Liberal Scientists Murder Healthy Baby Natasha, Because ”She Was Handicapped”
2/27/2012 5:52 P.M:
I had a realization about five minutes ago: If abortion supporters justify abortion, the murder of a baby on the inside of another human’s body by saying, “A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body” or “We have the right to…” then using that logic shouldn’t they also approve of murdering people outside of their own body, since they say they can do what they want with their body? Because doing whatever you want would include ANYTHING, not just anything TO YOUR OWN BODY. And so they should also approve of taking whatever drug we want to, eating whatever we want to, suicide and external torture of others, murder (murdering people outside the body), torture and death penalties. Further evidence of their contradictory justification and hypocrisy is if they claim they simply have been poorly wording their justification and meant what I stated here, which is “OWN BODY” they would be evidently lying, since pro-abortionists ALWAYS SUPPORT using ANOTHER HUMAN to murder the baby OF ANOTHER HUMAN, in other words, using someone elses help, like a practiced abortionist or using the help of the one who got them pregnant if no one else will. No pro-choice person as far as I know in my my long experience in life, has ever said, “You should abort your own baby by yourself.” Although I am sure there are people who though supporting “a woman’s right to choose” who wouldn’t, and who would say something like, “You let yourself get pregnant, be responsible for killing your own baby then and don’t involve someone else who had nothing to do with it, except probably in the case of rape.” But, I no of no one who has ever said that, so I am confident to say all abortion-supporters are contradictory hypocrites who support the worst kind of murder: murdering a defenseless baby while it’s still being formed within it’s mother. Not even attempting to kill a child who can run, and who can be argued has already committed some bad sins, by being unthankful to its parents after a few years of kindness, and being a trouble-maker, but a baby who has barely had a chance to live, who hasn’t even breathed air yet.
Further, it’s now a known fact that most people abort a baby out of “convenience,” making these abortion-supporters all the more evil, since the majority of them aren’t doing it for some noble reason like they might want Christians to think, like, “To keep the population down, so others can live without starving and being in great pain, and to keep people from living miserably from being very poor and being oppressed by the rich,” no, it’s so, “I can live more comfortably.” So, a brutal murder of the most least bad humans of all so you can afford more barbecue or tofu, soy milk, have more carefree sex, parties, relaxation, sleep, an easier time in school and a better social life, just forget about the person you murdered or about to be murdered never getting to experience those things on Earth. And how convenient for the ones that believe in reincarnation: “It’ll be someone elses problem, and eventually someone won’t abort them and they will be born to a well-off family or someone who is willing to suffer dealing with a kid.” And some, especially atheists, justify baby-murder as “punishment of rapists” (and rapists care? all rapists? rapists aren’t interested in sex it’s about making babies?). Using that logic how can they then bash God and the Bible for “punishing the children for the sins of their fathers” as he once did, or punishing anyone to teach someone else “a lesson” or scare them or punish them somehow so they won’t “sin” again? And how hypocritical for the abortion supporters who condemn capitalism and living an “excessive” life-style and who believe in being one with nature, who justify abortion for “convenience”; I’m sure hypocrites like that exist because I encounter incredibly stupid, hypocritical and contradictory people often. There is another point of hypocrisy with pro-choicers: Why do they say, “It’s a woman’s right to choose” rather than “It’s a female’s right to choose” being that as far as I’ve read and heard, they also support the right of a 12 year old to abort her baby. And being that they support that, and being that many of them also support homosexual (gay and lesbian) preteen sex, shouldn’t they also support the right of pre-teens to have sex whenever they want to, and with anyone of any age? Why y if they can “choose their own sexuality, have sex with the same sex while still a preteen, and brutally murder their own baby while it’s even still inside of them without their parents consent” would it be “a sin” or “immoral” or “unethical” or “bad karma” as all these confused and confusing groups say, who can hardly get along with each other at times, draw the line at a pre-teen or teen having sex with someone one or two years older or younger or much older or younger, at some age difference that they can’t agree on? Many don’t even realize that marrying age laws differ from state to state and country to country, and that they simply believe what they do due to cult-like brainwashing and blindly and arbitrarily following perverted old men and women in the government (and the lobbyists who bribe them) who hate them or believe that they are superior to them. They sure do love to oppose them though when these old perverted men when it comes to religion in public and private (free speech issues), same-sex sexuality issues, saving “nature” and baby-killing (and baby killing is okay for many liberal “save the trees, chickens, cows and Lady Gaga” people), but uh oh, bad if a kid wants to have sex with an adult. And many conservatives, libertarians and liberals think or say they think that that isn’t possible, maybe because they’ve been living in underground caves watching CNN, Fox News or Nickelodeon all day and were ugly all throughout their childhood and young adult years and their parents had them playing with stupid toys or studying all day. Either they are pretending they don’t think it’s possible out of some collective paranoia, or they really are that stupid, ignorant and unaware of the obvious. And why for those who call preteens and people up to 21 even, “kids” do they approve of them doing drugs, aborting, and having sex, but just not with someone some arbitrary number of years younger or older than them?! And if they are so against Christians judging others, and saying who should be able to have sex with who, let alone murdering a bay being right or not, why then do they often become infuriated at the thought of a “kid” having sex with an adult or even just flirting with one, or “worse”, if the adult flirts back or allows the kid to have sex with them? Why the crazy standards? Can anyone explain away all these hypocritical standards and judgments? Only a stupid, arrogant, evil person who didn’t bother to read this article carefully would believe they could.
Clearly, to those who aren’t spiritually blind, pro-abortionists have exchanged God for temporary comfort and truth for ignorant “bliss” and have seared their conscience and deluded themselves into thinking to murder the innocent for whatever reason is better than being inconvenienced and struggling in life, and as a result are callous, cold-hearted, shallow and deeply confused.