Why Does Obama Hate Your Babies?

Posted on Comments

 

Obama Will Veto Bill to De-Fund
Planned Parenthood Despite
Selling Aborted Baby Parts
— Steven Ertelt, LifeNews

Obama Appointee And Bundler
Blocks More Video Releases By Group
Behind Planned Parenthood Sting
— Mollie Hemingway, The Federalist

White House threatens to veto bill
blocking Planned Parenthood’s funding
— Jordan Fabian, The Hill

Does a Future Planned Parenthood Video
Contain ‘Prima Facie Evidence
of Born-Alive Infants?’
— David French, National Review

It is important to keep in mind during this controversy that, despite everything the abortion industry will try to tell you, the question is not Planned Parenthood’s existence, but whether federal taxpayer dollars should be used to fund it.

Apologists for the Culture of Death are experts at rhetorical prestidigitation, deflecting criticism and distracting the public’s attention with emotional appeals about “rights” and “women’s health.” They will use character assassination against their critics, trying to “kill the messenger” by demonizing their opponents with accusations of bad faith (mala fides) that are irrelevant to the issue. However, we do not need to engage in metaphysical or existential debates about “rights” in order to say that American taxpayers should not be required to fund an organization that profits from what everyone with a conscience recognizes as a ghastly and abominable business:

We have passed the point where Nazi comparisons are inappropriate. In the latest video about Planned Parenthood, if you want to watch it, you will see an admission that some of the children are born alive before being killed and carved up — their bodies being sold essentially for scrap.
These are children. They entered into the world alive and were killed, chopped up, and sold bit by bit.
“It’s a boy,” one person commented in the latest film. They talk about the commoditization of children’s eyeballs (the ones in the video were not developed enough), hearts that turn to mush they are so small, and reference the legs, feet, and hands of the children.
They are children being killed, butchered, and sold in pieces.

You can read the rest at Red State.

Democrats are the Party of Death, forever stained by their embrace of this hideous evil. No honest person believes their lies.




 

104 comments

  2. I guess that’s why I said “practically impossible.” I fear that if such records exist, they will vanish into the ether the more these tapes come out.

    Consider this alternative: Young confused mother obtains an abortion hoping that somehow she will “forget” the entire incident. PP sells her with the propaganda that the process is the moral functional equivalent of removing an ingrown toenail. Now she is confronted with the thought that the “clump of cells” she aborted is being butchered and sold. Was that possibility explained to her? Did she give informed consent? If this “thing” that is being destroyed is merely an extension of the mother and not an individual human life, then any emotional distress occasioned by the butchery and sale of it without the mother’s knowledge or consent should be actionable.

    I’ve seen medical malpractice cases proceed on less evidence.

  5. You know I like you, Daniel, and I think highly of you. But you’re opening doors here that you shouldn’t open, because they’re unbiblical doors.

    In John 14:6, Jesus says that no one comes to the Father except through Him. This means that unless a person accepts Jesus as their Lord and Savior – not just mouthing the words, but believing upon Him – then they cannot be saved. It has nothing to do with the corruption of people’s souls, as that opens the door to universalism, but rather that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”, and without the righteousness imputed to them through Jesus, all deserve whatever judgment God chooses to mete out.

    Certainly, those not born again and saved will receive eternal separation from God. The precise nature of this is possibly open to debate, but the Scriptures do compare it to “torment” and “the smoke of their torment” and to “fire”, and further, Jesus spoke of the Rich Man and Old Lazarus, in which the Rich Man begs for a drop of water to cool his lips.

    However, being a fundamentalist evangelical, I believe in literal interpretation where possible, ala Cooper’s rule of hermeneutics “when the plain sense makes common sense, seek no other sense”, and so if God calls a place a “lake of fire”, I’m inclined to take that at face value.

    Further, at the risk of offending you and every other Catholic here, I’m going to come right out and say that there is no Biblical basis for the concept of purgatory or any “levels” of hell, as per Dante. In fact pugatory was a scam invented out of whole cloth by the papacy as a way to extract coinage from believers via the sale of indulgences. Having said that, I’m not exempting Protestant churches from my scathing commentary either, as most of them urge believers to tithe. My own church does this, and when they mention tithing, I offer to bring them the firstfruits of my barley harvest. In fact, the Apostle Paul clarifies that we are to “give generously”, because “the Lord loves a cheerful giver”, not that we are to “tithe” some specified percentage.

    I’m not singling you out Daniel. I lectured one of coworkers for an hour and a half the other day, about prophecy, the Tribulation, and why he needs to stop fornicating. Because if he can’t control his lust, he should just get married. =)

  6. Make that despicable piece of shit own his evil.

    I’d like to put this on a tee shirt, along with one of Barry’s selfies and the PP logo.

  8. I like that idea, RS. The sort of neighborhoods that PP frequents contain the sort of individuals who would surely perk up at the thought of a lawsuit through which they could be enriched, however tenuous or not the premise might be.

    I’m surprised that no enterprising personal injury lawyer guys have jumped on this. In fact, I’m laughing out loud at the thought of a certain group of unscrupulous ambulance chasers in FL, headed by a guy whose name rhymes with “norgan” and who is a huge Dem contributor and thoroughly putrid person, having to sit this one out so as to not PO their leftist masters.

    Then again, aren’t most (I said “most”, not “all”) lawyers Dems and Dem contributors? IIRC, the Bar Associations are, at least.

  9. I can tell you, I sure would defy it, and damn the consequences. One look at your profile picture only confirms that in my mind.

  10. If Babs had only known that her music might fade away (among straight people), but her Effect never will.

  11. I’d guess that the organs ->stem express -> stem express customer piece is almost certainly documented. But the mother -> baby -> organs documentation will never see the light of day. Instead, they’ll see an industrial-strength, masticating IRS-style paper shredder. If they haven’t already.

  12. It’s likely that every woman who comes in for their abortion services is also documented as having used every other service as well. It’s a neat way to pad documentation for “necessary” services.

  13. I have to agree. Release the rest of the videos and give the apologists a double middle finger. DARE them to arrest you. Civil disobedience.

  14. You know, ‘organlegging’ is a staple of a number of dystopian future genres, especially cyberpunk.

    I never thought I’d be living in one of those.

    Maybe PP could change their name to Tamanous.

  18. I enjoy discussing these things with you and do not take them personally. I also like watching sometimes, like how the #cuckservative kerfuffle sometimes devolved into dispensation vs. replacement theology, which was odd but educational.

    So anyway, God is outside of time and Jesus went to Hell during those three days. [skips some steps] Therefore, even the future unrepentant who haven’t been born yet on Earth have already been offered a postmortem second chance.

    Of course, given the good news and choosing to reject it is a pretty good predictor of what your choice would be in the end, but maybe you misunderstood for some reason. Given that God is the very definition of loving and fair, it would make sense for there to be a second chance when the mortal scales have fallen from our eyes; but if you understood clearly and refused, then why would your answer change?

    I do not have a good answer to the Biblical lake of fire, except that I have known people for whom I cannot imagine a worse punishment than not being able to get away from themselves.

    NB: My theology is a blend of Pentecostal, Southern Baptist, Foursquare, Marian, Jesuit and Dominican, with my own twist.

  20. Daniel Freeman!! >:(
    >:(
    >:(

    You have asked for it when you said:

    So anyway, God is outside of time and Jesus went to Hell during those three days. [skips some steps] Therefore, even the future unrepentant — who don’t even exist yet on Earth — have already been offered a postmortem second chance.

    No. Just…no.

    The correct translation for “hell” would be sheol (Hebrew) / hades (Greek). They mean the same thing. Sheol/hades is a temporary place, where souls are kept as they await the final resurrection and judgment. Revelation 20:11-15 gives a clear distinction between hades and the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the permanent and final place of judgment for the lost. Hades, then, is a temporary place. Many people refer to both hades and the lake of fire as “hell,” and this causes confusion. Jesus did not go to a place of torment after His death, but He did go to hades.

    Sheol/hades was a realm with two divisions—a place of blessing and a place of judgment. The abodes of the saved and the lost are both generally called “hades” in the Bible. The abode of the saved is also called “Abraham’s bosom” (KJV) or “Abraham’s side” (NIV) in Luke 16:22 and “paradise” in Luke 23:43. The abode of the unsaved is called “hell” (KJV) or “Hades” (NIV) in Luke 16:23. The abodes of the saved and the lost are separated by a “great chasm” (Luke 16:26). When Jesus died, He went to the blessed side of sheol and, from there, took the believers with Him to heaven (Ephesians 4:8-10). The judgment side of sheol/hades has remained unchanged. All unbelieving dead go there awaiting their final judgment in the future. Did Jesus go to sheol/hades? Yes, according to Ephesians 4:8-10 and 1 Peter 3:18-20.

    While the idea of a second chance for salvation is appealing, the Bible is clear that death is the end of all chances. Hebrews 9:27 tells us that we die, and then face judgment. So, as long as a person is alive, he has a second, third, fourth, fifth, etc. chance to accept Christ and be saved. Once a person dies, there are no more chances.

    To understand what happens to nonbelievers after they die, we go to Revelation 20:11-15 which describes the Great White Throne judgment. Here takes place the opening of the books and “the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” The books contain all the thoughts and deeds of those being judged, and we know from Romans 3:20 that “by the works of the Law is no flesh justified.” Therefore, all who are judged by their works and thoughts are condemned to hell. Believers in Christ, on the other hand, are not judged by the books of works, but their names are found written in another book—the “Lamb’s Book of Life” (Revelation 21:27). These are the ones who have believed on the Lord Jesus, and they alone will be allowed to enter heaven.

    Your theology should be the Bible and that’s it. You cannot invent a god in your own image or a god of who you want him to be; that’s idolatry. Yahweh is the unchangable I AM, and it is we who conform to Him, and His Word, which He gave us.

  22. Okay, I’m going to need my references to respond to that (so tomorrow), but I suspect that part of it is a theoretical mathematician vs. a statistician. Very different sensibilities.

  23. In retrospect, “Eric Rudolph did nothing wrong” is sounding catchier and catchier. Funny how those Southern Nazi types seem to be the earliest ones to react seriously to atrocities like this.

    But really, the only question to ask now is: “Which one of these merchants of death should die publicly first, in order to put the fear of God into the others?” And if neither I, nor other decent, much less righteous, men have the power to do so without serious opposition under the present order, why is that?

  24. Patience. I can see there is a plan. By the time all of the videos have been released, we will know those who are no longer our countrymen (twanloc).

  25. Ok! I can’t wait to see what you come back with. I know you wouldn’t have seen this coming in a million years, but I love theological discussions. 😀

  28. And given when we’re living, you know it’s going to get worse. This is just the early stages.

  31. Now this is really fascinating. Did PP commit fraud in describing the state of the fetus/baby and the intended use of the organs? Did PP use the word “organ” at any point to describe what was being donated or did they deliberately use euphemisms? Reading the Yelp reviews of my local PP clinic, it does appear that some PP “customers” experienced pressure to receive certain tests and perhaps there was pressure to sign this consent form as well.

    A class action suit now would certainly accelerate PP’s trajectory and could potentially be quite profitable for the right group of attorneys given their annual budget.

  33. Thank you for your post and the one above. Presenting the Truth as it is written.
    Too many people I am moved to talk to have this same one more chance after death mindset. While narrowly focused on God is Love they forget he is also Justice and Righteousness.
    Like my wife says: Only those who want to continue in their sin have need of this false doctrine.
    Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. When a person says that is not good enough for them for any reason it is still a rejection of Christ.

  34. As I’ve always said, Mercy means nothing absent prior judgment. Too many nominally Christian denominations have turned God into an anthropomorphic “Santa Claus” who pays lip service to being nice over naughty, but who then turns around and hands out presents every December 25 anyway. One cannot truly understand and appreciate God’s Grace, unless and until one appreciates the severity of Sin and the Judgment which follows.

  35. The suit would be predicated upon either “intentional” or “negligent” infliction of emotional distress, a known tort action in most states. The plaintiffs would need to show a medically diagnosible mental/emotional injury to recover, but that does not seem particularly far fetched.

  36. Here is another possiblity, given that a) PP purports to be non-profit and b) accepts federal funds for certain specified purposes.

    Consider also, women are charged for abortions at PP. Do they know that the sale of their babies most likely exceeds the cost of the abortion services?

  37. Defunding Planned Parenthood by name is a poor tactic. We defunded ACORN and it sprouted a dozen offshoots. We need to stopping funding all non-profits. We can offer them fee for service contracts if they do indeed perform necessary services. There is no reason why government bureaucrats should decide which ( left wing ) charities are to be subsidized with tax dollars.

  38. Thank you for your response. What you say is true, that many people do have the (unbiblical) idea of a “second chance” after death. Who can blame them for getting that idea though? Lots of churches teach this. The Bible is the ultimate arbiter of what is true or not, but sadly, a lot of people trust their church to give them the truth, which we see is a bad idea.

    Which brings up another point. Now that I’ve probably irritated a bunch of people with what I’ve already said, let’s see if you agree with my position on predestination. I’m not talking full-on Calvinism, but predestination in the Biblical sense; no more, no less.

    Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1:5,11 speaks of this. I won’t quote them here, but many people have a strong hostility to the doctrine of predestination, I know.

    The words translated “predestined” in the Scriptures referenced above are from the Greek word proorizo, which carries the meaning of “determine beforehand,” “ordain,” “to decide upon ahead of time.” So, predestination is God determining certain things to occur ahead of time. According to Romans 8:29-30, God predetermined that certain individuals would be conformed to the likeness of His Son, be called, justified, and glorified. Essentially, God predetermines that certain individuals will be saved. At least a dozen scriptures refer to believers in Christ being chosen. And not in the sense of seeing beforehand who would choose Christ or not; that is Arianism, and is heresy.

    A lot of people call that “unfair”, but we have to remember is that no one deserves to be saved. We have all sinned (Romans 3:23) and are all worthy of eternal punishment (Romans 6:23). God would therefore be perfectly just in allowing ALL of us to spend eternity in hell. However, He chooses to save some of us. He is not being unfair to those who are not chosen, because they are receiving what they deserve. God’s choosing to be gracious to some is not unfair to the others. No one deserves anything from God; therefore, no one can object if he does not receive anything from God. In fact, those people were given life to live out on earth, which was all that most of them expected anyway.

    God choosing who will be saved does not strip us of free will. The Bible says that we have the choice—all who believe in Jesus Christ will be saved (Romans 10:9-10, John 3:16). Predestination works hand-in-hand with a person being drawn by God (John 6:44) and believing unto salvation (Romans 1:16). God predestines who will be saved, and we must choose Christ in order to be saved. Both facts are equally true.

    Now, here comes the part where I not only irritate people, but make them out-and-out angry: all the babies aborted, or who die in infancy are NOT with God in heaven. Only the ones predestined are with God in heaven. The rest are in hades. Because we are all BORN sinful (Job 25:4, Psalm 51:5). That, in my estimation, makes abortion 1000000x more vile than people think. The child’s “mother” (so-called) has robbed her baby of the life it received from God, and an opportunity to live it out, and CONDEMNED IT STRAIGHT TO HADES. And she did that simply FOR HER OWN CONVENIENCE.

    If you think about it, you’ll know that what I’m saying is true. Otherwise, if aborted or dead babies automatically go to heaven, then abortion is actually an act of love. The mother sacrifices her own eternal life in heaven by committing murder, but guaranteeing her offspring heavenly life.

    So…I know this is hard to swallow, but it’s Biblical according to what I said above. As I said, all this means that abortion is much, much worse than many people thought. I would say, than the vast majority of people thought.

  39. I’m sure there are sympathetic friends in other countries, maybe ones with lax laws about this sort of thing, who would be more than happy to keep the videos safe in the mean time and if one were to accidentally slip out onto a Russian server or something oooooops shit happens amirite.

  40. Which is why we’re told to fear God, as opposed to creating a false Santa Claus-like god.

    Or in your case, Santa CLAUSE. Get it? Lawyer? Clause? OK, I’ll shut up now.

  41. Since everybody is now required to have health insurance, and all health insurance plans are required to provide contraception at no cost to the patient, why does Planned Parenthood need federal subsidies? It would seem to me that the only part of their business which would not be covered by insurance is abortion, and the Hyde Amendment prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion.

    The truth is simple: money is fungible, and Planned Parenthood simply moves money around to make it look like no taxpayer dollars are funding the abortion business.

    The President will veto the defunding measure, and the Republicans don’t have enough votes to override it, but the Republicans can simply refuse to appropriate any money for Planned Parenthood in the FY2016 budget, leaving the President with the choice of vetoing a huge appropriations bill, or letting Planned Parenthood support itself.

  42. When I first typed the comment, I spelled it “clause.” Fortunately, I saw it in time. Although in fairness, your comment could have been directed to a grammarian, as well.

  43. Not just them. It’s a numbers game that is especially prevalent in government. If an agency has an amount of our money budgeted to them and they do not use it all then guess what happens next year?
    Budget allocations go down.
    I asked a firefighter buddy of mine why they took pumper trucks along on a call that only required an ambulance.
    He told me that it’s all about calls, the number of calls they can document being sent out on. Fire truck goes with ambulance to the medical emergency and ambulance goes with fire truck to brush fire.
    Total of four responses to two incidents.

    I’ve no doubt that every person who visit’s Planned Parenthood is documented as having taken advantage of services that they didn’t actually received. It allows PP to claim that they’re helping millions more persons than is actually the case.

    A numbers game so they can keep killing children with our tax dollars and the donations of ignorant well-meaning people.

  44. I disagree on a number of levels, I believe your views on “Predestination” conflict with any number of verses, including 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Peter 3:9; and Romans 10:13. I acknowledge the verses you cite, but suggest that foreknowledge is not predetermining an outcome.

    And, unfortunately, you cannot have true free will and a predestination of an elect together, no matter how you try semantically get around that.

    As you might imagine, I disgree regarding the victims of abortion, as well. While Adam’s sin taints the universe and our being, i.e. it causes us to be born with a sin nature, it does not cause us to sin. Our sins are our own. And the unsaved will be judged according to their works and law, (which will be insufficient of course). The victims of abortion have no works upon which to be judged.

    There’s more, but I don’t wish to hijack the comments.

  45. 1. Given that PP receives federal funds, it is unclear just how much oversight GAO (or anyone else) has provided in terms of auditing. A quick search of GAO reports shows there has not been a detailed GAO report in PP since 1995 or 1998: http://www.gao.gov/search?rows=10&now_sort=score+desc&page_name=main&search_type=Solr&o=0&facets=&adv_begin_date=&adv_end_date=&adv=0&advanced=&q=%22planned+parenthood%22

    Individual states (esp those run by R’s) can demand audits of individual PP units and their supplier/buyer relationships almost immediately. Apparently SC is ahead of the curve here http://www.wltx.com/story/news/2015/08/01/sc-gop-legislators-seeking-audit-of-planned-parenthood/30982249/ but really this should be done by every R state like … this week.

    What seems quite possible to me is that from a cost accounting perspective it should be provable that PP used federal funds to support its abortion services. This would take some work and while PP may have some controls in place to prevent slip-ups here, the people in these videos seem sloppy, arrogant, and not exactly rules-oriented in the way they talk about taking money for baby organs.

    I don’t know if charging more than cost for abortions is against the rules for 501c3’s … someone else on this thread could chime in.

  46. So to speak plainly here: we need a group of former PP “customers” who want to claim emotional distress upon learning that the “tissue donation” they were making was actually organs of little people.

    Financial compensation for their distress would be one incentive that might draw them out if the sheer horror of these videos won’t on its own.

  48. First, let me point out that in the Scriptures, there are many instances of the speaker using “all”, “everyone”, “the whole world”, etc., when clearly the scope was much more limited; i.e., hyperbole, where words like “all” are limited by context. Examples include Luke 2:1-3, John 12:19, Mark 1:32, Matthew 8:16, et al.

    In the case of 2 Peter 3:9, the Apostle is speaking to “you” or “us-ward” (depending upon Bible translation), and is speaking to a group of believers. And God does not wish for any believers to perish and that all believers should come to repentance.

    Considering 1 Timothy 2:3-4 and Romans 10:13, I had a whole explanation here, but it was long, and I took it out so as to not hijack the comments, as you say.

    I think it all boils down to a matter of letting Scripture interpret Scripture. I can see where there are many passages that could go either way; that is, proving either your case or mine, mainly because I once believed as you do. At the end of the day though, it was not the place of the Apostles – or me, or you, or anyone else – to decide who was elect and who was not, but to preach the Gospel to everyone, regardless, because a person’s election status is known to God, not to others. I’m not even sure if the person him/herself can know it, except that in my case, I do know it, but I have no idea if this is the same for other people, or if I’m just a freak.

    In my mind, I can’t reconcile Jesus’ statement in John 6:44 that an act of God is required for people to come to Him, without the concept of predestination. Which I don’t see as foreknowledge, in the sense of just looking ahead to see who believes or not. The word “know” in both the OT and the NT refers to much more than simply cognitive knowledge of a person, but rather, something deeper. In the case of Christ and the elect, the establishment of a love relationship with that person before the foundation of the world (an eternal relationship in Christ’s case). Even, for all I know, in the case of the elect, similar to how Christ is spoken of in 1 Peter 1:20. I don’t see this as precluding free will in any sense. God predestines, He calls, and the call can be accepted or rejected according to free will.

  49. All things are created by Jesus Christ, for his pleasure. Rev 4:11
    God is the Almighty. His will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. Nothing can thwart God’s will. If it could he wouldn’t be the Almighty. We have to be drawn to Christ by the Father and empowered to believe. God will not share his glory with another. Salvation is a free gift of God and not by works, lest any flesh should glory. A gift is bestowed not earned or stolen. Gifts are bestowed by the giver both what the gift is and to whom it is bestowed. God said he would let the wheat grow with the thorns until the harvest where they would be separated.
    Everyone who believes in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior can be assured of their Salvation. God declares this and he cannot lie.

  50. Predestination smacks of arbitrariness, a trait which is attributed to the various false gods over course of human history. The Cross is the antithesis of arbitrariness. It is both an acknowledgment of cosmic reality created by Adam’s sin and the embodiment of mercy available to all who accept it. I cannot accept that God is arbitrary. Sovereign and omniscient, yes. Arbitrary, no.

    As for your assertions regarding aborted souls, the Bible has no definitive answer. I note, however, we have clues in God’s treatment of children where their fathers have sinned. See, e.g. the entrance into Canaan, where only those above a certain age were refused admittance because of unbelief.

    The idea that God would condemn a soul which has no awareness of Sin, or its sin nature, much less has never committed a sin to an eternity outside His presence is not the merciful God who died on the Cross for Mankind.

    Finally, I understand concepts of symbolism and hyperbole. I am hesitant, however, of applying those terms to definitive declaratory statements such as the ones I cite above.

Comments are closed.