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.
03/10/2017 / By JD Heyes
I’ve always pondered the irony of people who support abortion, framing the act not as the willful destruction of human life or the end result of bad behavioral choices, but instead as a “woman’s right to choose” – death.
Liberals are the most ironic – well, hypocritical anyway – in their thinking regarding this issue. They deflect conservatives’ view of abortion as denying women a “choice” about what they ought to be able to do with their own bodies, but they:
— Support groups and movements that deny all sorts of “choices” for other Americans, including gun rights, free speech rights, freedom of religion and assembly rights, and the right to back certain political parties and their candidates;
— Fail to understand that the woman had a “choice” not to have sex or, perhaps, unprotected sex to begin with;
— And the victim in all of this – the unborn child, who is the most vulnerable – has its choice made for it by women (and Democratic lawmakers) who support…the “right to choose.” What about the rights of the unborn child? Liberal Democrats care more about the rights of illegal aliens than the unborn because the unborn can’t vote (and yes, illegal aliens vote). It should also be pointed out that the unborn child did not ask to be created – let alone killed – and that there are no advocates in any court for the unborn after one U.S. Supreme Court, in another time filled with justices who are no longer alive, found some hidden “constitutional right” to kill unborn children. (RELATED: President Trump just banned federal funding of abortions.)
But hey, maybe we’re onto something here. Maybe libs who are constantly harping about how there ought to be fewer humans sucking up finite resources on our planet could someday decide that the only decent thing to do is to self-abort after the fact.
No? Why not? Wouldn’t self-termination be the ultimate celebration of “women’s rights?” Or does self-termination, in the progressive sense, really only apply to their view of conservatives? Because we know how you libs feel about us. But hey, fair enough – it’s mutual.
Of course, self-termination will never happen. Liberals are far too selfish to do that. In fact, the most hypocritical liberal of all is the one who champions a “woman’s right to choose” (to kill her unborn child) after being born herself/himself. It certainly is easier to extinguish an unborn life while being damned thankful your mother and father didn’t make the same decision.
It’s too early to tell whether President Donald Trump will have the opportunity to put enough constitutionally-minded justices on the Supreme Court – justices who also have a conscience and understand that a woman’s “right to choose” actually takes place before she undresses – but he’s certainly off to a good start. If the Senate can find the time at some point to give constitutional jurist Neil Gorsuch a confirmation hearing and eventual vote, even if it takes Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell implementing the nuclear option like his former colleague Harry Reid did, Trump will have made a good start.
Then and only then can Americans – most of whom believe abortion should only be legal in certain narrow circumstances – finally get some closure on an issue that, until the 1973 Roe v Wade decision, was left up to states to decide for themselves if they would permit it. At the time of the decision, only a handful of states permitted it. (RELATED: Planned Parenthood not meeting safety standards, employees not washing hands after abortions.)
In the meantime, we’ll continue having to put up with liberal hypocrisies that only they have some divine right to bestow the gift of life (or take it away) on other completely helpless human beings, a decision they themselves would never allow others to have over them.
J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.
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.