I would like to caution my readers, graphic images and descriptions included in this article.   

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled today banning a procedure known as Partial Birth Abortion, in which a doctor partially delivers a baby, punctures the babies skull with a pair of scissors and then proceeds to suck the brains out and collapse the skull.  Democrats argue that it’s a woman’s right to this procedure. 

What I clearly cannot understand, is that Liberals run screaming bloody murder to protest Capitol Punishment in which a convicted killer/rapist is executed after being convicted of a heinous crime.  Liberals defend child molesters saying that they can be rehabilitated, but cry out for the legalized killing of millions of unborn innocent babies whose only crime was to be conceived by a irresponsible individual.  Where is the logic with these schmucks?

Liberals defend a woman’s right to a procedure they know nothing about and that the liberal controlled media refuses to expose what the procedure involves or what it looks like. 

To see what Liberal Democrats are defending.  Please look at this with caution.  GRAPHIC IMAGE.

Liberal Democrats running for President of the United States had this to say about the ruling…

Democratic Presidential Candidate John Edwards:

“I could not disagree more strongly with today’s Supreme Court decision. The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women. This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election. Too much is at stake - starting with, as the Court made all too clear today, a woman’s right to choose.”

Senator Hillary Clinton:

 ”This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman’s right to choose and recognized the importance of women’s health. Today’s decision blatantly defies the Court’s recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.”

And of Course, Senator Barack Hussein Obama:

I strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women.  As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient.  I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman’s right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women. 

How can one with a concience defend this practice that produces the same horrific results as the murderous Islamic Terrorists in Afganistan and Iraq.  The same morally bankrupt people that defend murdering innocent babies and protect terrorists and convicted killers and rapists are the same people, DEMOCRATS that want to lead our nation.  I’m scared, are you?

Rate this post:

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...