THE PSYCHOLOGIST : Partial Birth Abortion is Not Used to Protect the Health of the Mother

Partial Birth Abortion is Not Used to Protect the Health of the Mother

I was going to comment on a comment to a post by MK, but due to the importance of the topic, I decided to respond in a separate post instead. This was the comment:

“Late-term abortions are legal in Kansas if two independent doctors agree that the mother could suffer irreparable harm by giving birth.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/...e-tiller- killed

I'm sorry but for me if it ever came to a choice between losing my wife or an unborn child — regardless of the stage of the pregnancy — I’d opt to save my wife every time…

This type of thinking would be understandable, if it were based on fact. But it is not based on fact, so the reasoning is flawed. The left has blinded many good people with good sounding words like "a woman's right to choose" or "health of the mother", but its only a cover for lies and half truths meant to mislead people who otherwise would never condone such things.

Unfortunately, there is no medical reason for a late term (partial birth) abortion. The procedure involves inducing a birth having the baby born feet first (breech births are normally more dangerous for the mother) the entire body of the baby is outside the mother and of the base of head.

At this point the doctor (butcher) holds the baby against the mother, punctures the back of the baby's skull and sucks out the brains with a vacuum. The baby is almost completely born when the doctor does this. There is nothing that could prevent the full birth and nothing that could harm the mother any more. All the danger to the mother is now passed. (Simulated procedure)

Why does the doctor hold the baby against the mother? The answer is, to maintain a legal fiction that the baby has not been born. We are talking a difference of inches and seconds. The butcher holds the baby against the mother so he can murder it without criminal liability. A few more inches, the baby is out, and you can't kill it. It is not for the mother's health, there is no more risk to the mother. No decision between "wife or an unborn child". Its simply a matter of convenience for the mother, money for the abortionist, and whether the butcher can be tried for murder.

A few seconds between life and death is used to justify the mass murder of the most innocent of human beings. Not for the life of the mother, but simply because she doesn't want to be responsible for her actions, and easy money for the butcher.

My son was born six weeks early. Most of these children are further developed than my son was when he was born. They could have been adopted. They could have been musicians, scientists, doctors, mothers and fathers. But some monster sucked out their brains as they struggled to take their first breath. A society that condones this type of debauchery will eventually pay a terrible price.

I have to say it was wrong to kill Tiller. After all it was illegal to kill him, he made it out of the womb. But I have to wonder what I would do if I accidentally walked in on a doctor performing one of these evil procedures? I suspect I would kill the butcher to try to save the child. And what would I do if the butcher lived next door? If, when I went to church, he sat next to me each Sunday with feigned piety? I don't know. But I do know, I'm not sorry he's gone.

And where does this all end? If a full term child can be killed a few seconds before birth, why not a few seconds or minutes later? Oh, we can. Tiller was recently tried for killing babies who made it out before he could suck out their brains. He was found not guilty. And we even have people who argue that parents should be allowed to kill their children up to several years after birth because they really didn't know what they were getting in to. And old people should get out of the way, they have a "duty" to die, as one politician put it. And if we can do that is anyone in between safe?

The oven doors are open and we're willingly walking in as a society, all in the name of "choice". This is a liberal agenda that has been tried before. Human life is not treated as anything special, then murder becomes justified for the common good, and millions die as a result. This will not end well for anyone, least of all the children.

No comments:

Background

The essence of conservatism is caution. The essence of Leftism is anger

This blog is written solely by John Ray, who has a Ph.D. degree in psychology and 200+ papers published in the academic journals of the social sciences. It does occasionally comment on issues in psychology but is mainly aimed at giving a conservative psychologist's view on a broad range of topics. There are very few conservative psychologists.

The blog originated in Australia and many (but not most) posts discuss Australian matters. Australians have an unusually good awareness of events outside their own country. Australian newspapers feature news from Britain and the USA not as an afterthought but as a major part of their coverage. So Australians do tend to have a truly Western heart, which is the reason behind the old name for this blog. So events in Australia, Britain and the USA all feature frequently here, plus occasional coverage of other places, particularly Israel.

A primer in American politics for non-Americans:

SCOTUS is the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest court in the land

The "GOP" stands for "Grand Old Party" and refers to the Republican party. The GOP is at present center/Right, while the Democrats have been undergoing a steady drift Leftwards and now have policies similar to mainstream European Leftist parties.

The ideological identity of both parties has however been very fluid -- almost reversing itself over time. In the mid 19th century, the GOP was the party of big government and concern for minorities while the Democrats advertised themselves as "The party of the white man" -- an orientation that lasted into the mid 20th century in the South. The Democrats are still obsessed with race but have now flipped into support for discrimination AGAINST whites.

Was Pope Urban VIII the first Warmist? Below we see him refusing to look through Galileo's telescope. People tend to refuse to consider evidence— if what they might discover contradicts what they believe.

Global warming

Calibrated in whole degrees. Larger graph here

Climate scientist Lennart Bengtsson said. “The warming we have had the last 100 years is so small that if we didn’t have meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn’t have noticed it at all.”

The term "Fascism" is mostly used by the Left as a brainless term of abuse. But when they do make a serious attempt to define it, they produce very complex and elaborate definitions -- e.g. here and here. In fact, Fascism is simply extreme socialism plus nationalism. But great gyrations are needed to avoid mentioning the first part of that recipe, of course.

Two examples of Leftist racism below (much more here and here):

Beatrice Webb, a founder of the London School of Economics and the Fabian Society, and married to a Labour MP, mused in 1922 on whether when English children were "dying from lack of milk", one should extend "the charitable impulse" to Russian and Chinese children who, if saved this year, might anyway die next. Besides, she continued, there was "the larger question of whether those races are desirable inhabitants" and "obviously" one wouldn't "spend one's available income" on "a Central African negro".

Hugh Dalton, offered the Colonial Office during Attlee's 1945-51 Labour government, turned it down because "I had a horrid vision of pullulating, poverty stricken, diseased nigger communities, for whom one can do nothing in the short run and who, the more one tries to help them, are querulous and ungrateful."

Defensible and indefensible usages of the term "racism"

The book, The authoritarian personality, authored by T.W. Adorno et al. in 1950, has been massively popular among psychologists. It claims that a set of ideas that were popular in the "Progressive"-dominated America of the prewar era were "authoritarian". Leftist regimes always are authoritarian so that claim was not a big problem. What was quite amazing however is that Adorno et al. identified such ideas as "conservative". They were in fact simply popular ideas of the day but ones that had been most heavily promoted by the Left right up until the then-recent WWII. See here for details of prewar "Progressive" thinking.

R.I.P. Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet deposed a law-defying Marxist President at the express and desperate invitation of the Chilean parliament. He pioneered the free-market reforms which Reagan and Thatcher later unleashed to world-changing effect. That he used far-Leftist methods to suppress far-Leftist violence is reasonable if not ideal. The Leftist view that they should have a monopoly of violence and that others should follow the law is a total absurdity which shows only that their hate overcomes their reason

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a war criminal. Both British and American codebreakers had cracked the Japanese naval code so FDR knew what was coming at Pearl Harbor. But for his own political reasons he warned no-one there. So responsibility for the civilian and military deaths at Pearl Harbor lies with FDR as well as with the Japanese. The huge firepower available at Pearl Harbor, both aboard ship and on land, could have largely neutered the attack. Can you imagine 8 battleships and various lesser craft firing all their AA batteries as the Japanese came in? The Japanese naval airforce would have been annihilated and the war would have been over before it began.

FDR prolonged the Depression. He certainly didn't cure it.

WWII did NOT end the Great Depression. It just concealed it. It in fact made living standards worse

Joe McCarthy was eventually proved right after the fall of the Soviet Union. To accuse anyone of McCarthyism is to accuse them of accuracy!

The KKK was intimately associated with the Democratic party. They ATTACKED Republicans!

People who mention differences in black vs. white IQ are these days almost universally howled down and subjected to the most extreme abuse. I am a psychometrician, however, so I feel obliged to defend the scientific truth of the matter:

The average African adult has about the same IQ as an average white 11-year-old and African Americans (who are partly white in ancestry) average out at a mental age of 14. The American Psychological Association is generally Left-leaning but it is the world's most prestigious body of academic psychologists. And even they have had to concede that sort of gap (one SD) in black vs. white average IQ. 11-year olds can do a lot of things but they also have their limits and there are times when such limits need to be allowed for.

America's uncivil war was caused by trade protectionism. The slavery issue was just camouflage, as Abraham Lincoln himself admitted. See also here

Did William Zantzinger kill poor Hattie Carroll?

Did Bismarck predict where WWI would start or was it just a "free" translation by Churchill?

Leftist psychologists have an amusingly simplistic conception of military organizations and military men. They seem to base it on occasions they have seen troops marching together on parade rather than any real knowledge of military men and the military life. They think that military men are "rigid" -- automatons who are unable to adjust to new challenges or think for themselves. What is incomprehensible to them is that being kadaver gehorsam (to use the extreme Prussian term for following orders) actually requires great flexibility -- enough flexibility to put your own ideas and wishes aside and do something very difficult. Ask any soldier if all commands are easy to obey.

A good article on Leftist hate

The real history of social Darwinism

Some personal memoirs

Memoir highlights

THE PSYCHOLOGIST

Partial Birth Abortion is Not Used to Protect the Health of the Mother

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive