murder

The Scoop On Scoping Out Snopes

    Near the beginning of 2019, several news sources began to report that abortion was the leading cause of death worldwide during 2018.  Breitbart reported, “There were more deaths from abortion in 2018 than all deaths from cancer, malaria, HIV/AIDS, smoking, alcohol, and traffic accidents combined.”1
     Snopes quickly ran a rebuttal.
     The Snopes article stated that to make such a claim was a “political position, one which is at odds with the scientific/medical world.  The medical community does not confer personhood upon fetuses that are not viable outside the womb….”2  That statement is simply false.
      C.W. Kischer, who was a professor of anatomy and human embryology, made the sweeping statement, “Every human embryologist, worldwide, states that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization (conception)….  We exist as a continuum of human life, which begins at fertilization and continues until death.”3  Dr. Jerome LeJeune, who was a pediatrician and professor of genetics in Paris, testified before a Congressional subcommittee, saying, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being” and that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence…. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”4  Since the definition of a person is a human being, science and medicine say that a human being, a person, comes into existence at conception.  It is not pro-life people who are at odds with the scientific/medical world.  It is pro-murder people who are anti-science and anti-medicine in this matter and it is the Snopes article that is taking a political position.  Who does the article cite for support?  Two sources were the United Nations’ WHO, a political organization, and also Guttmacher, which is a pro-murder organization, a political organization.  Does anyone spot bias?
     The article went on to list religion, philosophy, science, and other areas as giving no clear answer as to when “personhood begins”.  It then quoted another article saying, “As scientists have peered into wombs with ultrasound and looked directly at sperm entering an egg, they’ve found that all the bright lines they thought existed dissolving.”  That’s simply not true either.  A scientist named Coy wrote in 2012, “The oviduct or Fallopian tube is the anatomical region where every new life begins in mammalian species. After a long journey, the spermatozoa meet the oocyte in the specific site of the oviduct named ampulla, and fertilization takes place.”5  If anything, the truth is exactly the opposite of the Snopes’ article.  Science has simply piled evidence on top of evidence that humans come into existence at conception.
     Let’s take a look at another part of the same sentence we just examined.  Bethania Palma wrote, “Stating that abortion is the ‘leading cause of death’ worldwide (as opposed to a medical procedure) is a problematic pro-nouncement….”  Here, the pro-murder piece seeks to cover up the true nature of abortion by speaking of it as if it were merely a medical procedure. This is a common practice by pro-murder advocates as they seek to conceal the truth.  The truth is that abortion is a medical procedure wherein an unborn human being is deliberately killed to end a pregnancy.  Palma, on Snopes, sought to take out what happens to the unborn child in abortion indicating that abortion was not a cause of death, but a medical procedure.
    The Snopes article then went on to quote an article on Wired, which said, “When life begins is, of course, the central disagreement that fuels the controversy over abortion.”  That’s totally false.  Professor Hymie Gordon of the Mayo Clinic testified before a Senate committee in 1981, saying, “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception” and “unequivocally, that the question when life begins is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute.  It is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception.”6
     The article then quoted biologist Scott Gilbert as saying, “The entity created by fertilization is indeed a human embryo, and it has the potential to be human adult. Whether these facts are enough to accord it personhood is a question influenced by opinion, philosophy and theology, rather than by science.”  What Palma does (and other pro-murder advocates frequently do) is a bit deceptive, shifting from one word or phrase to another as if they are the same.   She wrote “…no definitive answers as to when personhood begins…” and then quoted as proof  “When life begins” followed in the same quote by “when does a fetus become a person”.
     Science does say that the life of a new human being begins at conception as already proven.  Many similar quotes could be given that say the same thing.  What’s a person?  “A human being regarded as an individual,”7 says one dictionary.  “A human, an individual,”8 says another. “A human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing,”9 says a third.  A human being is a person and a person is a human being.  Therefore, when science says that a human being comes into existence at conception, it is saying that a person has come into existence then.
     By hurriedly posting this article to counter a claim about the number of abortion murders worldwide in 2018, Snopes showed its bias, lack of objectivity, and inaccuracy in an article so flawed.  Ironically, on the same page as the article was this, “Snopes.com has long been engaged in the battle against misinformation….”  I now wonder how much bias and misinformation is in the other articles they post in which they have a vested interest like they do in abortion.
     Let the Snopes reader beware!

                                                                                                                                Dennis Lange

 

1 https://www.breitbart.com/health/2018/12/31/abortion-leading-cause-of-
  death-in-2018-with-41-million-killed/

2 https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/01/03/abortion-leading-cause-of-
  death/

3 Christine Watkins, editor The Ethics of Abortion (New York: Greenhaven  
  press, 2005).  http://clinicquotes.com/embryologist-everyone-knows-life-
  begins-at-conception/

4 http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-   
  beginning-conception/Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to
  Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session April 23-
  24, 1981.

5 Coy et al., Roles of the oviduct in mammalian fertilization, REPRODUCTION
  144(6):649 (Oct. 1, 2012).

6 Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary
  Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981.
  http://naapc.org/why-life-begins-at-conception/

  Part was found above and part was found the book: The Life and Death
  Debate: Moral Issues of Our Time by James Porter Moreland, Norman L.
  Geisler, p.34,35.

7 https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/person

8 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/person

9 http://www.dictionary.com/browse/person

Dianne Feinstein’s Huge Ignorant Goof

 
    As I was passing by my television the other day, I heard Murdercrat Senator Dianne Feinstein of California interviewing supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and say something about abortion.  So, I later took the time to listen to her words on YouTube because I knew she would say something wrong.  All abortion murder advocates do.  They lie, deceive, and use empty slogans and arguments. 

     Feinstein questioned Kavanaugh and revealed her ignorance of the issue, saying, “Do you agree with Justice O’Connor that a woman’s right to control her reproductive life impacts her ability to ‘participate equally in the economic and social life of the nation’?”1 Anyone, including O’Connor and Feinstein, who thinks that abortion controls reproduction, is completely wrong.  One has ALREADY REPRODUCED when an abortion takes place.  Abortion kills the human being that came into existence in that womb at conception.

     Then, Feinstein made a gross error.  She said, still addressing Kavanaugh, “In the 1950’s and 60’s, the two decades before Roe, deaths from illegal abortions in this country ran between 200,000 and 1.2 million.  That’s according to the Guttmacher Institute.  So a lot of women died in that period….  I don’t want to go back to those death tolls in this country.”2

…..If one knows the issue because he has studied it (because he cares), then he knows immediately that those figures are wrong.  Feinstein made a horrible mistake that makes illegal abortion seem like a terrible killer of women that it never was. (Instead, it’s a terrible killer of their unborn children.)

     Twenty years compose those two decades and the range in deaths per year using the erroneous figures she gave would mean that from 10,000 to 60,000 women died each year from illegal abortions.  But even the lower figure is totally false. 

     Abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathan, one of the leading pro-abortion figures prior to Roe, writing in his book Aborting America about the number of women dying from illegal abortions, said, “How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal?  In N.A.R.A.L we generally emphasized the drama of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always ‘5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year.’  I confess that I knew the figures were false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it.  But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics?  The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible.”3  He admitted, “I was selling a bill of goods.”4

     What is the truth?  The truth is that Guttmacher does use the figures Feinstein gave for those two decades, but the figures are not for the number of deaths from abortions but for the number of illegal abortions.  The Guttmacher site reads, “Estimates of the number of illegal abortions (emphasis mine – DL) in the 1950s and 1960s ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year.  One analysis, extrapolating from data from North Carolina, concluded that an estimated 829,000 illegal or self-induced abortions occurred in 1967.”5

     About deaths from illegal abortions, Guttmacher went on to say in the same article, “One stark indication of the prevalence of illegal abortion was the death toll. In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18%) of maternal deaths recorded in that year. The death toll had declined to just under 1,700 by 1940, and to just over 300 by 1950 (most likely because of the introduction of antibiotics in the 1940s, which permitted more effective treatment of the infections that frequently developed after illegal abortion). By 1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen to just under 200, but illegal abortion still accounted for 17% of all deaths attributed to pregnancy and childbirth that year.  And these are just the number that were officially reported; the actual number was likely much higher.”  Using the reported statistics from 1950 (just over 300), the deaths from illegal abortions during the 50’s and 60’s would have been closer to 6,000 instead of the 200,000 Feinstein gave.

     A pro-murder Feinstein staffer doing research most likely made the mistake, but didn’t know enough about the issue to instantly recognize it. Pro-murder Senator Feinstein didn’t know enough about the issue so she continued the error.  How many Senators listening to her didn’t know she had made a gigantic mistake?  How many millions who heard her words on television or as I did more distinctly on YouTube not know she had made a mistake?

     The problem in abortion murder is that people on both sides of the issue are ignorant about the issue.  Countless millions have the same ignorance Freinstein revealed because they are so involved in watching movies, sports, soap operas, playing games, and pursuing their trivia in their lives that they don’t really care to learn about the issue of abortion which has resulted in the murder of 60,000,000 unborn babies since Roe vs. Wade in 1973 and continues at the rate of 2500 murders per day.

     How about you?  Are you going to learn the issue?  If you’re pro-murder, you just might find out you’ve been duped.  If you’re pro-life, perhaps you’ll discover the rock-solid basis for your stance.  If you’re a politician who is supposedly pro-life, you would find out that the issue belongs to those who are pro-life and you can destroy the Murdercrats in elections by focusing on abortion murder and educating an unknowing public.

    Read a book.  Try mine – Murdercrats: Millions of Abortion Murderers, available at Amazon.  When 2500 murders are occurring every day, there is too much at stake to be ignorant about the issue.


Dennis Lange

 

1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK1iBT9Ofg

2 Ibid.

3 Nathanson, Bernard. Aborting America (Garden City, NY: Doubleday &
   Company, Inc., 1979), p.193.

4 Ibid, p.161.

5 https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2003/03/lessons-roe-will-past-be-prologue

Bill Nye, The Anti-Science Guy

     A pro-murder website has a link to a video by Bill Nye (“the science guy”) and says about the video, “Bill Nye debunks anti-abortionist logic with science in passionate plea to lawmakers”.1  Since Bill Nye comes nowhere close to debunking anti-abortionist logic with science, that’s a frightening statement for two reasons.  One is that Bill Nye, who is supposedly using science, is completely against what science says.  The second is that people like the author of that sentence don’t realize that Bill Nye was terribly wrong and are deceived by what he said. 

     Nye began by saying, “Many, many, many, many more hundreds of eggs are fertilized than become humans. Eggs get fertilized, and by that I mean sperm get accepted by ova a lot. But that’s not all you need. You have to attach to the uterine wall, the inside of a womb, a woman’s womb.”  Science does not agree with that at all.  Nye contradicts what science says.  Dr. Jerome LeJeune, who was a pediatrician and professor of genetics in Paris, testified before a Congressional subcommittee, saying, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being” and that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence…. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”2  In my book (Murdercrats: Millions of Abortion Murderers, available at Amazon), I quoted nearly 50 scientists who all said the same thing, saying there is no longer any debate when a human being comes into existence.  Attaching itself to the uterine wall is simply one of the first acts of this new human being to provide itself with nutrition that it may continue to live and grow.

     After his first statement, Nye then goes into a philosophical discussion. If it’s true that a human life begins at conception, he poses, then who are you going to sue or imprison – every woman who has had a fertilized egg pass through her?  He totally fails to understand the issue, perhaps even deliberately creating a straw man argument that he can attack rather than addressing the real issue. The issue is first, that a human being comes into existence at conception and, second, that the deliberate killing of that living human being is murder. The issue is not about what happens as a result of nature, when a fertilized egg (a human being) fails to attach to the uterine wall and doesn’t survive.  We don’t charge anyone with murder when they’re struck by lightning and killed. Duh! Nye fails miserably at both science and philosophy.

     Nye then says that it’s just a reflection of a deep lack of scientific understanding.  I just shook my head when I first read that.  Nye is the one who was wrong scientifically in his first statement and all else he said in between was philosophy and he failed at that, too.

     Next, Nye says that laws against abortion are written because of a book written 5000 years ago. So, he’s saying that men are against abortion as murder because of the Bible. That’s simply an attempt to poison the well, to change the discussion. I’ve not used, either in my book or on this website or in any discussion with abortion murder advocates, a single biblical argument that abortion is murder unless some religious person has made an argument that I’ve addressed.  Every single argument I’ve made is what SCIENCE says.   

     Nye talks as if males ought to be left out of this matter, a fairly common attempt by pro-murder advocates.  But, it’s only when men are AGAINST abortion that the murder crowd says men should stay out of it.  If a man is for abortion he won’t be told to shut up at all!!!  After all Bill Nye is supposedly a man and this website is touting his male support of murder. So, pro-murder advocates are both sexist and hypocritical in this matter and Nye simply joined in that hypocrisy. 

     Nye continued, saying, “Nobody likes abortion, but you can’t tell somebody what to do.” He’s wrong. Over and over again, he’s wrong. Nobody likes rape and we pass laws against rape and we are thus telling people what to do (what not to do).  We tell people what to do as we give them speed limits and stop signs and a deadline for filing taxes, etc. Nye is simply as wrong as he can be.

     Nye then says, “She (the pregnant woman) has rights over this.” Sorry, Nye, but no one has the right to murder another human being. Now, let’s go back to Nye’s first blunder when his first statement was wrong scientifically. He said that it took more than conception to make a human being, that the zygote had to attach to the uterine wall and he left it at that. All right, by his own definition, every abortion performed in a clinic is murder because they are all performed after that attachment.  This is about the worst video I’ve ever seen that purported to answer pro-life arguments and what I’ve addressed so far is only about half.

     Nye said, “It’s very frustrating. You wouldn’t know how big a human egg was if it weren’t for microscopes, if it weren’t for scientists, medical researchers looking diligently. You wouldn’t know the process. You wouldn’t have that shot, the famous shot or shots where the sperm are bumping up against the egg. You wouldn’t have that without science. So then to claim that you know the next step when you obviously don’t is trouble. Let me do that again. Let me just pull back. At some point we have to respect the facts.”  I scratched my head when I read that.  It appears he’s saying we owe all we know about this to science as if pro-life people have abandoned science and science is on Bill Nye’s side.  It’s not.  He puts a human being coming into existence at implantation while science puts it at conception. Dr. Joseph DeCook, who was the executive director of the American  Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists said, “There’s no question at all when human life begins.  When the two sets of chromosomes get together, you have a complete individual.  It’s the same as you and I but less developed.”  He distinguished between pregnancy, when the embryo is implanted on the uterine wall, and the beginning of human life.  He said, “But we’re not talking about pregnancy.  The question you have to focus on, is when does meaningful, valuable human life begin?  That’s with the union of the two sets of chromosome. You have a complete human being that begins developing.”3  It’s extremely obvious why Nye is wrong.  The embryo doesn’t change its nature by implantation on the uterine wall.  Therefore, if it is a human being after implantation (per Nye’s insinuation), then it was a human being prior to implantation.  This isn’t rocket science.  It’s not that difficult.

     The author of the article on the site ended, however, with these words, “…I suspect this conversation will be had many, many times for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, I’m with Bill — facts and science, please.”  I have to say that the author can be with Bill but when he’s with Bill he will not be with facts and with science.  Bill Nye, in the matter of abortion murder, is the Anti-Science Guy.   

Dennis Lange

 

 

 

1 http://www.femalista.com/bill-nye-debunks-anti-abortion-logic-with-
  science/

2 http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/scientists-attest-life-   
  beginning-conception/Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to
  Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session April 23-
  24, 1981.

3 http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/07/medical-views-when-does- 
  human-life-begin/

Pro, Pro, Pro, Pro?

     In an article entitled “Abortion Is Not Immoral”, Caitlin Borgmann and Catherine Weiss wrote that the pro-murder position is “prowoman, profamily, prochild, and prochoice”1 (sic).

     What a lie!

     First, the choice (which pro-murder advocates always deliberately and deceptively leave out) is to kill a human being.  Abortion is therefore murder and IS immoral, wicked, evil.

     Abortion is NOT “prowoman” (sic).  I have detailed in my book Murdercrats: Millions Of Abortion Murderers the devastation abortion wreaks on the lives of millions of women who have them.  Feminists, Planned Murderhood, and other New Nazis don’t care.  They hide the truth from women and often lie to them to conceal the facts.  It is pro-murder advocates who wage the War on Women.  They’ve murdered 30,000,000 females in abortions and they don’t want to stop the carnage.

     The pro-murder position is NOT “profamily” (sic).  Abortion almost invariably destroys relationships. The pro-abortion mantra is that it’s purely the woman’s decision – her body, her choice.  That severs rather than building husband-wife relationships in families.

     It is unmarried women who opt for more than 80% of abortion murders.  Abortion is exactly what sluts and sluds want so that they can escape the consequences of their actions.  Abortion helps them remain single and thus discourages families.  It is therefore anti-family.  The same sexual culture results in many single-parent families.  Absent, irresponsible “fathers” result in children who are more likely to be poor, more likely to be poorly educated, and more likely to be in trouble with the law.  Abortion murder and its accompanying culture is a plague.

     Let’s examine two cases: a married couple with two children and a “living together” unmarried male and female.  For the sake of argument, we’ll call even the latter a family.  If the female in each of our cases becomes pregnant and gets an abortion, how is murdering one of the family being profamily? (sic)  Abortion murder advocate reason is insane.

     Finally, the pro-murder position is NOT “prochild” (sic).  One is not pro any person that he murders.  He has committed the ultimate act AGAINST him.  To argue that the child might grow up in poverty, etc, blah, blah, blah, does not justify murder.  To murder that unborn child because it will have Down’s Syndrome (or some other problem) does not justify murder either.  Nothing does.

     The abortion murder position is pro-SELF and anti-everybody else.

     By the way – I am NOT prospelling, but I am pro-spelling.

 

                                                                                                                                  Dennis Lange

 

1 Torr, James (ed.), Abortion Opposing Viewpoints (Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2006), p.23.

 

Knowledge Is Power; Truth Is Almighty

 

…..In her book Abortion And The Politics Of Motherhood, Kristin Luker quoted a woman who detailed how she became active in the pro-life movement.  She said, “I’ve always been against abortion.  I’d written letters and things like that, but the final straw was this class I had at Cal State….  Abortion came up, and the teacher was saying it didn’t matter, that the child wouldn’t even know the difference.  And I tried a few things but I really didn’t know what to say.  And it just made me angry that he didn’t know the facts at all.  And I tried to say something, but it just didn’t work.”1  She went home, made calls, became trained and involved.

     The woman witnessed the ignorance of the majority who are pro-murder – her teacher “didn’t know the facts at all.”  Pro-murder minds are made up by everything except the facts because the facts are against them.  They want sex outside of marriage without facing the consequences, without responsibility.  Some side with murder because they sympathize with the woman and completely ignore the unborn child.  Others are fueled by ambition and are selfish to the core.  Others see difficulties and wrongly think murder is a solution when it shouldn’t even be considered as an option.  Pause and think about that for a moment – what’s wrong with you if you think murder should even be in a discussion about possible actions to take?

     The woman admitted her own inability to effectively address the professor’s comments.  Many pro-life people aren’t knowledgeable about the facts either.  What did she do when she realized her inadequacy?  She didn’t retreat but took aggressive steps to learn and be prepared for future situations.

     Sometimes, it’s merely a matter of focus and thought about what the pro-murder advocate says.  Her teacher justified abortion by saying that it didn’t matter – the child wouldn’t even know the difference.  One could say in like manner that if you kill a person instantly in their sleep or one who’s in a coma or who’s under anesthesia it doesn’t matter – the victim won’t know the difference.  He’s dead.

     An easy way to answer many false arguments of abortion murder advocates is to answer in kind.  I took the professor’s false argument about murdering the unborn and applied it to murdering the sleeper, etc.  Invariably, the murderer then runs away to another argument rather than admitting he was wrong.  Hold his feet to the fire.  Make him go back and admit he was wrong.

     I also used a second way to counter his argument, one that we must use against virtually every false argument the pro-murder advocate tries – abortion murders a human being.  It doesn’t matter if you’re answering one line, a paragraph, an article, or a book as large as a set of encyclopedias.  A few words or many words don’t justify murder.

     Knowledge is power.  Pro-murder advocates aren’t just a little ignorant about this issue.  They’re shockingly so.  Read, study, learn.  You’ll quickly know far more than they do.  And even more important – what we know will be the truth because the facts are on our side.  Truth will triumph over error because truth is almighty.

 

………………………………………………………………………………………………….Dennis Lange

 

 

1 Luker, Kristin. Abortion and The Politics of Motherhood (Berkley: University of California Press, …1984), p.148.

Oregon – Number One Baby Killer State

    In August, 2017, Governor Kate Brown of Oregon signed a law that forces insurance companies to pay for abortion murders.  By allocating state funds to pay for abortions, the law also made abortion “free” for illegal immigrants.  A month later the Murdercrat governor ceremonially signed the law to celebrate its passage.

     Murdercrat Brown said, “I am proud to sign legislation that expands access to basic reproductive health service for all Oregonians regardless of where they live, where they come from, or how they identify as a person.”1   She’s proud of being a murderer!  But thinking that murder is all right makes her ideas and reasoning wrong in many ways.  Abortion murder has nothing to do with reproductive health.  When a “medical procedure” kills at least half of those involved, it can hardly be said to be healthy.

     Murdercrat Brown’s quote ended with “how they identify as a person.”  That’s gobbledygook for the modern foolishness of changing genders, which science says is impossible.  Bruce Jenner is still a male scientifically.  He just masquerades in outward appearance as a female.

     The murderous acts of Oregon’s governor are in alignment with her previous philosophy and work.  Before a political appointment in 1991, Brown had been a lobbyist for the Women’s Rights Coalition which supported partial birth abortions.2

     In a court case in 1997, abortionist Leroy Carhart described the partial birth abortions he performed.  Here is some of his testimony under oath as he was questioned by his attorney:

        Attorney: Are there times when you don’t remove the fetus intact?

       Carhart: Yes, sir.

Carhart then described a situation when he wouldn’t remove it intact and the
attorney asked what he would do in that case.  

       Carhart: My normal course would be to dismember that extremity and
………………….then go back and try to take the fetus out either foot or skull
………………….first, whatever end I can get to first.

       Attorney: How do you go about dismembering that extremity?

       Carhart: Just traction and rotation, grasping the portion that you can
………………….get a hold of which would be usually somewhere up the shaft
………………….of the exposed portion of the fetus, pulling down on it through
………………….the os, using the internal os as your counter-traction and
………………….rotating to dismember the shoulder or the hip or whatever it
………………….would be. Sometimes you will get one leg and you can’t get
………………….the other leg out. 

       Attorney: In that situation, are you, when you pull on the arm and
                    remove it, is the fetus still alive?

       Carhart: Yes…. 

       Attorney: And then what happens next after you remove the arm? You
                    then try to remove the rest of the fetus?

       Carhart: Then I would go back and attempt to either bring the feet
………………….down or bring the skull down, or even sometimes you bring
………………….the other arm down and remove that also and then get the
                    .feet down.

       Attorney: At what point is the fetus…does the fetus die during that
                    process?

       Carhart: I don’t really know. I know that the fetus is alive during the
………………….process most of the time because I can see fetal heartbeat on
………………….the ultrasound.

Later when he was being cross-examined by the counsel for the Attorney General, Carhart said, “My intent in every abortion I have ever done is to kill the fetus and terminate the pregnancy.”

     Carhart described one way he performed partial birth abortions.  Notice that he was twisting arms and legs to rip them off the unborn baby and that he knew it was alive during the process “most of the time” because he knew the heart was still beating.  We don’t do that to the vilest men on death row.

…..But Murdercrat Governor Kate Brown of Oregon supported those horrendous murders and she continues to take pride that “Oregon is the only state left with no restrictions on…abortion.”3  Oregon has a baby-killer governor and is a baby-killer state.  All who vote for Kate Brown and those like her are baby-killers as well.

     If I ever visit Oregon, I’ll try not to spend a penny there.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Dennis Lange

 

1 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/18/oregon-governor-celebrates-law-abortions-free-all/

2 https://prolifepages.wordpress.com/the-carhart-testimony-partial-birth-dc-abortion-described/

3 https://www.ortl.org/2017/09/kate-brown-abortion-governor/

Rape And Incest

     In college, I lived in an old house one year with three other guys.  While we were at a football game one night, someone crawled in a back window and stole several items.  I felt violated. 

     Rape is a horrible act.  What I felt after being robbed could only be a shadow of what the violated woman must feel.  Incest is also a horrible act by a relative that should have been trustworthy, but proved to be villainous.  Becoming pregnant through either crime puts an additional burden on the women.  I’ve discussed their plight more fully in my book (Murdercrats: Millions of Abortion Murderers) and will not repeat those thoughts here.  Instead, I will focus on pro-life politicians and others who very tragically and mistakenly think those two cases should be exceptions in laws against abortion murder.

     Because of scientific fact and the meaning of murder, aborting an unborn child murders it.  Let’s consider one pregnant woman, just one, and her unborn child.  Let’s address all of our questions about that one woman.

     Is it all right for that woman to murder her unborn child because she wants to “get on with her life” a la Gloria Steinem?

     No.

     Is it all right for that woman to murder her unborn child because she would lose a scholarship if she stayed pregnant?

     No.

     If she couldn’t keep on playing basketball?

     No.

     If being pregnant and having a child didn’t fit in with her lifestyle?

     No.

     If she felt like she was too young to have  child?

     No.

     If she and the responsible male felt like they weren’t capable of raising a child?

     No.

     If she wouldn’t be able to take care of a child and keep her job?

     No.

     If she was poor and felt like she couldn’t support a child?

     No.

     If she was single and thought she couldn’t raise a child on her own?

     No.

     If her parents were upset that she was pregnant?

     No.

     If her boyfriend was pushing her to get an abortion?

     No.  (ditch the loser)

     If she and her husband already had children and didn’t want another one?

     No.

     If she was pregnant because she had been raped?

     No.

     If she was pregnant because of an incestuous relationship with her father or another relative?

     No.

     Look back at that list and think about the sympathetic pro-lifer who would say it is wrong to murder this one unborn child in the discussion in a dozen cases but mistakenly thinks it is all right to murder that unborn child by abortion in the last two.  It’s all right to murder that child sometimes, but not always?  Pro-murderers are fools for thinking, as they multiply their arguments for murder, that a few words are a million words justify murder.  Murder is ALWAYS wrong.  Pro-lifers who bend to justify murder on occasion stoop to the foolishness and evil of the pro-murderers.  It is never right to murder the unborn by abortion, even when the unfortunate woman is a victim of rape or incest.
     In my book, I also took a look at making that innocent woman who is a victim into a guilty murderer by saying it is all right for her to have an abortion.  I took a lengthy look at the guilt and broken lives and other problems that come upon women who have abortions.  We don’t do the rape and incest victims any favors when we encourage them to do wrong.

      Three facts never change as one discusses or thinks about these two cases: 1. A human being comes into existence at conception.  2. Abortion murders that human being.  3. Murder is ALWAYS wrong.  

Ignorance

…..Ignorance may be bliss in some limited situations, but ignorance concerning abortion is murderous and inexcusable.  Most pro-murder advocates are ignorant about the matter.  Some pro-lifers are ignorant on the issue as well, including many pro-life politicians.

…..Pro-murder advocates largely base their stance on slogans, personal experience, and emotion.  Facts aren’t part of their beliefs.  They don’t know the difference between a cell (such as a sperm cell) and an organism like the zygote.  They’re unaware of the difference between human life (such as an egg cell) and a human being (the zygote). They don’t know that science says a new human being comes into existence at conception.  Furthermore, most don’t care.  They’ll keep on advocating abortion murder even when the facts are presented to them.  They think, and others may think, that they’re good people but they’re immoral and their consciences are seared.

…..The apathy and ignorance of some pro-lifers is difficult to swallow.  Perhaps some have an instinctive realization that abortion is wrong and don’t investigate further.  But since they believe that abortion is wrong, shouldn’t they be more involved in learning about the issue – coming to a far greater understanding of all those things pro-murderers get wrong, investigating what they can do to end the slaughter, becoming involved in this most important issue of the day, and working in whatever capacity they can until we bring this holocaust to an end?  Many pro-lifers need to examine themselves.  If they call themselves Christians they should think about what the book of I John says about saying, and not doing.

…..The silence of many pro-life politicians on the subject of abortion (except to run on the statement that they’re against it) says they don’t understand the issue either.  Very few people in this nation would stand and say that they’re in favor of murder.  Given the ignorance of pro-murder voters, a pro-life politician could speak about the issue of abortion murder and teach his voting public what science says about that human being in the womb.  If he knew the subject, he wouldn’t be silent when Murdercrats try to gain votes by saying Republicans wage a war on women.  He could turn the tables easily because it is they who have the blood of 30,000,000 females on their hands.

…..Pro-life politicians show their ignorant stripes in other ways.  When they pass laws like Iowa did recently (May, 2018) and make exceptions in the cases of rape and incest, they show they don’t have a firm stance on abortion being murder.  It’s nonsense to say murder is unacceptable most of the time but if something bad has happened to the woman, she can murder her own innocent unborn child in abortion.

…..It’s time to change.  It’s time to make a tremendous push with all of us pro-lifers learning and working to bring about change in individuals around us, change in voting habits, and change in our language and perhaps even our arguments about the issue.  Never speak of the Democratic Party or Democrats again.  Instead, always say the Murder Party, Murdercrats, abortion murder, and Planned Murderhood.  Read a little, study a little, talk a little, do a little – or make that little A LOT!  Let’s all work together now to bring about change beginning with the November, 2018 election.  Each day of delay results in the murder of 2500 unborn babies.

…..There is nothing more important you can do.

 

Human Beings

.
.

…..The abortion crowd pushed abortion to make it legal by slanting the issue, avoiding the fact that abortion murders an unborn child.  In their arguments today, pro-murder people continue to slant discussions in order to persuade the gullible and protect their murderous position.  Essentially, that’s what the bloody supreme court did in 1973 – slant its discussion about the unborn child in the womb.  Those justices did it by relying upon a philosophical term (person) and using it rather than simply asking science and common sense if this was a human being or not.  Science says it is and thus abortion is murder.  But they skirted that by focusing on “person”.

…..In discussions with others, and in articles here, I routinely speak of a child in the womb or the unborn baby.  That’s common language that the world uses.  A woman who is pregnant is “with child”.  She will be asked, “Have you felt your baby move yet?”  But those who argue in support of murdering that baby will almost invariably try to slant the discussion by changing terms.  It’s not a baby.  It’s a fetus.  It’s not a child.  That’s not a person.  Or, it’s a zygote.  Or, it’s just a glob of tissue.  It’s the Nazi mind at work, making that unborn human being subhuman.  Before beginning to slaughter the Jews, gypsies, the infirm, Poles, and others, the Nazis used words and arguments to reduce those groups to something less than human beings.

…..Consider this list of some of the stages of a human life:

  1. zygote
  2. blastocyst
  3. embryo
  4. fetus
  5. newborn infant
  6. toddler
  7. teen
  8. young adult
  9. middle-aged
  10. senior

    Is a newborn infant not a human being because he is not a young adult? Is a toddler not a human being because he’s not a teen?  Is a senior not a human being because he’s not middle-aged anymore?  Those are absurd suggestions just as saying a fetus is not a baby so it’s not a human being and we can destroy it.  It’s absurd to argue that a woman can choose to have it torn apart within her womb because it’s just a fetus, not a baby.In discussions, a pro-choice person will slant his argument with the words fetus or zygote or others.  Always bring him back to the fact that whichever word he uses (and whichever word we use of those ten above or others that are not included), a human being is what exists in the womb and is merely developing into another stage of its existence.  Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth of Harvard Medical School testified, “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”1

…..If I’m challenged in a one-on-one discussion about my use of the word “baby”, I may shrug and say, “Okay.  To be exact, the unborn baby is not a baby but a fetus.”  Then, I will use the phrase “human being” exclusively.  I will not allow the pro-murder individual to make the unborn child subhuman by using “fetus”.  I will reveal the truth that he wants to conceal and avoid by his slanted choice of terms by using “human being”.

…..Millions have been deceived by the pro-murder advocates because of their deliberate choice of words and phrases, because they carefully avoid the truth about what they desire- the death of a human being in a woman’s womb.  We must now reshape and re-capture the discussion by the words we deliberately choose that reveal what they try to hide from those they are misleading.

…..No matter which way they twist things, science is against them and they are murdering human beings at the rate of 2500 per day, in gruesome ways.

 

1 http://clinicquotes.com/scientists-speak-before-the-senate-human-life-begins-at-conception/

 

 

 

Abortion Techniques

  An abortion murders an unborn human being during one of the three trimesters that would lead to birth.  Various techniques are used to murder the unborn, just like other human beings are murdered in various ways (shooting, stabbing, strangling, poisoning, etc.).  We may read of the murder of a family in a distant city and be sorrowed by a headline or the opening paragraph in the report.  But when we read of the details of how gruesome such an attack was, we become horrified by that crime against humanity, and angry at the wicked person who committed it.  The same is true about the murder of the unborn.

   During the first trimester of pregnancy (weeks 1 to 12), about 90% of all abortions1 are performed (if one includes the thirteenth week as well).  Two abortion procedures during this time are listed simply as “medical” abortion procedures by pro-choice sites.  They don’t reveal what happens to the unborn child when those poisons (not medicines) are used.  The first is Methotrexate, a “highly toxic chemical” that “directly attacks and
breaks down the baby’s fast growing cells. It also attacks the life-support systems the baby needs to survive.”2  The second is Mifepristone, also known as RU-486 or the abortion pill.  This chemical prevents the unborn baby from getting the nutrients it needs to live and it is starved to death in a few days.  A third method during the first trimester is called suction aspiration and is described as a “surgical abortion procedure used to terminate pregnancy between 6 to 12 weeks gestation. It is also referred to as suction curettage or vacuum aspiration.”3 What that description conceals is what happens to the unborn baby.  Here’s a description of what this does to it: “The abortionist inserts a suction tube (similar to a vacuum hose with an extremely sharp end) into the mother’s womb. The suction and cutting edge dismember the baby while the hose sucks the body parts into a collection bottle.”4

   Still another method used to murder the unborn during the first trimester is dilation and curettage (D&C).  The abortionist uses a “loop shaped knife” to cut the baby to pieces and scrap the wall of the uterus to remove the parts.  The butchered child is then put back together outside the womb to ensure that nothing is left in the womb.  Though they have torn the child apart, they want to make certain that the mother stays healthy!

   During the second trimester (weeks 13 to 27), almost all of the remaining 10% of abortions not performed in the first trimester take place (again including the 13th week as part of the first trimester statistics).  The D&C method of murder of the first trimester is also used during the second trimester.  Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) is another procedure.  Again, pro-abortion sites won’t detail what happens to the unborn baby, concealing the ghastly butchery.  Here is a description:

        “The cervix is dilated and the unborn child is dismembered with plier-
         like forceps. Force is needed to pull the baby apart. The instrument is
         used to seize a leg or other part of the body and then, with a twisting
         motion, tear it from the baby’s body. The baby’s spine is snapped and
         the skull crushed. After the baby parts are removed, they are
         reassembled outside the womb to be sure all are removed. “5

If a child took her doll and started tearing it apart, limb by limb, and then crushed its head, we would recognize that something was terribly wrong with that child.  But this isn’t a doll that’s being ripped apart.  It’s a living human being, a baby, that is being shredded while living until it dies during the butchery.  Let’s see.  How many people are PETA people and don’t want animals mistreated and yet are for abortion?  Let’s just all let the woman choose to do what she wants – right?  Strange.  The PETA people don’t want to allow others to have exercise their choice of putting animals in a cage in a zoo.

   How many would want the snail darter protected (or some other species) while standing by and allowing your own species to be murdered?  But it’s the woman’s body so she has the right to have the body of another human being torn apart – right?

   Another second trimester method of abortion is called induction abortion where a salt solution, for example, is injected into the sac where the baby is growing.  Of course, pro-murder people wouldn’t want the pregnant woman told what will occur prior to killing her baby, but this is what happens:

        “A needle is inserted through the mother’s abdomen and 50-250 ml
         (as much as a cup) of amniotic fluid is withdrawn and replaced with a
         solution of concentrated salt. The baby breathes in, swallowing the
         salt, and is poisoned.  The chemical solution also causes painful
         burning and deterioration of the baby’s skin.  Usually, after about an
         hour, the child dies. The mother goes into labor about 33 to 35 hours
         after instillation and delivers a dead, burned, and shriveled baby.”6     

This method, which was once widely used, is now largely abandoned due to the possibility of harming the mother.  While one is murdering the unborn baby, one wouldn’t want to hurt the mother, would they?  Consider a woman who hires a hit man to murder her husband during a break-in.  “If I’m there,” she says, “be careful when you shoot him not to shoot me as well.” The hit man and the abortionist both must take care to murder only one person, not two.  Aren’t they considerate!

   During the third trimester, less than 2% of abortions take place.  The method used is, in sterilized terms, is Dilation and Extraction (D&X).  It’s also called partial birth abortion.

        “The abortionist reaches into the mother’s womb, grabs the baby’s  feet with a
……..forceps and pulls the baby out of the mother, except for  the head. The abortionist
……..then jams a pair of scissors into the back of the baby’s head and spreads the
……..scissors apart to make a hole in the baby’s skull. The abortionist removes the
……..scissors and sticks a suction tube into the skull to suck the baby’s brain out. The
……..forceps are then used to crush the baby’s head and the abortionist pulls the baby’s
……..body out the rest of the way.”7

Let’s remember that this is a live human being, capable of feeling pain, that a doctor (some of them are such wonderful healers!) is jabbing in the back of its head with a pointed instrument and sucking out its brains.  In dry medical terms that help mask what occurs, this method of murder is called intrauterine cranial decompression.  Cranial decompression translation – they crush the baby’s head.  Intrauterine translation – they do it in the womb.  Why do they do it there?  For one reason, it is murder to take a baby that was born a second ago, jab it in the back of the neck or skull, suck out its brains, and crush its skull.  Out in the room of the world, it’s not acceptable.  But inside the room of the womb, it is.  It is just as much a living human being a few seconds before birth as it is one second afterward.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was chairman of the DNC helping rig the primary against Bernie Sanders and for Hillary Clinton, was asked if she thought it was all right for a seven pound baby to be aborted (partial birth abortion).  She replied, “I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story.”  When asked later by another interviewer about whether her stance was that it was acceptable to abort a seven pound baby, she didn’t deny that it was her stance and said, “We have very different definitions of personal liberty. I made that clear in my response the Democratic Party’s position is we are pro-choice,” Schultz said. “We believe a decision on a woman’s reproductive choices is best left between a woman and her doctor….”8  The Murder Party is fine with allowing the murder of a seven pound baby.  It just has to be in the womb.  A second later in a different place, and it wouldn’t be okay.  Who makes such an obvious foolish distinction?  Why the wise supreme court, of course.

   Aren’t you smarter than the Bloody Court of 1973?  Can’t you see through the veil that the murder crowd puts between the public and the reality of what occurs to an unborn child during abortion?  Quit being deceived and vote against the Murdercrats, voting for the party that will end the murder of the unborn.     

by Dennis Lange


1 https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states?gclid=CjwKEAiAkajDBRCRq8Czmdj-yFgSJADikZggsRrpnsSeFZZhimCIqSEI877pbaTr0nqdX_2tewAn4BoCWV3w_wcB

2 http://www.all.org/learn/abortion/methods/

3 http://www.thehelpline.org/unplanned-pregnancy/abortion/types-of-abortion-procedures/

4 http://www.all.org/learn/abortion/methods/

5 http://www.prolife.com/abormeth.html

6 http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/medicalfacts/techniques/

7 http://www.all.org/learn/abortion/methods/

8 http://www.lifenews.com/2015/04/14/cnn-asks-top-democrat-if-its-ok-to-kill-a-7-pound-baby-in-abortion-heres-her-answer/