Friday, March 29, 2013

A New Level of Utter Depravity in this Country  

"Alisa LaPolt Snow, the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor."

This is the FIRST time ever that Planned Parenthood has come out and supported this—and without any shame.

This is their head lobbyist giving their official position. These people are monsters.

This is pure Satanic evil.

We are living in dark days.


  1. Meanwhile, somewhere in New Jersey, Peter Singer nods approvingly while finishing his garden salad.

  2. There was a report last year regarding two "ethicists" from Australia. They posited an ethical construct of a "potential person" with respect to new-borns that would open the door to post-partum abortion (murder) a la Pete Singer.

    This is enormously troubling for at least two reasons;

    1) It attempts to strip the God-given right to life of a person made in God's Own image through the assignment of an arbitrary category of "potential person".

    2) The category of "potential person" is an arbitrary contrivance; it fails to attach to any objectively verifiable criteria. There is no universal standard of attributes that can be used as a classifying device for the purposes of determining whether or not a human has entered or exited a (the?) state of "potentiality". Therefore, each person's status is left up to the determination of others. Since the definition is elastic it should be obvious that it is open to abuse; each will decide for themselves right and wrong.

    In fact, we have already entered in to that state of affairs as a society. Acceptance of abortion on demand has already allowed for the existence of a dichotomy as far as whether to regard a fetus as a baby (person) or as a "mass of cells" (unperson). The status of the baby is determined by the intent of the mother. Recently, a jury awarded the parents of a Downs Syndrome child in a "wrongful birth" suit nearly $3 million dollars because they were led to believe the baby would be normal. The parents would have aborted the baby if the tests had come back indicating Downs.

    Since whether or not to abort a child in utero is determined on the basis of personal preference, the next logical step (which has been vehemently denied by the pro-abortion left as slippery slopism) is to permit ex utero abortion (murder). Partial birth (delivery) abortions are already allowed and the case for expanded availibility is being pursued.

    Over time, the unthinkable becomes theoretical. The theoretical becomes justifiable in "extreme cases". The extreme cases make way for more mundane cases, etc... So yes, it is a slippery slope. That's what happens when the Word of God is replaced by the word of man.

    This won't stop at babies. Now that "wrongful birth" has become an acceptable legal argument, the stage is set for "wrongful life". Look at the number of aging Americans. The Baby Boomer generation will not sit idly by as their parents are warehoused in nursing homes at exorbitant cost. We will see more and more people making the quality of life argument replete with tearful testimonies that their loved ones would not want to continue on "this way" and "release" will be granted as the "humane" way to "allow" loved ones to pass on with "dignity". As economic circumstances become worse, the motivation to eliminate those that are a burden financially or via time commitments (which eat into earnings) grows.

    Not only are we on the slippery slope, I believe that the bottom is coming into view.

  3. I would not be opposed to a Pretrib rapture.

  4. The argument being presented is not too much of a jump from what has been argued before. That is if the decision to abort has been made, then, regardless of the result, it should be able to be carried out. Though I think the person giving testimony was too evasive in answering too see a bigger jump should be noted.

    As horrible as the statement is, it still is not too much of a jump from what was said in the past. And this advocacy is not just from our society's current ride on the slippery slope. We have to recognize that when the pillars of society, such as the business community, can live by the ethic of maximize profits, which says it is all about what I can get without having any responsibilities, then many other groups and people will follow.

  5. That was just way too difficult to watch. The emtotions it stirrs in me, at least, are not good. It is simply beyond my ability to comprehend how this woman could argue in this manner. It is a very clear testimony and witness of just how sinful sin can be and how utterly deceiving it can become. But for grace! But for grace!