Archive for After Birth Abortions

2011 YouTube says that her friend’s baby was born alive after the abortion

Posted in After Birth Abortion with tags , , , on July 29, 2013 by saynsumthn

ABORTION CLINIC LED MOM 2 BELIEVE THAT HER BABY WAS SUCCESSFULLY ABORTED, YET BABY WAS ALIVE

A woman who claimed that her friend’s baby was born alive after the abortion has posted a video on youtube. It was an emotional message, “I know a friend of mine several years ago. She herself had an abortion, a two day procedure…” the woman begins.

She described the way her friend “suffered with major labor pains” during the second day.

“However, my friend was not heavily sedated all the way. She did not say anything to the hospital – to the staff- or anybody….Upon the completion of the abortion, she heard the baby cry. The baby was alive, she knew the baby was alive, it was a girl…That’s when she protested, when she heard the baby cry, because she saw a female nurse with glasses.. taking the baby to the table and checking the heartbeat. And then that’s when she started complaining that she wasn’t heavily sedated. That she knew that her daughter was alive and she made up her mind that she wanted to have the baby. And they reassuring her it was the drug making her hallucinate these things. And so they injected more sedative into her I.V….and suffered this thought in her mind for many many years.”

Planned Parenthood supporters sign petition for after birth 4th trimester abortion

Posted in After Birth Abortion, Planned Parenthood After Birth Abortion with tags , , , on July 25, 2013 by saynsumthn

Think AFTER BIRTH ABORTION WON’T HAPPEN- Think AGAIN:

Wendy Davis does Death Dance while media ignores After Birth Abortions

Posted in Karpen, Late term abortion, Media Bias, Politics, pro-choice with tags , , , , , , , on June 25, 2013 by saynsumthn

UPDATE: June 26, 2013: #SB5 passed then failed in #Texas. Last night the #abortion dance by Senator Wendy R. Davis was suspended, then, as lawmakers tried to cast their votes after the filibuster attempt, chaos from abortion promoters overwhelmed the Senate floor causing the vote to go past the midnight cutoff for the special session. At first the media declared SB5, Texas’ most restrictive abortion legislation as passed, then at 3:00am LT. Gov. Dewhurst announced that the vote had failed.

WendyDavis-Fight

Today, radically pro-abortion Texas State Senator Wendy Davis has announced that she will filibuster in the Texas legislature to try and keep several abortion restrictions from moving forward in the state.

Republicans pushed the restrictions through the House early Monday in a special session that will end tonight. To be successful in her filibuster, Davis will have to remain standing and speak nonstop, without bathroom breaks for 13 hours.

Life Dynamics Logo

Life Dynamics Inc., a national pro-life organization in Denton, points out that while Davis does her pro-death dance today, state and national media will likely cover the filibuster while ignoring accusations that after birth abortions are being performed in the state.

KARPEN Clinic Workers Pic
A few weeks ago, Life Dynamics released an interview with three former abortion clinic workers who accused Houston, Texas abortionist, Douglas Karpen of killing babies after birth.

DouglasKarpen

Since Life Dynamics’ video was released, Texas District 61, State Representative Phil King along with several other state lawmakers have called for a full investigation of the late term abortion doctor. In addition, Rep. King has mailed a copy of the testimony to the Homicide Division of the Houston Police Department. According to Harris County DA’s Office spokeswoman Sara Marie Kinney, the Harris County District Attorney’s Office is cooperating with an investigation by the Houston Police Department.

CecilWorldWatching
While Wendy Davis, along with abortion giant Planned Parenthood claim the whole world is watching Texas, Life Dynamics asks when will the media do their job and report these Gosnell style accusations to the nation?

TEXAS Filibuster

KARPEN PHOTO 2-942f39ee34

Mark Crutcher, President of Life Dynamics said, “They’ve seen these things go on; they’ve participated in them. He’s delivering them live and killing them outside the womb…He sometimes twists their heads off – he would just grab them by the shoulders and by the head and twist their necks, ring their necks like a chicken, literally.

What we have witnessed in our video is the nature of the beast. Simply put, this is Abortion! If the abortion lobby thinks this issue is going away, they are, literally, whistling past the graveyard.”

A portion of the interview conducted by Life Dynamics interview can be viewed here:

Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fhyJItGPko&feature=youtu.be

Abortion clinic employee, “I thought, well, it’s an abortion you know, that’s what he does, but I wasn’t aware that it was illegal…Most of the time we would see him where the fetus would come completely out and of course, the fetus would still be alive..”

“He does a lot of huge abortions. A lot of the times, we would bring the big fetus that were over age, we would re-open the bag and just look at it and be like, ‘Oh my gosh, it’s so big!'”

“Sometimes he couldn’t get the fetus out. He would yank pieces – piece by piece – when they were oversize. And I’m talking about the whole floor dirty. I’m talking about me drenched in blood.”

Life Dynamics was founded in 1992 by Mark Crutcher and has gained a trusted reputation for ongoing research into the abortion industry.

For an interview, call Life Dynamics at (940) 380-8800

###

Partial transcript from the interview:

CLIP 1
Clinic Worker: “ Most of the time we would see him where the fetus would come completely out and of course the fetus would still be alive because it was still moving, of course, you could see the stomach breathing and um that’s when he would do his um, he would snip the spine, as they were saying this doctor did and of course the soft spot was one of the spots that he um would take one of the forceps, or what is it called? The dilators and stick it down the soft spot of the fetuses head.”
Interviewer: “You saw this happen?”
Clinic worker: “Oh yes. I think every morning I saw on several occasions. If we had um, if we had 20 something patients, of course maybe 10 or 12, or 13 or 15 would be large procedures – out of those large procedures I’m pretty sure I was seeing 3 to 4 fetus that were completely delivered in some way or another.”
( View here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LBLQ9jYgFY_)

CLIP 2
Interviewer: “You would see the baby alive”
Clinic Worker: “Yes, sir.”
Interviewer: “and him kill that baby outside the womb?”
Clinic worker: “Yes, sir”
Interviewer: “And this would be done by jamming some kind of instrument into the soft spot?”
Clinic worker: “Either that or actually twisting the head off the neck, kind of with his own bare hands?”
Interviewer: “And you saw that happen?”
Clinic worker: “Yes, sir”
Clinic Worker: “Sometimes he would go through the stomach as well”
Interviewer: “Sometimes he would do what?”
Clinic Worker: “He would like, force it through the stomach.”
Clinic Worker: “The, the instrument…”
Clinic Worker: “and he’d twist it”
Interviewer: “And you saw that?”
Clinic Worker: “anything that he could get to…like she said..”
Clinic Worker: “I normally saw either the snipping of the spine or the introduction of the instrument in the soft spot of the fetus normally or twisting of the neck”
Clinic Worker: “Remember he would like take his finger”
Clinic Worker: “Or his finger, he’d take his finger”
Clinic Worker: “uh, through the throat”
Clinic Worker: “Yeah”
( View clip Here – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaBe6rsw1jY )

Watch several minutes of the clinic workers interview Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fhyJItGPko&feature=youtu.be
View Rep. King’s Letters here – http://tinyurl.com/mqrgja8
About Life Dynamics: http://www.lifedynamics.com/Pro-life_Group/
Mark Crutcher’s Bio http://tinyurl.com/c6menuz
View photos here ( WARNING VERY GRAPHIC) http://www.scribd.com/doc/141550822/Photos-of-Babies-1-2

Is a Texas abortion doctor killing babies after birth like Gosnell and being ignored by state authorities?

Posted in abortion clinic safety, Abortion Clinic Worders, Abortionist, Abortionist and Live Birth, Karpen, Late term abortion, Life Dynamics with tags , , , , , , , , on May 15, 2013 by saynsumthn

Special Report: New Stunning Photos, Testimony Show Texas Abortionist Kills Babies Born Alive
May 15, 2013 By Operation Rescue

karpenbanner

Houston, TX – After the conviction of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell on murder charges, Operation Rescue has been repeatedly asked if there is any evidence that similar practices exist at abortion clinics elsewhere in the nation. That documentation has now been released.

Operation Rescue arranged to have Life Dynamics, Inc. produce a video interview, released yesterday, with three informants who came to Operation Rescue as the result of our Abortion Whistleblowers Program, which offers a reward of $25,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of abortionists who are breaking the law.

The three informants, Deborah Edge, Gigi Aguliar, and Krystal Rodriguez, have come forward to tell of their horrific experiences working for abortionist Douglas Karpen, at one of three of his Texas abortion clinics, the Aaron Women’s Clinic in Houston. A fourth informant has co-operated with Operation Rescue, filing an affidavit about her experiences, but remains at this time anonymous.

KARPEN Clinic Workers Pic

As shocking as their stories are, these women did more than just talk; they brought forward evidence of illegal late-term abortions in the form of photos taken on their cell phones at the Karpen’s clinic on Schumacher Lane in Houston.

KARPEN PHOTO 2-942f39ee34

The photos were scandalous. They depicted two babies aborted well beyond the legal limit of 24 weeks in Texas. Their necks had been cut.
“The photos show babies that are huge, with gashes in their necks, indicating that these babies were likely born alive, then killed, just as Kermit Gosnell did at his ‘House of Horrors’ clinic in Philadelphia,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “In fact, there are numerous similarities between Karpen and the Gosnell case, including the disregarding of complaints by the authorities that allowed both men to continue their illegal operations.”

KARPEN 3-e13d84c928

Signs of life
In both cases, the babies’ skin is pink, noting a lack of masceration, an early form of decomposition that happens in babies that die in the womb. Massive bruising on the extremities of one of the babies indicates the baby’s heart was pulsing with life when the trauma was inflicted likely when grasping instruments latched on to bring the baby down into the birth canal. The eyes of the other child are open in a nightmarish expression of pain, revealing development greater than 26-28 weeks. Both sets of photos were taken sometime in 2011.

The video interview of the three informants verified the worst.

“When he did an abortion, especially an over 20 week abortion, most of the time the fetus would come completely out before he cut the spinal cord or he introduced one of the instruments into the soft spot of the fetus, in order to kill the fetus,” said Deborah Edge, who worked as a surgical assistant for Karpen for about 15 years until leaving in March, 2011.

“I thought, well, it’s an abortion you know, that’s what he does, but I wasn’t aware that it was illegal…Most of the time we would see him where the fetus would come completely out and of course, the fetus would still be alive,” Edge continued.

How often did this happen?

“I think every morning I saw several, on several occasions,” she said. “If we had 20-something patients, of course ten, or twelve, or fifteen patients would be large procedures, and out of those large procedures, I’m pretty sure that I was seeing at least three or four fetuses that were completely delivered in some way or another,” said Edge, acknowledging that these babies would be alive.

She described how some babies would emerge too soon and would be alive, moving, and breathing. She also told of how Karpen would sometimes deliver the babies feet first with the toes wiggling until he stabbed them with a surgical implement. At the moment the toes would suddenly splay out before going limp. Sometimes he would kill the babies by “twisting the head off the neck,” according to Edge.

Women would be given doses of Cytotec, a drug that causes strong and unpredictable uterine contractions, and would deliver while they were waiting in line to see Karpen, some in toilets, one in the hallway.

“He just picked it up with one of those [chux] pads and put it in the trash bag,” said Krystal Rodriguez of the baby born in the hallway.
“As long as the patient had the cash, he was going to do it past 25 weeks,” she said.

But not all the babies came out intact. When there was difficulty, Karpen would dismember them, a process that was, according to the surgical assistant Deborah Edge, a bloody mess.

“Sometimes he couldn’t get the fetus out” she explained. “He would yank pieces – piece by piece – when they were oversize. And I’m talking about the whole floor dirty. I’m talking about me drenched in blood.”

Undercover investigation and a troubled past

It all began in early 2011, when Operation Rescue was conducting an undercover investigation of several Texas abortion clinics when it discovered that Karpen appeared to be violating the Texas informed consent law that required that abortionists give the state-mandated information personally on patient conference calls set up for that purpose. In addition to the improper use of a recording, he was not on the line to answer questions, as the law required. Operation Rescue’s Cheryl Sullenger filed a complaint with the Texas Medical Board concerning this violation.

Sullenger submitted a statement to the TMB noting Karpen’s documented history of problems, including series of botched abortions stretching back to 1988 when 15-year old Denise Montoya hemorrhaged and died after a 26-week abortion done by Karpen.

She told the TMB of a documented incident on February 6, 2005, when a sewer broke at Karpen’s Texas Ambulatory Surgical Center, located at 2421 N. Shepherd in Houston, causing sewage to spill into the parking lot of a neighboring car dealership. Maribeth Smith, an employee of the car dealership said she is convinced she saw human body parts mixed in with the sewage. She took photographs, believing the human tissue came from the clinic.

“Whether it’s legal or not, it’s not right,” Smith said. “This whole area is nothing but raw sewage and bloody pieces. There were little legs coming out from one side.”
A Health Department worker called 911 to report a second spill at the same abortion clinic. When asked who she was with she told the dispatcher, “Health Department…and we handle normal medical waste, but this is beyond us. He says he can see fetuses and fingers and everything.” (Emphasis in transcript.)

Sullenger hoped that the history of documented abuses would help convince the TMB to act swiftly to protect the public.

Whistleblower comes forward

The following month, Deborah Edge contacted Operation Rescue with her first-hand account Karpen’s practices after she had smuggled one of Operation Rescue’s Whistleblower flyers out of his clinic, knowing that she needed to call.

In addition to the accounts of the illegal late-term abortions, other abuses Edge witnessed included:

• Falsification of ultrasounds to produce younger fetal ages of babies over the legal limit or older fetal ages to extract more money out of women.
• Fraudulent billing practices.
• Surgical equipment not properly sterilized.
• Reuse of disposable instruments.
• Unqualified workers drawing and administering drugs.
• Late-term abortions done at 28 weeks and later. (Texas law permits only to 24 weeks.)
• Lack of adequate nursing staff.
• Concealing poorly kept logs from inspectors to prevent deficiency citations.
• Hiring nurses through a temp agency to work only on days when inspections are scheduled.
• Mistreating heavy women and inappropriately touching attractive women while under sedation.
• Sexual harassment.

Edge explained that Karpen was able to evade detection by having his workers hide sanitation logs and other incriminating documentation from inspectors on the occasions they would come by the clinic.

“Karpen might have a little newer equipment and a little cleaner clinic, but his shoddy practices certainly mirror those of convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell. Certainly if anyone deserved Board discipline, it was this guy,” said Sullenger.


Excel Spreadsheets

spreadsheet

Another piece of evidence was an Excel file that contained four months of abortion billing information for 2011. That file was given to Operation Rescue by an anonymous informant. The abortions listed all indicated that several abortion funds, including the National Abortion Federation Fund, the Hershey Fund, the Lilith Fund, and others had been billed for part of the abortion fee. The allegation made by the informant was that Karpen was bilking the funds out of money by over-billing them. While that allegation could not be substantiated by Operation Rescue, the list was revealing as to the price of the late-term abortions that the women all said were done beyond the legal limit and the amount of cash taken in to the clinic.

March, 2011, listed 33 abortions that were partially paid for with abortion funds or other sources. Over $38,000 in cash was paid by patients. The file showed 5 abortions that cost under $1,000, 7 abortions that were between $1,000-2,000, 12 abortions that cost between $2,000-$3,000, and 3 abortions that were over $3,000.

The greater the gestational age, the higher the abortion fee. How old were the two babies whose abortions cost $3,700? The file didn’t say, but the high figure seemed to confirm the allegations that abortions were being done very late — much later than 24 weeks.

Working together

Due to legal issues raised by the former clinic workers, Operation Rescue contacted attorneys at Alliance Defending Freedom, which handled many of the women’s legal concerns. Once the women quit their jobs, finances became an issue. Newman contacted Abby Johnson, whose new organization And Then There Were None, which offers support to former abortion clinic workers. She agreed to help the women with some financial assistance.

Amended complaint
The additional information gathered from Edge and the other women was quickly added to the original Texas Medical Board complaint filed earlier. Sullenger discussed the new information with TMB Inspector, Leslie Coe, who seemed to be conducting an investigation. As the other Karpen employees came forward with similar stories, their affidavits were submitted to Coe along with the video of violations taken inside the clinic and the photos of the huge babies Karpen had aborted.

Everything seemed to be progressing through the investigative process. The women were interviewed and Sullenger spoke on and off with Coe, who seemed cooperative and willing to take more information as it came in.

Settlement conference hearings were scheduled and hopes rose, but the hearings were repeatedly delayed and reset over the course of months until finally they were simply were not rescheduled.

“I thought that the additional information had sent the case back to the investigative phase and that the Board just needed more time to process everything. Medical Boards take a very long time to work through things. After being involved in numerous Board actions against abortionists, the delays seemed normal,” said Sullenger. “But apparently they weren’t.”

Mysterious dismissal

But then something changed.

“It was like someone turned the spigot off. Ms. Coe stopped returning my calls and did not acknowledge my e-mails. I could not account for the change in attitude,” said Sullenger. “Then I got the letter dismissing the case and was completely stunned by it.”
The letter, dated February 8, 2013, stated:

The investigation referenced above has been dismissed because the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to prove that a violation of the Medical Practices Act occurred. Specifically, this investigation determined that Dr. Karpen did not violate the laws connected with the practice of medicine and there is no evidence of inappropriate behavior, therefore no further action will be taken.

“I couldn’t believe what I was reading,” said Sullenger. “How could anyone look at those pictures of the two babies and still say ‘there is no evidence of inappropriate behavior’? No one even bothered to sign the letter.”

Going public

With the TMB out of the picture, Sullenger sought an opportunity to get the women’s stories recorded and evidence released to the public, an effort that required her to negotiate unexpected delays.

Then, while Sullenger was in Philadelphia reporting on the Kermit Gosnell murder trial, Mark Crutcher of the Texas-based Life Dynamics, Inc., a close associate of Operation Rescue’s, was able to make arrangements to get the interviews recorded.

The Gosnell trial and his convictions on 3 counts of first degree murder for severing the spinal cords of babies born alive during abortions at his filthy West Philadelphia abortion clinic has focused the national abortion debate onto the question of whether Gosnell’s behavior was an anomaly. Often in the courtroom conversation amongst reporters, many with very liberal world views, would shift to questions about whether others like Gosnell were out there breaking the law and subjecting women – and their viable babies that the law was supposed to protect – to unspeakable atrocities.

“Douglas Karpen is so like Kermit Gosnell that it is uncanny, from the illegal late-term abortions, to killing babies born alive, to even the sewers clogged with fetal remains,” said Sullenger. “But the most disturbing thing is that we know there are others out there who are maybe even worse than Gosnell and Karpen, who just have not been caught yet. How many? There’s just no way to tell, but that thought should give everyone pause to think. Can we really afford to allow abortion clinics to run amok without accountability? When we do, we get places like Gosnell’s ‘House of Horrors” and Karpen’s apparently illicit operation. The ones that pay the price for the lack of enforcement and oversight are those who can’t defend themselves from exploitation by men like them.”

Enforcement elusive

While states continue to enact pro-life laws that are designed to provide greater oversight and accountability to an out-of-control abortion industry, the matter of enforcement still remains the biggest challenge to bringing abortionists like Gosnell and Karpen to justice.

For years, Gosnell evaded accountability, shielded by a political atmosphere that ignored complaints and refused to inspect clinics out of fear of limiting access to abortions. That political climate was one in which Gosnell thrived. Karpen appears to enjoy the benefits of a similar political climate in Texas, which has inexplicably chosen to ignore a total of four former employees and the images of the babies Karpen dispatched in a similar manner that earned Gosnell two life sentences in prison.

Operation Rescue has finally made public Karpen’s identity in order to attempt bypass the stonewalling of the TMB and bring him to justice.

“We are asking all those who were appalled by the details of Gosnell’s behavior that have come out throughout the trial to take action to bring Karpen to justice in a court of law,” said Newman. “We know that it is possible to prosecute him because of the outcome of the Gosnell trial. We just need prosecutors like those in Philadelphia who are willing and courageous enough to enforce the law.”

Please take the time to contact the authorities below and ask for a full-scale investigation into Douglas Karpen’s abortion business.
Mike Anderson, District Attorney Harris County, Texas
1201 Franklin Street, Suite 600, Houston, Texas 77002-1923

Voice: (713)-755-5800
E-Mail: Armand_Stephanie@dao.hctx.net
Greg Abbott, Attorney General of Texas
Office of the Attorney General
PO Box 12548
Austin, TX 78711-2548
Voice: (512) 463-2050
E-Mail: robert.allen@texasattorneygeneral.gov
Texas Medical Board
333 Guadalupe
Tower 3, Suite 610
Austin, TX 78701
Voice: (512) 305-7010
E-Mail: verifcic@tmb.state.tx.us

“Rational Design” code word for Genetically Modified Eugenics

Posted in After Birth Abortion, Eugenics, Genetically Modified Humans, Infanticide, Rational design with tags , , , , , , , , , on August 17, 2012 by saynsumthn

On August 16,2012, the UK Telegraph published this article: Genetically engineering ‘ethical’ babies is a moral obligation, says Oxford professor

The claim is simple: Genetically screening our offspring to make them better people is just ‘responsible parenting’, claims an eminent Oxford academic.

Professor Julian Savulescu said that creating so-called designer babies could be considered a “moral obligation” as it makes them grow up into “ethically better children”.

The expert in practical ethics said that we should actively give parents the choice to screen out personality flaws in their children as it meant they were then less likely to “harm themselves and others”.

Savulescu is also editor-in-chief of the Journal of Medical Ethics, made his comments in an article in the latest edition of Reader’s Digest.

Interesting to note, the Journal of Medical Ethics received death threats after they published an article on AFTER BIRTH ABORTIONS. The authors, Alberto Guiblini and Francesca Minerva, of that horrific publication maintain that abnormalities cannot always be detected in a fetus and women cannot choose to abort or not. “A serious philosophical problem arises when the same conditions that would have justified abortion become known after birth. In such cases, we need to assess facts in order to decide whether the same arguments that apply to killing a human fetus can also be consistently applied to killing a newborn human”.

Below is an audio interview of the author about the article on AFTER BIRTH ABORTIONS:

In justifying their publication of the article, the editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Julian Savulescu wrote “Many people will and have disagreed with these arguments. However, the goal of the Journal of Medical Ethics is not to present the Truth or promote some one moral view. It is to present well reasoned argument based on widely accepted premises. The authors provocatively argue that there is no moral difference between a fetus and a newborn. Their capacities are relevantly similar. If abortion is permissible, infanticide should be permissible. The authors proceed logically from premises which many people accept to a conclusion that many of those people would reject”.

Back to the RATIONAL DESIGN ARGUMENT:

Savulescu explained that we are now in the middle of a genetic revolution and that although screening, for all but a few conditions, remained illegal it should be welcomed.

He said that science is increasingly discovering that genes have a significant influence on personality – with certain genetic markers in embryo suggesting future characteristics.
By screening in and screening out certain genes in the embryos, it should be possible to influence how a child turns out.

In the end, he said that “rational design” would help lead to a better, more intelligent and less violent society in the future.

“Surely trying to ensure that your children have the best, or a good enough, opportunity for a great life is responsible parenting?” wrote Prof Savulescu, the Uehiro Professor in practical ethics.

“So where genetic selection aims to bring out a trait that clearly benefits an individual and society, we should allow parents the choice.

“To do otherwise is to consign those who come after us to the ball and chain of our squeamishness and irrationality.

“Indeed, when it comes to screening out personality flaws, such as potential alcoholism, psychopathy and disposition to violence, you could argue that people have a moral obligation to select ethically better children.

“They are, after all, less likely to harm themselves and others.”

“If we have the power to intervene in the nature of our offspring — rather than consigning them to the natural lottery — then we should.”

So much can be said about these comments, but calling them MORAL and CHOICES are despicable reasoning for simple EUGENICS !

So what is MORAL Behavior and what personality and character would this professor deem reasonable to breed?

In 1904, Frances Galton who coined the term EUGENICS and was a cousin to Charles Darwin, stated in his writings:
“Persistence in setting forth the national importance of eugenics.”

He said, “There are three stages to be passed through:
(I) It must be made familiar as an academic question, until its exact importance has been understood and accepted as a fact.
(2) It must be recognized as a subject whose practical development deserves serious consideration.
(3) It must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion. It has, indeed, strong claims to become an orthodox religious, tenet of the future, for eugenics co-operate with the workings of nature by securing that humanity shall be represented by the fittest races.

Galton then observed that “What nature does blindly, slowly, and ruthlessly, man may do providently, quickly, and kindly. As it lies within his power, so it becomes his duty to work in that direction.” AH…there is that so-called MORAL OBLIGATION AGAIN !

Galton continued,” The improvement of our stock seems to me one of the highest objects that we can reasonably attempt. We are ignorant of the ultimate destinies of humanity, but feel perfectly sure that it is as noble a work to raise its level, in the sense already explained, as it would be disgraceful to abase it.” THERE IS THAT SO-CALLED “rational design”, again !

In 1904, Eugenicist George Bernard Shaw said, “What we must fight for is freedom to breed the race without being hampered by the mass of irrelevant conditions implied in the institution of marriage.”

Theodore Roosevelt, wrote this in a letter to eugenicist Charles Davenport in 1913, hoping that “Someday we will realize that the prime duty, the inescapable duty, of the good citizen of the right type is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type.”

The 1917 California amendment, the third sterilization bill in the nation, worded the description of a diagnosis warranting sterilizations from “hereditary insanity or incurable chronic mania or dementia” to a “mental disease which may have been inherited and is likely to be transmitted to descendants.”

At state and local fairs during the 1920s and 1930s, the American Eugenics Society sponsored lectures and exhibits intended to demonstrate principles of heredity and the menace of unchecked breeding among the unfit. “Some people are born to be a burden to the rest” read the signs above their booths. In 1936 the Eugenics Institute listed its activities for the previous year: “the training of SS doctors; racial hygiene training; expert testimony for the Reich Ministry of the Interior on cases of dubious heritage; collecting and classifying skulls from Africa; studies in race crossing; and experimental genetic pathology.” In 1937 Frederick Osborn a founder of the Eugenics Society in America , himself “praised the Nazi eugenic program as the ‘most important experiment which has ever been tried.’”

That was the year after Julian S. Huxley coined this staggering term: Selection through Favourable Variations, when he said, “But in civilized human communities of our present type, the elimination of defect by natural selection is largely (though of course by no means wholly) rendered inoperative by medicine, charity, and the social services; while, as we have seen, there is no selection encouraging favourable variations. The net result is that many deleterious mutations can and do survive, and the tendency to degradation of the germ-plasm can manifest itself.”

So as you can see this professors “ideas” are not new in any way- they are regurgitated evil eugenics at its worst, plain and simple !

Killing Newborns and born infants- not a new idea from the pro-abortion gangs

Posted in After Birth Abortion, Infanticide, Kermit Gosnell with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 2, 2012 by saynsumthn

Virginia Ironside the columnist and celebrated agony aunt of The Independent newspaper has caused outrage this morning by saying that she, like all “good mothers”, would put a pillow over the head of her baby if it was suffering from a disability and would have a poor quality of life.

Shocked BBC viewers complained after the agony aunt said she would hold a pillow over the face of a child in pain.

Minutes earlier the controversial writer said ‘a loving mother’ would abort an unwanted or disabled baby, and praised abortion as ‘a moral and unselfish act’.

Miss Ironside said: ‘If a baby’s going to be born severely disabled or totally unwanted, surely an abortion is the act of a loving mother.’
She added: ‘If I were the mother of a suffering child – I mean a deeply suffering child – I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face… If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would.’

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Virgina Ironside.. would put pillow over baby’s…, posted with vodpod

Thursday 1 March,2012 interview on Radio Rhema’s Pat Brittenden Mornings.
Francesca Minerva, from Melbourne University, talks about the controversy surrounding the said, ‘after-birth abortions’. She elaborates on the logic behind the theories existing that argue ‘how old is too old’ for an abortion, and the reasons why an after-birth abortion would be logical, or even worth arguing, in her view.

Her report entitled After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
Alberto Giubilini1 and Francesca Minerva( FULL TEXT here)

INTRODUCTION: Severe abnormalities of the fetus and risks for the physical and/or psychological health of the woman are often cited as valid reasons for abortion. Sometimes the two reasons are connected, such as when a woman claims that a disabled child would represent a risk to her mental health. However, having a child can itself be an unbearable burden for the psychological health of the woman or for her already existing children,1 regardless of the condition of the fetus. This could happen in the case of a woman who loses her partner after she finds out that she is pregnant and therefore feels she will not be able to take care of the possible child by herself. A serious philosophical problem arises when the same conditions that would have justified abortion become known after birth. In such cases, we need to assess facts in order to decide whether the same arguments that apply to killing a human fetus can also be consistently applied to killing a newborn human.

In Fact- An Abortionist has done just that – In Pennsylvania- Abortionist Kermit Gosnell was arrested for doing After Birth Abortions- delivering the babies and SNIPPING their Spinal Cords to cause their deaths !!!
Read the full GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION REPORT here

Eugenics Professor Peter Singer : Allow Infant Euthanasia ? Just kill them humanely

Taking Life: Humans
BY: Peter Singer
Excerpted from Practical Ethics, 2nd edition, Cambridge, 1993, pp. 175-217

I do not deny that if one accepts abortion on the grounds provided in Chapter 6, the case for killing other human beings, in certain circumstances, is strong. As I shall try to show in this chapter, however, this is not something to be regarded with horror, and the use of the Nazi analogy is utterly misleading. On the contrary, once we abandon those doctrines about the sanctity of human life that – as we saw in Chapter 4 – collapse as soon as they are questioned, it is the refusal to accept killing that, in some cases, is horrific.
‘Euthanasia’ means, according to the dictionary, ‘a gentle and easy death’, but it is now used to refer to the killing of those who are incurably ill and in great pain or distress, for the sake of those killed, and in order to spare them further suffering or distress. This is the main topic of this chapter. I shall also consider, however, some cases in which, though killing is not contrary to the wishes of the human who is killed, it is also not carried out specifically for the sake of that being. As we shall see, some cases involving newborn infants fall into this category. Such cases may not be ‘euthanasia’ within the strict meaning of the term, but they can usefully be included within the same general discussion, as long as we are clear about the relevant differences.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Eugenics Professor Peter Singer : Allow Infant …, posted with vodpod

In the 1970s, as the leading theoretician of animal rights, Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and Philosophy coined the term “speciesism” for anyone so narrow-minded as to, “allow the interest of his species to override the greater interest of members of other species“. Singer holds that the right to physical integrity is grounded in a being’s ability to suffer, and the right to life is grounded in the ability to plan and anticipate one’s future. Since the unborn, infants, and severely disabled people lack the ability to plan and anticipate their future, he states that abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia can be justified in certain special circumstances, for instance in the case of severely disabled infants whose life would cause suffering both to themselves and to their parents.

In a question posed to Singer, it was asked:
If you had to save either a human being or a mouse from a fire, with no time to save them both, wouldn’t you save the human being?”

Singer’s answer, ” Yes, in almost all cases I would save the human being. But not because the human being is human, that is, a member of the species Homo sapiens. Species membership alone isn’t morally significant, but equal consideration for similar interests allows different consideration for different interests. The qualities that are ethically significant are, firstly, a capacity to experience something — that is, a capacity to feel pain, or to have any kind of feelings. That’s really basic, and it’s something that a mouse shares with us. But when it comes to a question of taking life, or allowing life to end, it matters whether a being is the kind of being who can see that he or she actually has a life — that is, can see that he or she is the same being who exists now, who existed in the past, and who will exist in the future. Such a being has more to lose than a being incapable of understand this. Any normal human being past infancy will have such a sense of existing over time. I’m not sure that mice do, and if they do, their time frame is probably much more limited. So normally, the death of a human being is a greater loss to the human than the death of a mouse is to the mouse – for the human, it cuts off plans for the distant future, for example, but not in the case of the mouse. And we can add to that the greater extent of grief and distress that, in most cases, the family of the human being will experience, as compared with the family of the mouse (although we should not forget that animals, especially mammals and birds, can have close ties to their offspring and mates). That’s why, in general, it would be right to save the human, and not the mouse, from the burning building, if one could not save both. But this depends on the qualities and characteristics that the human being has. If, for example, the human being had suffered brain damage so severe as to be in an irreversible state of unconsciousness, then it might not be better to save the human

Singer states here that, ” The difference between killing disabled and normal infants lies not in any supposed right to life that the latter has and the former lacks, but in other considerations about killing. Most obviously there is the difference that often exists in the attitudes of the parents. The birth of a child is usually a happy event for the parents. They have, nowadays, often planned for the child. The mother has carried it for nine months. From birth, a natural affection begins to bind the parents to it. So one important reason why it is normally a terrible thing to kill an infant is the effect the killing will have on its parents.

It is different when the infant is born with a serious disability. Birth abnormalities vary, of course. Some are trivial and have little effect on the child or its parents; but others turn the normally joyful event of birth into a threat to the happiness of the parents, and any other children they may have.

Parents may, with good reason, regret that a disabled child was ever born. In that event the effect that the death of the child will have on its parents can be a reason for, rather than against killing it.

When asked the question: Would you kill a disabled baby?

Singer Replied, “Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman’s right to have an abortion. One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the fetus and the newborn baby.

EUGENICS IN THE USA?

In the 1970’s President Obama’s Science Czar, Paul Holdren, published many books, several which were co-authored with radical population control guru, Paul Ehrlich. Holdren stated officially that one of his mentors was a Professor he had by the name of Paul Harrison.

Paul Holdren, President Obama’s Science Czar praised his mentor, Harrison Brown, who wrote the book: The Challenge of Man’s Future.

Challenge of Mans Future by Harrison Brown

Challenge of Mans Future by Harrison Brown

In a speech he delivered as President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Holdren admitted that he admired Brown and read his book in high school. Holdren also admitted in his speech that he later worked with Harrison Brown at Caltech.

Holdren quoted Brown as saying this during that same speech, “It is clear that the future course of history will be determined by the rates at which people breed and die, by the rapidity with which nonrenewable resources are consumed, by the extent and speed with which agricultural production can be improved, by the rate at which the under-developed areas can industrialize, by the rapidity with which we are able to develop new resources, as well as by the extent to which we succeed in avoiding future wars. All of these factors are interlocked.

Holdren asked this question in an article authored by him, which was published in a book entitled, No Growth Society,

Why, then, should we compound our plight by permitting population growth to continue?” He stated clearly that in the 1970’s the US had already exceeded its “optimum population size of 210 million” (pg. 41) and concluded that , ” it should be obvious that the optimum rate of population growth is zero or negative…“

Paul Holdren and Harrison Brown slide

Paul Holdren and Harrison Brown slide

What is also interesting is that I obtained a copy of Harrison Brown’s book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, the one our Science Czar holds up as so important, and discovered this Nazi style statement by Brown on page 87 . ” In the absence of restraint abortion, sterilization, coitus interruptus, or artificial fertility control, the resultant high birth rate would have to be matched at equilibrium by an equally high death rate. A major contribution to the high death rate could be infanticide, as has been the situation in cultures of the past. ”

With Professors like Singer, Harrison and others teaching our kids at major Universities – do you really believe that National Health Care will not go down the slippery slope to Death Panels and Euthanasia? Just Sayn !

Former Labor Secretary and Obama adviser Robert Reich speaking at UC Berkeley on Sept. 26, 2007

“Thank you so much for coming this afternoon. I’m so glad to see you, and I would like to be president. Let me tell you a few things on health care. Look, we have the only health-care system in the world that is designed to avoid sick people. [laughter] That’s true, and what I’m going to do is I am going to try to reorganize it to be more amenable to treating sick people. But that means you–particularly you young people, particularly you young, healthy people–you’re going to have to pay more. [applause] Thank you.

And by the way, we are going to have to–if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive, so we’re going to let you die. [applause]

“Also, I’m going to use the bargaining leverage of the federal government in terms of Medicare, Medicaid–we already have a lot of bargaining leverage–to force drug companies and insurance companies and medical suppliers to reduce their costs. But that means less innovation, and that means less new products and less new drugs on the market, which means you are probably not going to live that much longer than your parents. [applause] Thank you.”

Are these the people we want in charge of our health care?

For more on Eugenics and how it is used to exterminate entire people groups today go here: http://www.maafa21.com

Note the documentation to “Sterilants in the Water Supply”

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Also Read: Death Panels? Is it possible?

READ MORE HERE: Death Panels, Eugenics, Rationing, Quality adjusted life ? what does Uncle Sam think your Life Value is?

Aborting newborns? Pro-abortion ethicist Francesca Minerva defends her position on Infanticide

Posted in Infanticide with tags , , , , , , on March 2, 2012 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Aborting newborns? Pro-abortion ethicist France…, posted with vodpod

ALSO READ: Peter Singer decade of controversy: Infanticide and Death Panels?