Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. The Slaughter of Innocents May Continue, But They are Losing the Fight

 

I wasn’t shocked when I saw this from LifeNews, “For Every 1,000 Babies Born, New York City Kills 544 Babies in Abortions.” Over one-third of pregnancies in New York City ends in the killing of the child. I wasn’t shocked because I knew NYC was the abortion capital of the US as far as a single city goes. And that’s not good enough. The Dems have taken over both Houses of the legislature in NY State now and fully intend to expand abortions if that is physically possible.

On Monday, Governor Andrew Cuomo and former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton joined forces at a Barnard College rally to promote the Reproductive Health Act (RHA). As Jack Crowe reported for National Review, Cuomo has “no doubt” that conservative justices will enable the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that legalized abortion at the a federal level. If that happens, the RHA will fortify abortion right in New York state law.

But the bill doesn’t just preserve abortion rights early in pregnancy, which is legal in every state — it protects late-term abortion, too. With the passage of this law, abortions will be permitted “within 24 weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or [when] there is an absence of fetal viability, or at any time when necessary to protect a patient’s life or health.” And, according to New York magazine, not only will abortion “move from the criminal code to the health code,” but also “it will be easier for physicians’ assistants and nurse practitioners to perform abortions.”

But it goes even further than that. Breitbart finds that the NY Bill actually redefines a human being as one who is physically out of the mother’s womb. From “New York Law to Make Abortion a ‘Fundamental Right’”:

Critics have noted that the Act’s language allowing abortion at any time a patient’s health needs to be protected is purposefully vague so as to permit the broadest interpretation.

The Act also redefines “person” as “a human being who has been born and is alive,” eliminating the possibility of recognizing the personhood of an unborn child. During her presidential campaign in 2016, Hillary Clinton stated that “the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.”

You see, killing one-third of the unborn (and this doesn’t even count the “day after pill” where the killing is undocumented) is just not enough for the liberals in New York City. They want to go as far as possible. Give them a little more time and they will go after their ultimate goal, condoning infanticide up to two years of age. Bio-ethicist Pete Singer among others, argues that it is not immoral to kill a child up to two years of age because the child is not “self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons”; therefore, “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.” I don’t know what makes Pete Singer an “ethicist.” Doesn’t sound very ethical to me, but what do I know. I’m not some elitist philosopher.

Somehow the Dems have not gotten the message on this. According to a new Marist poll, 65 percent of Americans now believe SCOTUS should overturn Roe v. Wade. You can read about the recent abortion polls in this Crux article, “New poll: Vast majority of Americans want abortion restrictions.” I guess most Americans are not elitists either.

What’s interesting is that it cites a poll that shows 75% of Democrats are pro-abortion and 70% of Republicans are pro-life. That must mean the people who don’t identify with either party must strongly lean pro-life. (Only 70% of Republicans? What’s wrong with the other 30%?)

I’ll be going to my fourth March for Life march tomorrow down in DC. We in the pro-life movement are winning! We are turning the tide. If you can’t be there, say a prayer to end this satanic practice.

There are 44 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Stina Member

    Manny: Only 70% of Republicans? What’s wrong with the other 30%?

    They are the “compassionate” dem-lite ones.

    • #1
    • January 17, 2019, at 9:52 AM PST
    • 7 likes
  2. AQ Member
    AQ Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Thank you for going, Manny. I will say a prayer for all of you. 

    • #2
    • January 17, 2019, at 10:02 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  3. Manny Member
    Manny

    AQ (View Comment):

    Thank you for going, Manny. I will say a prayer for all of you.

    Thank you.

    • #3
    • January 17, 2019, at 10:04 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  4. Full Size Tabby Member

    Yes, it is possible to expand abortion in New York. Ethnic groups other than blacks can raise their abortion rates to the abortion rates of blacks, which statewide have about as many abortions as live births, and in New York City, have a much higher number of abortions than live births (i.e., more black babies die in abortion than are born). 

    This article (I know nothing of the author) compares New York and Texas. It is a couple of years old, but she seems to be using real data:

    https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/nov/25/cynthia-meyer/cynthia-meyer-says-more-black-babies-are-aborted-n/ 

    Jason Riley, more recently (July 2018) in the Wall Street Journal:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697 

    I wonder what the objective is of Democrats who want to expand abortion when black women have far more abortions than women of other ethnic groups. A much higher proportion of black pregnancies end in abortion in New York than in other states. Democrats are fond of citing “disparate impact” among racial groups as indicative of racial animus. Do Democrats want us to take their efforts to expand a procedure that results in a highly disproportionate share of black deaths in a state with an already high rate of death to black babies to indicate that that they want more black babies to die?

    • #4
    • January 17, 2019, at 10:15 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  5. James Gawron Thatcher
    James Gawron Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Manny: You see, killing one third of the unborn (and this doesn’t even count the day after pill where the killing is undocumented) is just not enough for the Liberals in New York City. They want to go as far as possible. Give them a little more time and they will go after their ultimate goal, condoning infanticide up to two years of age. Bio-ethicist Pete Singer among others, argues that it is not immoral to kill a child up to two years of age because the child is not “self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time.

    Manny,

    You are hitting it perfectly here. This is the moral slippery slope that you’ve heard about. However, in recent years it is more like a moral cliff that we’ve fallen off of. Part of the great trend toward nihilism that started at the beginning of the 20th century is a belief in total moral relativism. What you should get from Singer here is the hint that the SOB still feels guilty about his total moral relativism. He must manufacture this bizarre explanation about “self-awareness” to justify not considering a two-year-old child a living human being with rights. Let’s get down to it. The child turns out to be more of an inconvenience than the parents thought. So they want to terminate, liquidate, kill, murder a small innocent human being to get out from under their mistake.

    The answer should be No, No, No…one thousand times and more, NO! We have professors losing their hard-earned careers because some SJW loser thinks that their professional opinions backed up by hard facts don’t conform to the SJW’s childlike ideas. If these idiot SJWs really had even a clue about Justice they’d demand that Singer be kicked out of whatever cushy tenured spot he’s in and pronto.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #5
    • January 17, 2019, at 10:30 AM PST
    • 9 likes
  6. Manny Member
    Manny

    James Gawron (View Comment):

    Manny: You see, killing one third of the unborn (and this doesn’t even count the day after pill where the killing is undocumented) is just not enough for the Liberals in New York City. They want to go as far as possible. Give them a little more time and they will go after their ultimate goal, condoning infanticide up to two years of age. Bio-ethicist Pete Singer among others, argues that it is not immoral to kill a child up to two years of age because the child is not “self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time.

    Manny,

    You are hitting it perfectly here. This is the moral slippery slope that you’ve heard about. However, in recent years it is more like a moral cliff that we’ve fallen off of. Part of the great trend toward nihilism that started at the beginning of the 20th century is a belief in total moral relativism. What you should get from Singer here is the hint that the SOB still feels guilty about his total moral relativism. He must manufacture this bizarre explanation about “self-awareness” to justify not considering a two-year-old child a living human being with rights. Let’s get down to it. The child turns out to be more of an inconvenience than the parents thought. So they want to terminate, liquidate, kill, murder a small innocent human being to get out from under their mistake.

    The answer should be No, No, No…one thousand times and more, NO! We have professors losing their hard-earned careers because some SJW loser thinks that their professional opinions backed up by hard facts don’t conform to the SJW’s childlike ideas. If these idiot SJWs really had even a clue about Justice they’d demand that Singer be kicked out of whatever cushy tenured spot he’s in and pronto.

    Regards,

    Jim

    Agreed. Thank you Jim.

    • #6
    • January 17, 2019, at 12:10 PM PST
    • Like
  7. Manny Member
    Manny

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Yes, it is possible to expand abortion in New York. Ethnic groups other than blacks can raise their abortion rates to the abortion rates of blacks, which statewide have about as many abortions as live births, and in New York City, have a much higher number of abortions than live births (i.e., more black babies die in abortion than are born).

    This article (I know nothing of the author) compares New York and Texas. It is a couple of years old, but she seems to be using real data:

    https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/nov/25/cynthia-meyer/cynthia-meyer-says-more-black-babies-are-aborted-n/

    Jason Riley, more recently (July 2018) in the Wall Street Journal:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697

    I wonder what the objective is of Democrats who want to expand abortion when black women have far more abortions than women of other ethnic groups. A much higher proportion of black pregnancies end in abortion in New York than in other states. Democrats are fond of citing “disparate impact” among racial groups as indicative of racial animus. Do Democrats want us to take their efforts to expand a procedure that results in a highly disproportionate share of black deaths in a state with an already high rate of death to black babies to indicate that that they want more black babies to die?

    It’s so sad about African-American abortion rates. It’s really disturbing.

    • #7
    • January 17, 2019, at 12:12 PM PST
    • 7 likes
  8. Flicker Coolidge

    A man once told me that, and he was speaking in all honesty, “a baby is not a person until its first breath!” I might know where he got that from, but I really don’t. But this thinking does leave one open to an interpretation of human life that allows, forgive the ghastliness of the thought, that allows a doctor or nurse (or father or mother) to clamp a hand over a newborn to effectively prevent it from breathing until it is clinically dead. If such arbitrary definitions of life and of human value (and sacredness) are allowed to stand unchallenged in open discourse, and by otherwise intelligent people, then yes, infanticide is next and just around the corner.

    • #8
    • January 17, 2019, at 12:17 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  9. GrannyDude Member

    Flicker (View Comment):

    A man once told me that, and he was speaking in all honesty, “a baby is not a person until its first breath!” I might know where he got that from, but I really don’t. But this thinking does leave one open to an interpretation of human life that allows, forgive the ghastliness of the thought, that allows a doctor or nurse (or father or mother) to clamp a hand over a newborn to effectively prevent it from breathing until it is clinically dead. If such arbitrary definitions of life and of human value (and sacredness) are allowed to stand unchallenged in open discourse, and by otherwise intelligent people, then yes, infanticide is next and just around the corner.

    There’s an eight second video embedded in this article that is worth seeing. I’ve watched it about a dozen times already. 

    https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/17/video-just-eight-weeks-conception-tiny-baby-kicks-arms-legs/

    Yup. That’s a baby.

    • #9
    • January 17, 2019, at 12:54 PM PST
    • 10 likes
  10. GrannyDude Member

    Prayers for you, Manny. God bless you all.

     

    • #10
    • January 17, 2019, at 1:12 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  11. Manny Member
    Manny

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    Prayers for you, Manny. God bless you all.

     

    Thank you. 

    • #11
    • January 17, 2019, at 3:27 PM PST
    • Like
  12. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    So.

    A. Apparently the “party of science” now thinks some kind of miracle happens in the 4 inch trip down the vagina that makes you a person.

    B. Does this mean no more murder charges when someone attacks a pregnant women causing the death of any fetus, even in the woman was on the way to the hospital to deliver her full term infant?

     

     

    • #12
    • January 17, 2019, at 3:46 PM PST
    • 11 likes
  13. Full Size Tabby Member

    Kozak (View Comment):
    B. Does this mean no more murder charges when someone attacks a pregnant women causing the death of any fetus, even in the woman was on the way to the hospital to deliver her full term infant?

    I believe that is one of the concerns that has been expressed about the way the new law is written. It was written specifically to deny personhood to a baby that had not yet been born, which could have an effect in the applicability of laws other than those specific to abortion.

    • #13
    • January 17, 2019, at 4:18 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  14. Scott Wilmot Member

    May you and all the other marchers, through your heroic witness, change hearts and minds. God bless you all.

    • #14
    • January 17, 2019, at 4:41 PM PST
    • 8 likes
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor

    Thanks for this OP, Manny, and for going to the March. G-d bless. 

    • #15
    • January 17, 2019, at 5:42 PM PST
    • 7 likes
  16. Ralphie Member

    Flicker (View Comment):
    A man once told me that, and he was speaking in all honesty, “a baby is not a person until its first breath!

    That was Gosnell’s defense of aborting viable babies. And he used God to boot.

    • #16
    • January 17, 2019, at 7:48 PM PST
    • 5 likes
  17. James Lileks Contributor

    Kozak (View Comment):
    A. Apparently the “party of science” now thinks some kind of miracle happens in the 4 inch trip down the vagina that makes you a person.

    Many people seem to believe personhood is bestowed when the spare room is decorated and the sonogram put on the fridge with a magnet. Otherwise, it’s a matter of opinion.

    • #17
    • January 17, 2019, at 8:06 PM PST
    • 7 likes
  18. Manny Member
    Manny

    Thank you all.

    • #18
    • January 17, 2019, at 8:14 PM PST
    • Like
  19. Flicker Coolidge

    Ralphie (View Comment):
    That was Gosnell’s defense of aborting viable babies. And he used God to boot.

    I didn’t know that. Is that a common interpretation?

    • #19
    • January 17, 2019, at 8:35 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  20. Chris Hutchinson Coolidge

    Manny: I’ll be going to my fourth March for Life march tomorrow down in DC. We in the pro-life movement are winning! We are turning the tide. If you can’t be there, say a prayer to end this satanic practice.

    Thank you for doing that, Manny! May God Bless you and all the others fighting this cruel injustice and use y’all to continue to open eyes, and change hearts and minds.

    • #20
    • January 18, 2019, at 12:46 AM PST
    • 1 like
  21. Saint Augustine Member

    Those dang philosophers.

    • #21
    • January 18, 2019, at 3:34 AM PST
    • 1 like
  22. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):
    A. Apparently the “party of science” now thinks some kind of miracle happens in the 4 inch trip down the vagina that makes you a person.

    Many people seem to believe personhood is bestowed when the spare room is decorated and the sonogram put on the fridge with a magnet. Otherwise, it’s a matter of opinion.

    To some of our more advanced philosophers, NY might consider 4th ( or later) trimester abortions I mean it’s just a matter of opinion.

    According to Dr Singer, not a person..

    • #22
    • January 18, 2019, at 4:07 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  23. Scott Wilmot Member

    Information on the March for Life.

    • #23
    • January 18, 2019, at 4:17 AM PST
    • Like
  24. Full Size Tabby Member

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ralphie (View Comment):
    That was Gosnell’s defense of aborting viable babies. And he used God to boot.

    I didn’t know that. Is that a common interpretation?

    I have heard that interpretation from other Christians. The basis is Genesis 2:7 “. . . then the LORD God formed the ma of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.” The logic is that man did not become a “living creature” until the LORD God breathed life into his nostrils.

    [I don’t agree with this interpretation for several reasons, but the interpretation is out there.]

    • #24
    • January 18, 2019, at 5:52 AM PST
    • Like
  25. Old Bathos Moderator

    People who kill their own children are at a distinct Darwinian disadvantage when it comes to influencing future culture and policy. Despite near-total ownership of academia, entertainment, social media, federal, state, local and corporate bureaucracies and the news media the pro-death ideologues are losing ground on the issue of abortion. And apparently that surprises them.

    Watching godless demagogues attack Catholic judicial nominees and the Christian practices and beliefs of the Vice President and his wife calls to mind various old Roman persecutions of Christians (and Jews) for the notion that God is not just another god from which one can pick and choose depending on the favors sought at the moment. Christians were thought to be intolerant for holding to such a faith and this offended Roman elites as it does modern pagan elites.

    The political mission if we can’t eradicate destructive ideologies is to prevent them from taking us with them over the cliff. We are currently more in the latter mode.

    • #25
    • January 18, 2019, at 6:00 AM PST
    • 1 like
  26. RyanFalcone Member

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Yes, it is possible to expand abortion in New York. Ethnic groups other than blacks can raise their abortion rates to the abortion rates of blacks, which statewide have about as many abortions as live births, and in New York City, have a much higher number of abortions than live births (i.e., more black babies die in abortion than are born).

    This article (I know nothing of the author) compares New York and Texas. It is a couple of years old, but she seems to be using real data:

    https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/nov/25/cynthia-meyer/cynthia-meyer-says-more-black-babies-are-aborted-n/

    Jason Riley, more recently (July 2018) in the Wall Street Journal:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697

    I wonder what the objective is of Democrats who want to expand abortion when black women have far more abortions than women of other ethnic groups. A much higher proportion of black pregnancies end in abortion in New York than in other states. Democrats are fond of citing “disparate impact” among racial groups as indicative of racial animus. Do Democrats want us to take their efforts to expand a procedure that results in a highly disproportionate share of black deaths in a state with an already high rate of death to black babies to indicate that that they want more black babies to die?

    The Democrats objective has always been and always will be Feudalism. Population control is a big part of their plan. Remember, for them, the pie is supposed to remain the same forever and they are supposed to be the ones doling out the slices. For them, only enough slaves as needed are to be born. You can’t have undesirables just milling about. The days of sending them to the new world are over. They must keep the pie small (no nuclear, no GMO, no private enterprise) and keep population small (abortion, no DDT, constant war and famine).

    • #26
    • January 18, 2019, at 6:01 AM PST
    • 1 like
  27. Flicker Coolidge

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    The logic is that man did not become a “living creature” until the LORD God breathed life into his nostrils.

    Yes, and that’s why I wrote that I might know where that came from, but not with this man; he was by no means at all a Christian, and specifically claimed not to be.

    But even so, Adam was still just “dust” at that point, not a heaving kicking mass of cells trying to breathe and cry out, and not created from other biologic life after its own kind, if you take the Biblical account as fact (and I do). Adam was different; he was created from scratch and his navel was only a show navel — assuming that he even had one. (I made that term up myself.)

    But this was not an ignorant guy, really, so I wondered at the time if that was in some way a common view, or perhaps a legal one (this was a few years after Roe). I mean, even as a young man I thought is was ridiculous to say that a baby isn’t alive until it breathes; and so it must be a legal interpretation.

    • #27
    • January 18, 2019, at 7:10 AM PST
    • Like
  28. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama Toad Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I’ve been on the March many times, but my health makes it tough.

    It’s usually bitter cold, and often snowing.

    My elder daughter is there today with a group of her friends. They all brought their snow pants, hats, mittens, and hand warmers.

    Prayer for all the marchers.

    Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us! She Who Crushes the Stone Serpent, pray for us!

    (It won’t be the first time she protects us from the horrors of human sacrifice.)

    • #28
    • January 18, 2019, at 7:55 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  29. JamesSalerno Coolidge

    I hate my state so much.

    • #29
    • January 18, 2019, at 8:23 AM PST
    • 1 like
  30. Unsk Member

    “I wonder what the objective is of Democrats who want to expand abortion when black women have far more abortions than women of other ethnic groups.”

    Abortion is a big and profitable business. Planned Parenthood, purveyor of so many abortions, is a huge multi-million dollar donor to the Democratic party. Nancy, Hillary and Mario are just rendering services, albeit thoroughly immoral, for their payoffs, pay to play style which is standard operating procedure for the Democrats. 

    • #30
    • January 18, 2019, at 8:51 AM PST
    • 2 likes

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.