There is nothing in all of creation that puts a woman more in touch with what it means to be female than having children. This does not mean to imply that's all women are good for, only that the process of carrying a child and giving birth is something uniquely female. By promoting abortion and the abandonment of children and family, women are being emotionally, mentally, and even physically scarred for life. Feminists, in their vile, ruthlessly brutal lust to butcher babies even stand against something as simple as "partial birth" abortion. This is both heinous, vile, ruthless, and wicked.
?The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it" Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in "Women and the New Rage," p.67.
"[A]ny pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say, yes, it kills a fetus." Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood, said in Ms. Magazine in 1997 -- Testimony of Maria Parker, M.B.A., Associate Director of Public Policy, Massachusetts Catholic Conference on Woman's Right to Know Bill Providing for Informed Consent on Abortion, to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Judiciary, May 17, 2001, found at: http://www.macathconf.org/testimony_on_informed_consent_ma.htm .
"[M]any blacks wonder whether black civil rights and abortion fit so neatly together. Black pregnancies have historically been the target of social engineers such as Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. Sanger was convinced that blacks, Jews, Eastern Europeans, and other non-Aryan groups were detracting from the creative intellect and social potential of America, and she wanted those groups' numbers reduced..." -- Greg Keath, in the "Wall Street Journal", 27/9/89
In response to a question concerning China's policy of compulsory abortion after the first child, Molly Yard responded, "I consider the Chinese government's policy among the most intelligent in the world" Gary Bauer, "Abetting Coercion in China," The Washington Times", October 10, 1989.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forty-two amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," briefs were filed on behalf of "Roe." A "woman's brief" argued, as author Marian Faux summarizes it, "that even if a fetus were found to be a legal person, a woman still could not be compelled to nurture it in her body against her will." Prominent women such as theologian Mary Daly, Barnard College president Millicent McIntosh, anthropologist Margaret Mead, and former U.S. senator Maurine B. Neuberger (D-Oregon), all signed it.
"that even if a fetus were found to be a legal person, a woman still could not be compelled to nurture it in her body against her will."
Consider this statement a moment, put another way, even if a fetus were a legal person, a woman could not be compelled TO LET IT LIVE (i.e. COMMIT FIRST DEGREE MURDER). And we wonder why Child Abuse is so high among those same women that buy into the Feminist party line and do not value marriage, OR LIFE!!! Was infanticide (child murder) the feminist goal all along??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
?[The unborn victims of violence act] would establish penalties for those who harm a fetus, either knowingly or unknowingly, while committing a federal crime-such as bank robbery, kidnapping or terrorism This bill is yet another attempt to limit and restrict a woman?s right to choose.? N.O.W. September 15, 1999 Legislative update. (Apparently, NOW?s version of ?choice? also includes FORCED ABORTIONS during the commission of a crime. The ?choice? is no longer a woman?s. According to NOW, If she WANTS the child, TOO BAD IF IT IS MURDERED DURING A CRIME!)
NOW apparently ENDORSES Domestic Violence against children. And just in case you think it is just HOUSTON NOW, think again. This little excerpt from the article tells the tale of the NATIONAL SUPPORT by NOW.
NOW Rallies to Mother's Defense. Group Says Woman Needs Help, Not Prison, in Drowning of 5 Children. By Paul Duggan, Washington Post Staff Writer, Monday, September 3, 2001; Page A03. excerpts below?
"From what we know right now, [Yates's] psychosis is so obvious and her mental illness is so heart-wrenching that clearly she's entitled to treatment and not punishment," declared Terry O'Neill, a NOW vice president in Washington. She said the group's national leadership ?completely supports? [NOW's Texas state president, Deborah Bell?s] efforts, which have been denounced by victims' rights advocates, media pundits and others.?
Dianne Clements, a Rosenthal supporter and head of Justice for All, Texas's biggest victims' rights organization, reacted angrily to NOW's criticism. "I don't believe they should be using their political power and prestige to help a woman who has acknowledged killing five children," Clements said. She accused NOW of "prejudging" Yates based on liberal ideals before a word of testimony has been heard.
"They've decided to seek absolution for Andrea Yates," Clements said. "They've absolutely accepted that she's not responsible for what she did before they've heard any facts in court. . . . None of us can say why she killed those children, whether it was because she was psychotic or she was just plain evil."
"Such a [post-partum depression] defense, however, is not novel," wrote Dallas lawyer Brenda Barton Neuwirt in the Southern Methodist University Law Review. In a 1998 article, she recounted successful postpartum psychosis defenses by a California mother who intentionally ran over her infant with a car and a New York woman who smothered two of her babies and tried to smother a third.
She also cited the highly publicized D.C. Superior Court case of LaTrena Pixley, who pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in 1993 in the suffocation of her infant daughter. At her sentencing, after a defense lawyer submitted a psychiatrist's report attributing the crime partly to postpartum depression, the judge stunned the court by ordering Pixley, then 20, to spend weekends in jail for three years.
Yates's sympathizers tend to lose sight of an important element of the tragedy.
"You know what I think [Rosenthal, the D.A.] saw when he looked at this case?" Clements said. "I think he saw the same thing I saw: five beautiful children, dead."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOW Throwing Lifebelt to Mom who Drowned Five Kids.
Phil Brennan. Thursday August 30, 2001
NewsMax.com. Excerpts below?
The National Organization for Women (NOW), which couldn't bring itself to lend aid and comfort to rape victim Juanita Broaddrick, is going all out to help a woman who drowned her five children.
According to the ultra-liberal feminist organization, NOW is helping to raise money for Andrea Yates on the grounds that their involvement might help raise people's consciousness about post-partum depression.
Now opposes the death penalty except for the victims of the abortion industry which they vigorously support.
Yates admitted to police that she drowned her children one-by-one in a bathtub. She revealed that when it came the turn of her oldest child he fled and she had to chase him down and drag him back to the tub.
Not surprisingly, NOW has been joined by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), several other women's and health groups and anti-death penalty organizations in the Andrea Pia Yates Support Coalition.
One reason for their support, observers say, could be that the pro-abortion NOW may view such child killing as merely retroactive abortion, and therefore worthy of their support of the killer.
Original content is Copyrighted © by NoDNC.com . Original author(s) retain their own copyright(s). Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment.
