Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
Well this is uncomfortable. On the one hand, the White House supports your right to kill your unborn child at any moment during your pregnancy. On the other hand, if you haven't killed your child, they will treat that child like any other visitor to the White House, subject to paperwork.
LifeNews.com has the details on the White House's new "If You Haven't Killed Your Unborn Child, You Must Register Her Before You Visit Us" policy:
The Director of the White House Visitor’s Office, Ellie Shafer, today distributed an email newsletter to members of Congress and others providing detailed instructions on how to register an unborn child (“a baby that has not yet been born,” as Shafer puts it) into the security system the White House uses to arrange group tours.
“We have received a number of calls regarding how to enter security information for a baby that has not yet been born,” Shafer wrote. “Crazy as it may sound, you MUST include the baby in the overall count of guests in the tour. It’s an easy process.”
According to the National Right to Life Committee, which obtained a copy of the newsletter, the White House spells out how “the baby’s security information should be entered” into the White House system. Staff must include such details as the baby’s sex, if known.
Update: I posted this, then pulled the post on account of believing it must be some hoax. It must be a hoax, right? Why would any White House need this information, much less one as supportive of abortion as this one? It doesn't make sense to me. In any case, here's a copy of the email used to source the story, courtesy of the Washington Free Beacon.
But someone must explain this to me, if it's not a hoax. Why would the White House need this information? I mean, I tell my children about the baseball games they attended in utero. And I even let them count it toward their list of stadiums they've visited. But, then again, I'm pro-life.
- Comment (12)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Nov '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
It makes sense if you are a member of the "say anything, do anything" crowd. As we learned, Democrats aren't ideological. That's just another way of saying they are unprincipled. That frees them to do things that are in conflict with each other, in terms of principal.
Dec '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
I incline towards hoax, but perhaps this has something to do with screening for suicide bombers?
Apr '11
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
If you want to pretend to be transparent, but you don't want to collect/ publish the important data (because, for example, the "appearance of impropriety" that you're trying to combat is less misleading than one might imagine), you want to be super strict about everything and anything you don't care about.
Or it could just be dumb.
Imagine the outcry if this took place under a Republican, though.
Thinking about it, it might be even worse under Mitt than under George; you can almost guarantee that people would claim it was for Mormon posthumous conversion purposes, despite all the obvious reasons for the implausibility of that claim.
Aug '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
If it were anyone other than the federal government I would assume it to be a hoax. It's just so ridiculously stoooopid.
But, since it has to do with the federal government, I have to wonder, maybe it's for real???
Oct '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
Two things:
1. An unborn child is a person. Killing an innocent person is not merely killing, as in kittens and cows, it is murder.
2. Perhaps the list is for future reference. Start practicing the list making now, so it will be handy when you need it. The Nazi's did.
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
OK, so the idea appears to be that if your child will be born by the time of a scheduled tour, you register him or her before they're born.
At least that sort of makes sense.
Still fascinating that such an abortion-supportive regime would treat unborn children as people.
Nov '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: OK, so the idea appears to be that if your child will be born by the time of a scheduled tour, you register him or her before they're born.
At least that sort of makes sense.
Still fascinating that such an abortion-supportive regime would treat unborn children as people. · 2 minutes ago
potential people...
Jun '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
I thought they might be fearful the kid will jump out with an Uzi.
Apr '12
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
I see that you got it in comment number 6. It really boils down to lead times. Some folks register for WH tours months in advance.
Jan '11
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
So, they'll accept an unborn child ... if it makes a bureaucrat's paperwork a little easier.
Nah .... gotta be a hoax.
Oct '10
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
Never question a mindless functionary of Government, reality and common sense versus an unrelenting conditioned mindset.
Aug '11
Re: Unborn Don't Have Right To Life, But A Requirement To Register
I heard about this requirement on Rush today. I wish I could tell you that I am astonished by this news but lately nothing that the Libs/DEMs do or say makes me bat as much as an eyelash.