You are here

Is Obama an Extreme Abortion Proponet

Here is a discussion transferred from Frank Turek’s site. The issue is whether is Obama is the most extreme proponent of abortion:

People have an instinct for murder, which many try to redefine as choice insofar as abortion is concerned. Let’s examine a real-life fact. Nanking. This is a city in China that the Japanese destroyed and tortured early in WWII. Some call it the rape of Nanking because of all the witnessed rapes. There is a movie, Nanking, that sets out the facts with eyewitness Japanese and Chinese. At least one story is relevant here. The Chinese man (crying) described how a Japanese soldier stuck his bayonet into the anus of his infant brother and threw him aside; the infant managed to crawl back to his mother. The mortally-wounded mother breast-fed her baby in an attempt to comfort him.

If anyone has any doubts about the character of the Japanese (human) soldier in WWII, let me say that my Marine Daddy saw unbelievable Japanese atrocities.

The responses were:

^Um…okay, really tear-jerking and poetic, but what does that have to do with this discussion?

and

Thanks Paul, do you want to hear a load of stories of Christians torturing, murdering and lynching black men in the Deep South?

My rebuttal was:

But how is the murder of the Nanking infant different from an abortion or a partial birth abortion or the murder of an infant that survived an abortion, as Obama is in favor of?

The response was:

But how is the murder of the Nanking infant different from an abortion or a partial birth abortion or the murder of an infant that survived an abortion, as Obama is in favor of?

The response was:

Well, for one, I don’t know any abortion procedures that involve sodomizing a baby with a beatstick. Also, baby =/= fetus.

My proposed response is as follows:

Isn’t it true that in everyday usage sodomy is the use of a human male’s penis to penetrate the anus of another human? If yes, isn’t the use of the word sodomy an obvious attempt to nominalize the cross-examination and to not respond?

Isn’t it true that a bayonet is a sharp instrument? If the answer is yes, how is penetrating an infant’s body with a bayonet different from using other sharp instruments to slice up an unborn infant, to suction out the unborn infant’s brains, or to slice up an infant that survives an abortion?

Forum: 
Share/Save

Sorry, I screwed up by repeating my response twice:

The response was:

But how is the murder of the Nanking infant different from an abortion or a partial birth abortion or the murder of an infant that survived an abortion, as Obama is in favor of?

The latter is particuarly sick because his own mother is doing it to him.

Of what possible relevance are Obama’s opinions on abortion? And why compare late term abortion to the Nanking Massacre as opposed to any number of other modern horrors?

The Democrats won the election and it is going to make absolutely no difference vis-a-vis abortion. Get over it. It can’t get any worse than it already is. Unlimited and unrestricted abortions are a fact and have been a settled issue for decades and there is no prospect for changing this in any way whatsoever under our present form of government. None.

It is now officially a “right” and outside the purview of any democratic process. There was no change under Ronald Reagan, no change under George H.W. Bush, no change under George W. Bush (with Republican control of both houses of Congress), and there would have been no change to this under John McCain either.

It should be encouraging to this Website’s fellow travelers that no one has posted a rational argument distinguishing the slicing up of a born infant through the anus with a bayonet from slicing up an unborn infant through other avenues with other sharp instruments.

This is a tough position, considering many of us have relatives who have aborted their babies. Take inspiration from the German Schindler of Schindler’s List fame, even if you would not take the risks he did. So far, you can still dissent without risking physical harm by the politically correct. But this could change fast. So remain inspired.

I’m not the most stout-hearted fellow and the scenario you depicted really upset me whether or not it really happened (I’ve no doubt people are capable of such things).

A couple of distinctions pop into my mind. The first act described involves the consent and participation of the person whose supposed to love the baby more than anyone. The second is worse than cold-blooded, it’s perversely cruel.

But really, how can we make distinctions between the monstrous and the monstrous which is your basic point. I don’t think it’s a tough position to take. It is what it is.

What can I say? We live surrounded by a pagan death cult. I don’t think you can decisively win these arguments, Paul. In my experience, people either “get it” or they don’t.