It would appear that I will have to tackle a few of those "don't want to know about it" issues and guess whose coming along ?
As a Father of Five, I do have major issues with the feminist version of describing and justifying abortions as an obvious and humane method of birth control. They have in the past demonstrated that not only is the "abortion" topic sacrosanct to the feminist cause as far as they are concerned, remember "Roe and Wade". Nothing as far as they are concerned will change that attitude..
No decision of the Supreme Court in the twentieth century has been as controversial as the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision holding that women have a right to choose to have an abortion during the first two trimesters of a pregnancy. Attorneys for Roe had suggested several constitutional provisions might be violated by the Texas law prohibiting abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother.The argument was ofcourse organised and financed by feminists as we have found to be the case. Feminists argue that the reason for their promotion of the abortion argument was to ensure that in case of rape, or whenever any questions were raised about the health of the mother regarding childbirth. The choice should be, whether or not to abort the "foetus" at will. Both those situations hardly ever occur or are the reasons for the abortion to take place. Feminists managed to ensure that any unborn child should not be regarded as being a human being whilst in the womb, to be considered nothing more than excess tissue of unknown shape and form, in order for them to justify it's removal and destruction. As usual, the consensus was reached and almost every female goose stepped their way into accepting this monstrous argument without even bothering to check the facts. If some the girls agreed than that was all that was required for them to agree as well. Democracy female style, via emotive consensus, was something they could all happily live with..
What amazes me is that little perfectly formed hand at just 21 weeks..
Brief Background:In 1973, the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade ruled that women have the right to an abortion during the first 6 months (2 trimesters) of pregnancy, thereby legalizing abortion.It's not as if something or someone was being affected, not a real person anyway..
The picture is that of a 21-week-old Unborn baby named Samuel Alexander Armas, who is being operated on by surgeon named Joseph Bruner.
The baby was diagnosed with spinal bifida and would not survive if removed from his mother's womb.
Little Samuel's mother, Julie Armas, is an obstetrics nurse in Atlanta
She knew of Dr Bruner's remarkable surgical procedure. Practicing at Vanderbilt Univ. Med. Ctr. in Nashville , he performs these special operations while the baby is still in the womb.
During the procedure, the doctor removes the uterus viaC-section and makes a small incision to operate on the baby. As Dr Bruner completed the surgery on Samuel, the little guy reached his tiny, but fully developed hand through the incision and firmly grasped the surgeon's finger.
Dr Bruner was reported as saying that when his finger was grasped, it was the most emotional moment of his life, and that for an instant during the procedure he was just frozen, totally The photograph captures this amazing event with perfect clarity The editors titled the picture, 'Hand of Hope.' The text explaining the picture begins, 'The tiny hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel Alexander Armas emerges from the mother's uterus to grasp the finger of Dr Joseph Bruner as if thanking the doctor for the gift of life.'
Little Samuel's mother said they 'wept for days' when they saw the picture. She said, 'The photo reminds us pregnancy isn't about disability or an illness, it's about a little person. ‘Samuel was born in perfect health, the operation 100 percent successful.
