Tag Archives: Pro-life

Good Nazis vote NEIN!

I’m publishing this blog out of my normal schedule (yeah, I know, my schedule hasn’t always been “normal”) because today is election day in Mississippi and I’m feeling compelled to blog about one of the items up for vote. Mostly because of some of the spirited debate I read on Facebook. Ha! So, if you’re not from Mississippi, come back next week, as this may not interest you at all. Or, it might.

Proposition 26 reads: “Should the term ‘person’ be defined to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof?”

Pure and simple, this is an anti-abortion proposition, not one about birth-control. Many Mississippians are tired of sitting idly by and watching babies killed. We don’t want to be like the “silent Germans” who sat back and watched the Nazis kill millions of Jews. Of course, if you listen to the pro-abortion folks, they are hot and heavy trying to convince the folks of Mississippi that the amendment will take away their birth-control and their right to have it. This is, of course, not true. But you’ve got to look deep and wide to see that because the “NO” propaganda machine is very, very good.

I’ll go so far as to say this: Those who vote “no” on Proposition 26 are little better than the Germans who turned a blind eye on the Nazis. Wow, some of you have your hackles up, now. Good! Let me explain to you what I mean by that.

The Nazi propaganda machine was also very good. To deny that would be to admit ignorance of history—and there is a lot of that running around in our nation. But I’ll assume anyone reading here won’t deny that historical judgment. That the Nazis killed millions of Jews is historical fact. Are we ready to believe that every single German person hated Jews and wanted to see them exterminated? I don’t think so. I don’t think we’re ready to believe that even a majority of them were simply that evil. The Germans are pretty much like people all over the world.

So the Nazi propaganda machine had to convince the general German populace that the Jews were sub-human, less than human, and far inferior to the German people. By thinking of them as less than human, it was easy to mistreat—and ultimately kill—them. Slavery, as much as it is still a healing wound in the U.S., was pretty much the same. Black Americans were considered less than human and that helped give American justification for their poor treatment, which lasted long after slavery was over. American Indians the same: they were called savages, less than human.

You see what’s happening, right? Those who ran those propaganda machines successfully convinced enough of the population that those people groups really weren’t human at all, therefore it was about the equivalent of kicking your dog.

Now, in 2011, the pro-abortionist propaganda machine has done the same thing. They have, for some time, successfully called the baby in the womb “fetus,” “embryo,” “fertilized egg.” These terms all de-humanize what’s in the womb so that we don’t feel so bad about killing it. Plus, this life is inside another human being and therefore it should be her decision whether to kill it or not. The frequent and consistent use of these terms has made unborn babies less than human.

Have you noticed when women get pregnant, people never say “oh! You’re going to have an embryo! That’s exciting!”

Science helps us out here, too. The heart starts beating at about 18 days, much before the mom or doctor even notices it.

So, go ahead. Be a good Nazi, and vote “no” on Proposition 26 today. I, on the other hand and even though some may curse me, will vote “yes” in an attempt to be a voice for those who have been deemed less than human.


Filed under General

Abandoning my Pro-life stance

Well, with all this change going on in the USSA, and seeing how this Friday is so changed from last Friday, I think it’s time that I change with the times, go with the flow, jump on the bandwagon and whatever else other cliché you’d like to fill in there.

For many many years I’ve been Pro-life. I’ve just never believed that one person has the right to kill another without repercussions, whether that person be 60, 30, 13, 3 or -.5. I’ve often wondered why the Pro-killer group was so anxious to kill babies, yet in the same breath toss a man in jail for kicking a dog. I just don’t get it. A man’s not a man unless he kicks his dog a few times a day.

But since the Roe v. Wade thing, the gimme-death-not-liberty group has tried to convince the American public that the baby inside a woman isn’t really a “person,” but just a blog of cells. I guess they forgot that for the past 10,000 years all societies have referred to pregnant women as “with child” and in other ways that reflect the fact there’s a life inside; we even call pregnant women “mommy.”

And, almost always the murder comes because the murdered child is unwanted by the birth female. Yes, I know that sometimes there are health complications when life and death is in the balance—I said “almost always.” Even in the case, or maybe especially in the case of rape, this is the case.

But since it is currently very legal to kill the unwanted unborn, I think with the new “changed” America, we should further expand Roe v. Wade to include the killing of all unwanted people. Wait, that’s probably too vague. Maybe it should be all unwanted and helpless people. Since we kill the unwanteds before birth, maybe we should look at aborting unwanted helpless people after birth and especially at the other end of life when people once again tend to be helpless. After all, nursing homes are filled to capacity in most places with old people that the families no longer are able or wish to care for. And since our economy is in such a terrible shape and the government is always worried about (and taking money from) Social Security, think of the money it would save not just the government, but families and businesses and insurance companies.

And, the abortion clinics—making money hand over fist and giving much of that to Planned Parenthood—could also take on the responsibility of aborting old people. They stand to make a killing (sorry, pun intended), at least for the first decade or so.

After that, they could move to people who are neither young nor old, but are equally helpless…more specifically, the mentally deficient. There would definitely need to be choice here, as some of those people are actually very loved. So it would just be the unloved ones.

And if you don’t get by now this entire post is tongue-in-cheek, don’t leave this page before reading that is indeed the case. When will we stop legalized murder?


Filed under Columns