You’d think that progressives who say they’re pro-women’s rights would question themselves when their policies clearly have created a gender imbalance with baby girls being aborted at alarming rates in some countries. They’re against it but they don’t even know how to argue against it because they can’t talk about the unborn as deserving of anything but scalpels.
In fact, the clearer it becomes to the world that liberals are leading the world to its ruination, the more outlandish their claims become.
This week, for example, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be discussing bills dealing with International Violence Against Women.
Janice Shaw Crouse of Townhall Magazine writes:
Feminist groups are pushing action on the legislation before the November elections — for obvious reasons. Like so many feminist proposals, the rhetoric sounds great. Is there anybody, other than the jihadists, who is not opposed to violence against women? The problems with I-VAWA are hidden in the fine print under the lofty rhetoric; the agenda is predictable: anything promoting so-called “women’s rights” is a thinly-veiled push for anti-family policies, gender quotas, and, of course, abortion-on-demand, all on a global scale…
Further, the urban myths continue alongside the long-standing practice of feminists equating a lack of “reproductive services” with “domestic violence.” The I-VAWA (Section 3) acknowledges U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325 — which, as those who are knowledgeable about the U.N. recognize, is the section that is cited as mandating the protection of reproductive rights. The I-VAWA would allocate $10 million a year to the United Nations Development Fund for Women, UNIFEM (Section 201), one of the major U.N. agencies devoted to promoting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which prominently feature reproductive and gender rights. First, note that the UNIFEM definition of domestic violence includes “psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the government of the country in which the victim is a resident” (Section 4). Second, what the American public needs to be aware of is that the U.N.’s interpretation of “psychological violence” includes “mental distress” brought on by lack of access to abortion services.
So the inclusion of money for abortion in a anti-women violence bill must mean that those who oppose funding abortion are pro-violence against women?
The sad part is that is how many pro-choicers truly view pro-lifers.
All you folks advocating for a culture of life are just simply pretending to love babies as cover for actually being pro- violence against women.
And here’s the extra kicker, Dems love putting these in 1) because they can’t get enough of promulgating the culture of death and 2) because they know that most Republicans will have to vote against it so the Dems can say in attacks ads that they voted against funding for abused women.
Read the entire piece at Townhall.
September 27, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Disgusting.
September 27, 2010 at 8:15 pm
They are just help killing girls before they are born
Stop Sex~Selective Abortion http://www.pop.org/projects/stop-sex-selective-abortion
September 27, 2010 at 9:48 pm
I guess this is what comes when pregnancy is seen as a form of oppression and abortion is a "freedom". The view of those on the side of death is so twisted they continue to drill downward in an effort to save their own lives, or theories as the case may be. Rhetoric is all they have as they cannot possibly logicize here.
September 27, 2010 at 9:56 pm
I oppose violence against women…born and unborn.
September 29, 2010 at 6:07 pm
Roe v. Wade the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing procured abortion, abortion on demand, never was and is not now about saving human life. Many people use the argument that: “abortion on demand is necessary to save the life of the mother”. Not one abortion on demand ever saved the life of the mother.
Justice is predicated on intent. Every procured abortion legalized by Roe v. Wade was intended to destroy the human being, alive and growing inside the womb. ROE V WADE NEVER SAVED THE LIFE OF ONE MOTHER. ROE V WADE WAS NEVER INTENDED TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER. ROE V WADE WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE THERAPEUTIC ABORTION THAT SAVES THE LIFE OF A MOTHER. 4,000 dead babies a day because the Supreme Court for the United States of America miscarried Justice and lied to us, all the people. 4,000 dead babies a day because we have been lied to and extorted to pay for the bloody mess.
When the pro-abortion lobby tells us that abortion to save the life of the mother is safe, legal and necessary, tell them that therapeutic abortion to save the life of the mother is not an issue in Roe v. Wade for procured abortion on demand, never has been and never will be. The difference between a therapeutic abortion and a procured abortion is that the therapeutic abortion is willed by God and the procured abortion is willed and procured by another. A therapeutic abortion, SUCH AS A TUBAL PREGNANCY, is caused by default in the process of life and the conception of life. The procured abortion is intended to and is the destruction of a perfectly formed and conceived human being following the laws of nature and nature’s God for any and all ill conceived notion. One is willed by God, the other is willed for no good reason against the common good on the basis of corrupt laws. A therapeutic abortion cannot be a procured abortion. By its very nature and definition as well as by its completion, a therapeutic abortion cannot be a procured abortion, that is, an abortion contracted to end the life of an unborn human being. The end justifies the means if the end is Justice.
Therapeutic abortion to save the life of the mother is the LIE, devised to deceive, extort, and destroy America out of our money, our dignity and our heritage.
We cannot stop abortionists from going to hell, but we sure as hell do not have to go with them.