Gianna Jessen | Abortion Survivor | Nascida durante aborto por envenenamento salino

Hillary’s Freudian Slip is Showing. Refers to Unborn as “Person”. Uh Oh. by kingsjester

This is a debate about our understanding of human dignity, what it means to be a member of the human family, even though tiny, powerless and unwanted. – Henry Hyde

[Where am I? This is July…not January. What are all these bright lights? What’s that smell? I don’t understand. I was inside my mother, sucking my thumb, all nice and safe and warm. The next thing I know, I feel this pressure on either side of my head, and I was ripped out of my mother.

Why is this happening to me? I have a whole life ahead of me.

I deserve a Mother and a Father. I will never have those. Grandparents, either. Heck, I won’t even get to know my cousins.

I want to know what milk tastes like. I want to hold a Cheerio in my hand and put it in my mouth. I want to know what it’s like to get my first tooth…to take my first step….to hear music for the first time. I want to hold a puppy. I want to have a first day in school. I want to have a best friend. I want to ride a bike. I want to have a best friend and go out to play with them. I want to know what Christmas is all about. I want to eat a turkey leg at Thanksgiving…and to see a fireworks display on the 4th of July. I want to wear costumes on Halloween. I want to go to ballgames with my Father.

I want to watch cartoons. I want to love and be loved.

I want to fall in love. I want to experience my first kiss. I want to have my parents drop me and my date off at the movie and then pick us up. I want to play sports in school…or be an artist…or be a musician…or, just be a kid.

I want to go to a pep rally. I want to dance at a prom. I want to get a report card. Heck, I want to taste a school lunch.

I want to graduate and go to college. I want to start work…and have a family.

I want to live!

Wait! What are you doing with those scissors! Don’t…]

I was born three days before my mother’s 40th birthday. To say I was a surprise is an understatement. As I recently wrote, I truly believe that they were going to name me “Oops”. That being said, I am grateful that God convicted them, regarding the sanctity of the life that my mother was carrying within her.

The issue of why "personhood" begins has always been a contentious one, as far as the subject of abortion is concerned.

Legally, America's legal System, time and time again, have charged those criminals who have stopped the beating hearts of both a mother and unborn baby with the crime of murder, with the leagal charge or First and Second Degree Homicide, respectively.

Yesterday, the presumed Democrat Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, throw a verbal "pipe bomb" in the middle of this already volatile argument.

The Washington Times reports that

Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton ran afoul of both the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion debate Sunday when she said constitutional rights do not apply to an “unborn person” or “child.”

“The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Mrs. Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Now that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.”

Mrs. Clinton also said “there is room for reasonable kinds of restrictions” on abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy.

Diana Arellano, manager of community engagement for Planned Parenthood Illinois Action, said Sunday that Mrs. Clinton’s comments undermined the cause for abortion rights.

The comment “further stigmatizes #abortion,” Ms. Arellano said in a tweet. “She calls a fetus an ‘unborn child’ & calls for later term restrictions.”

Describing the fetus as a “person” or “child” has long been anathema to the pro-choice movement, which argues the terms misleadingly imply a sense of humanity.

In addition, the specific term “person” is a legal concept that includes rights and statuses that the law protects, including protection of a person’s life under the laws against homicide. Pro-choice intellectuals have long said that even if an unborn child is a “life,” it is not yet a “person.”

Guidelines issued by the International Planned Parenthood Federation discourage pro-choice advocates from using terms such as “abort a child,” instead recommending “more accurate/appropriate” alternatives such as “end a pregnancy” or “have an abortion.”

“‘Abort a child’ is medically inaccurate, as the fetus is not yet a child,” the guide reads. “‘Terminate’ a pregnancy is commonly used, however some people prefer to avoid this as terminate may have negative connotations (e.g., ‘terminator or assassinate’) for some people.”

“‘Abort a child’ is medically inaccurate, as the fetus is not yet a child,” the guide reads. “‘Terminate’ a pregnancy is commonly used, however some people prefer to avoid this as terminate may have negative connotations (e.g., ‘terminator or assassinate’) for some people.”

The guidebook also advises against the terms “baby,” “dead fetus,” “unborn baby” or “unborn child” when discussing what it is that’s being aborted. Instead, it recommends the terms “embryo,” “fetus” and “the pregnancy.”

“The alternatives are medically accurate terms, as the embryo or fetus is not a baby,” it explains.

The exchange with NBC’s Chuck Todd on Sunday came after Mrs. Clinton blasted Republican front-runner Donald Trump last week for saying that women should face “some form of punishment” for having abortions if they were illegal. He later reversed his statement, multiple times, after an outcry from both pro-life and pro-choice groups.

Conservatives also caught Mrs. Clinton’s words and drew implications. Commentary Editor John Podhoretz said the gaffe is comparable to those of Mr. Trump.

“This is Trump-level gaffery,” Mr. Podhoretz said in a tweet. “If you acknowledge personhood, then the unborn has every Constitutional right.”

Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro also said that Mrs. Clinton’s statement “demonstrates just how incoherent and evil the left’s abortion position is.”

As everyone knows, who was actually paying attention, Trump responded to a "What if" scenario, in which abortion was illegal. Just like Liberals lied about Michael Brown and the "Hands up. Don't Shoot" garbage, they attempted to lie about the Trump situation, as well.

But, this post is not about Donald J. Trump.

In a speech in April of 2015 at a Women’s Summit, Democratic Presidential Hopeful, Hillary Rodham Clinton, told Christian Americans. that were going to have to change our beliefs, in regards to abortion. Breitbart.com reported at the time, that

“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced,” Hillary Clinton said at the Women in the World Summit on Thursday night. “Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper.  Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Clinton made it emphatically clear she’s not just talking about, say, the horrific abuse of women by Islamist extremists: “As I have said, and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century, and not just for women but for everyone… and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.” She pointed at the very ground she was standing upon, to emphasize the point.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that a Far Left Radical Follower of Saul Alinsky, like Hillary Rodham Clinton, should feel this way.

Hillary, like Obama, sincerely believes that she is the smartest person in any room that she happens to walk into.

There is no room in her ego-filled heart and mind, for a Supreme Being. Hillary, herself, believes that she is the sole arbiter of Right and Wrong in her life.

Have you ever tried to have a discussion with an ardent  pro-abortion supporter, either on Facebook or face-to-face? You won’t hear these “Champions of Tolerance” call those innocent lives, babies, human beings, a life, a soul, a gift from God, or anything remotely resembling something that they should feel remorse about killing.

Pro-Abortionists are opposed to the taking of sonograms of the woman’s womb, before she has an abortion. They’re afraid that the “seed-carrier” will realize that IS a HUMAN BEING inside her, and will decide not to kill that baby.

Heck, I have even, on a Facebook Political Page, run into one, so out of touch with reality, that they, to this very moment, insist that a baby is not a "person", until the moment of birth.

They insist that, until then, it is just a fetus.

Of course, I informed them that "fetus" is Latin for BABY.

But, that did not seem to matter to them.

If those in favor of abortion would acknowledge the personhood of a human being inside their mother's womb, they would also have to come to grips with a very harsh reality.

From the scientific perspective, Dr. Carlo Bellieni, in his book “Dawn of the I: Pain, Memory, Desire, Dream of the Fetus,” writes:

As soon as it is born, the child shows in a scientifically demonstrable way that it recognizes its mother’s voice and distinguishes it from that of a stranger. Where has he learned that voice other than in the maternal womb?

There are also direct proofs. For example, we register how the movements and cardiac frequency of the fetus vary if we transmit unexpected sounds through the uterine wall. And we see that at first the fetus is startled, then it gets used to it, just like we do when we hear something that does not interest us.

In fact, the scientific evidence is immense. We cannot understand how it can be thought that it becomes a person at a certain point, perhaps when coming out of the uterus.

From the physical point of view, at the birth very little really changes: Air enters the lungs, the arrival of blood from the placenta is interrupted, the type of circulation of blood in the heart changes, and not much more.

As I often say, only blind faith in magic arts or some strange divinity can lead one to think that there is a “human” quality leap at a given moment — certainly not science.

While this Presidential Election is not about Social Issues, this is an important gaffe by Hillary.

Why?

First, her Freudian Slip was showing. She called the being that a mother is carrying in her womb an "unborn PERSON", possibly having their Constitutional Rights violated by being murdered in their Mother's womb.

Second, the pure political entertainment value provided by that slip is priceless.

Hillary's "Moonwalk", in her attempt to limit the damage that her Freudian Slip caused, reminded me of Michael Jackson in his prime.

Until He Comes,

KJ

An American Genocide: It’s Time for Christians to Speak Out From the Pulpit and On the Street

Reblogged from kingsjester.wordpress.com by kingsjester

But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.  – Matthew 19:14 (KJV)

The Christian Post reports that

Christian ethicist Russell Moore has said that congregations too afraid of being political to speak out against acts of immorality, like abortion, are similar to churches in the 1800s that remained silent on the issue of slavery.

As the featured speaker at the Institute on Religion and Democracy's fifth annual Diane Knippers memorial lecture, Moore, the president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, criticized mainstream Christian congregations that have relaxed their teachings on key issues of sexual morality and other social issues in order to blend in with the "ambient culture" and appeal to today's society. 
  Moore explained that religious conservatives need to "preserve" the biblical truth for future generations. Although secular society likes to claim that Christian conservatives are on the "wrong side of history," Moore told the audience that Christian conservatives should not be afraid to have their biblical convictions conflict with mainstream society and that they should really embrace the distinctive Christian message.

"This is something that Diane Knippers saw Mainline denominations losing as they believed that the best way to connect with the generations around them was to assimilate into the sameness of the ambient culture. That is a recipe for death," Moore argued.

"It's a recipe for death, precisely for the same reasons that Jesus is speaking to Pilate about a Kingdom that does not originate from the world. Christianity always thrives the best when we have a distinctive word and a distinctive word that is rooted in a specific view of authority. Jesus said, 'I have come to bear witness for the truth.'"

"The arguments that we see happening right now over issues of human sexuality are not really about human sexuality," Moore continued. "These are debates of apostolic authority."

Despite the fact that religious conservative views on issues like gay marriage and abortion directly conflict with the views of a secular world, Moore assured that the historic Christian message has always conflicted with the world's understanding.

Although many congregations in the last 50 years have altered their views and teachings to accommodate the modern worldviews, Moore warned that churches that have historically distanced themselves from the biblical truth eventually failed to exist.

"The miraculous was startling in the first century and in every other century, so the churches who discarded it no longer had anything distinctive to say and withered and died into obscurity," Moore stated. "The churches who were willing to speak with a voice of authority about resurrection, the coming of Christ, supernatural regeneration by the Holy Spirit are the churches who had a witness to be able to bring forward."

Moore further argued that secularism is not the world's final "stopping point."

"Secularism is just a stop along the path," Moore said. "We must have a distinctive word in terms of claim to authority, and we must be willing to bear witness. We must be a conversionist people, which means that if we truly believe that the spirit of God is able to transform someone from sinner to saint, we will be the people who will not hesitate to speak the truth and to speak what often will be unpopular truths."

Churches have long been responsible for speaking the unpopular truths on social issues, not just in today's world where abortion and gay marriage are the hotly contested subjects, Moore said.

"The churches in 1845 Georgia that did not speak to slavery, were speaking to slavery," Moore said. "If you stand in the pulpit and call people to repentance for drunkenness and sexual immorality, but you do not call them to repentance for man-stealing and kidnapping and pretending to own another human being, you have spoken to that issue by saying that it will not be something for which one must give an account at the judgement."

"The churches in 1925 Mississippi that spoke about drunkenness and adultery, but did not speak about lynching, were speaking to lynching," Moore continued. "They were baptizing the status quo by not calling people to repentance for a grave sin against God and against a neighbor."

"The churches in 21st century America that do not speak to the personhood of the unborn are speaking to the personhood of the unborn by baptising the status quo and leaving consciences that are wounded and in need of Gospel liberation exactly where they are under accusation, rather than freeing them with a witness that is thought to be political."

Russell Moore makes a good point.

However, I wish to take it a step further.

Christian Americans are not in a struggle against just Christianity vs. Secularism.

We are involved in a struggle of Good vs. Evil.

In 2003, Illinois State Senator Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), spoke in front of his colleagues in defense of the infanticide known as Late-Term Abortion…

I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the Medical Society. As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child – however way you want to describe it – is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that its nonviable but there’s, lets say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just out limp and dead, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct?

While The Lightbringer was in the Illinois State Senate, he opposed a state version of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, a bill which would make sure that babies who survive abortions are given proper medical care.

This measure also protected babies who were “aborted” through a purposeful premature birth and left to die afterwards.

During Obama’s U.S. Senatorial Campaign in 2004, his opponent attacked him for supporting infanticide by voting against the above-mentioned bill. Obama responded by claiming that he had opposed the state bill because it lacked the neutrality clause found in the federal version.

The Chicago Tribune reported on October 4, 2004,

Obama said that had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal.

During Obama’s 2008 run for President, he stood by those claims.

In March, 2008, during a Townhall Meeting in Western Pennsylvania, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) said,

Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.

Of course, Barack Hussein Obama was elected President of the United States. When he was “radically changing” everything about our sacred land, blood was being spilled across the fruited plains. Especially, in that same state of Pennsylvania:

On February 18, 2010, the FBI raided the “Women’s Medical Society,” run by Dr. Kermit Gosnell, a butcher, euphemistically killing babies under the title of “Abortion Doctor”.

The FBI entered the office about 8:30 p.m. expecting to find to find evidence that it was illegally selling prescription drugs. What they found was America’s Auschwitz:

There was blood on the floor. A stench of urine filled the air. A flea-infested cat was wandering through the facility, and there were cat feces on the stairs. Semi-conscious women scheduled for abortions were moaning in the waiting room or the recovery room, where they sat on dirty recliners covered with blood-stained blankets. All the women had been sedated by unlicensed staff. They also found out that a patient had died there several months earlier.

Until 2009, Gosnell reportedly performed mostly first and second trimester abortions. But his clinic had come to develop a bad reputation, and could attract only women who couldn’t get an abortion elsewhere, former employees have said. “Steven Massof estimated that in 40 percent of the second-trimester abortions performed by Gosnell, the fetuses were beyond 24 weeks gestational age,” the grand jury states. “Latosha Lewis testified that Gosnell performed procedures over 24 weeks ‘too much to count,’ and ones up to 26 weeks ‘very often.’ …in the last few years, she testified, Gosnell increasingly saw out-of-state referrals, which were all second-trimester, or beyond. By these estimates, Gosnell performed at least four or five illegal abortions every week.”

On January 22, 2013, Obama said,

On the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we reaffirm its historic commitment to protect the health and reproductive freedom of women across this country and stand by its guiding principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters, and women should be able to make their own choices about their bodies and their health care.

The Liberal mind is fascinating.  Sick and twisted…but, fascinating. On the one hand, Obama is saying that children are to be cherished and protected. I agree.

At, the same time, he stands by a woman’s right to kill her baby. I can hear the Liberals screeching right now.

That’s not a baby. It’s a fetus! It’s not the same thing! You chauvinist pig!

(Fetus is Latin for BABY)

If cherishing God’s gift of life makes me a “chauvinist pig”, you’re darned skippy I am! Yay, pigs! Sooey! That’s not a puppy growing in there, y’all.

The blatant hypocrisy shown by Obama, his loyal minions in Congress, and the MSM, the Liberal pundits on TV and Radio, and ignorant “seminar” callers and posters on Conservative websites, in defense of  "their rights "not to be punished with a baby" and their silence regarding the American Auschwitz know as the Gosnell Case, is reminiscent of Germany in the 1930s…and positively chilling.

Remember a while back, when MSNBC Host, and resident Communist, Melissa Harris-Perry proclaimed, 

…we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility, and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.

Evidently, for Obama and the rest of the Liberals, that only applies when the child is no longer a “punishment”.

And, if Christian Americans do not speak out against this American Genocide...WHO WILL?

God help us.

Until He Comes,

KJ