones to see things differently.
When the former president of the United States, Barack Obama, was serving in the Illinois Senate, he opposed a proposed law several times which would have forced physicians to provide care for abortion survivors. Obama’s pro-abortion stance contributed to rejecting the bill, which aimed to ensure that abortion survivors would be saved. Obama believed that the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act conflicted with women’s reproductive rights.
The pro post-birth abortion statement made by Planned Parenthood’s regional lobbyist, Alisa LaPoit Snow, came during a Florida legislative hearing for a proposal requiring doctors to care for infants who survived the abortion procedure. At the hearing, a lawmaker asked what Planned Parenthood would prefer to do with a newly born baby from a failed abortion. The lobbyist’s response was that the decision should be made collectively by the mother, physician and family. (RELATED: Find more abortions news at Abortions.news)
Planned Parenthood believes that disabled babies should be killed if it’s deemed to be in the best interests of the family. “From the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the fetus and the newborn baby,” said the lobbyist, who is clearly okay with killing any beings who are unaware that the future exists.
Leftists claim that it should be okay to kill a newborn child in instances where abortion was permissible. They believe that sustaining the newborn’s life could affect the family’s well-being. Since they view the moral status of the newborn to be the same as the fetus, they see no difference between the two. Adoption isn’t a viable solution to them because they don’t agree with the associated psychological distress that the mother will have to deal with. Post-birth abortion advocates are using the same arguments as abortion advocates to justify the practice.
What would legal post-birth abortion do for the rights of disabled children? There are major possible implications for newborns who are mentally challenged, physically handicapped or diseased. How non-person classifications are determined could prevent certain births that are mandatory by today’s standards. Personhood amendments would certainly keep this topic controversial. (RELATED: Find women’s health news at WomensHealth.news)
COPYRIGHT © 2017 NEWSTARGET.COM
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. NewsTarget.com is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. NewsTarget.com assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.
Receive Our Free Email Newsletter
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.
Once you click subscribe, we will send you an email asking you to confirm your free subscription.