Monday, August 10, 2015

The Lyin' King

 I can only shake my head in disbelief and disgust over "Cecil the Lion." What disgusts me is not so much the killing of the lion, but the culture's reaction to it. Unless you've been living under a rock, Cecil was a protected animal surreptitiously lured away from his safe haven in Africa by a disgusting man from America, who then ruthlessly killed him. I love animals, especially cats. I've owned cats since I was a small boy; they are awesome pets. I have no sympathy for the man who did this, one Walter Palmer, who should be punished. In a sane society, that would be the end of the story. I've heard several commentators in the media refer to this animal as having been "murdered." Vandals have struck Palmer's vacation home, painting the words "Lion Killer!" on the garage door. They left a trail of pigs feet, covered in what appears to be blood, as well as a jar of lion-shaped cookies. No one should defend Palmer's actions, but by the way people are acting, you'd think he had killed a little baby.

 Contemporaneous with Cecil's demise is the attempt by Congress to defund the number-one  baby- killing organization, Planned Parenthood. This occurred in the wake of some pro-life advocates posing as representatives interested in buying aborted baby parts and taking videos of what transpired. In so doing, they exposed Planned Parenthood officials discussing the selling of body parts from aborted babies for research. They have released a fifth video that catches a Planned Parenthood official discussing how the abortion business sells “fully intact” aborted babies. The supporters of murdering children have rushed to Planned Parenthood's (hereinafter "PP") defense claiming the videos were edited, the organization does much good, and federal money can't be used for abortion anyway.

 The New York Times ("All The News That Fits Our Views") published an op-ed piece written by Katha Pollitt entitled "How To Really Defend Planned Parenthood" on August 5, 2015.  To show you how depraved post-Vatican II culture is, I've reprinted the most pertinent parts of that article in red below.

"But the videos do cleverly evoke visceral feelings of disgust — graphic images, physicians using the words “crush” and “crunchy” — to activate the stereotype that abortion providers are money-grubbing baby killers.

Why women end up having second trimester abortions, why they choose to donate fetal tissue, what good the research achieves — who cares, when there is outrage to provoke and express?

There are two reasons abortion rights activists have been boxed in. One is that we’ve been reactive rather than proactive. To deflect immediate attacks, we fall in with messaging that unconsciously encodes the vision of the other side. Abortion opponents say women seek abortions in haste and confusion. Pro-choicers reply: Abortion is the most difficult, agonizing decision a woman ever makes. Opponents say: Women have abortions because they have irresponsible sex. We say: rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities, life-risking pregnancies.

These responses aren’t false exactly. Some women are genuinely ambivalent; some pregnancies are particularly dangerous. But they leave out a large majority of women seeking abortions, who had sex willingly, made a decision to end the pregnancy and faced no special threatening medical conditions.

We need to say that women have sex, have abortions, are at peace with the decision and move on with their lives. We need to say that is their right, and, moreover, it’s good for everyone that they have this right: The whole society benefits when motherhood is voluntary. When we gloss over these truths we unintentionally promote the very stigma we’re trying to combat. What, you didn’t agonize? You forgot your pill? You just didn’t want to have a baby now? You should be ashamed of yourself."

Sorry for making you feel sick. However, Pollitt does (unintentionally) make one point that many pro-lifers have forgotten: the real truth. She wants us to think abortion is some enshrined "right" and pro-abortionists should say it and not dodge the issue. Sick and warped, but it is honest about what they really think. The pro-life movement knows the real issue is that abortion is MURDER. Properly defined, murder is the taking of innocent human life. It doesn't concern animals. Abortion is the murder of unborn children. It's not about the how the woman got  pregnant or how she feels about it. We in the right to life fight shouldn't try to divert people from the heart of the matter: Inside every pregnant woman is a living, growing human person.

 Let's bring to light some facts:

1. PP's Founder: Margaret Sanger

  • Sanger was a racist who contributed to the eugenics movement in the U.S. She contributed to getting compulsory sterilization laws in 30 states for vulnerable people she considered "feeble-minded."
  • She presented to a KKK rally in New Jersey back in 1926. According to her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan … I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses … I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak … In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered” (pg. 366)
  • Below are her quotes PP never wants you to read:

“Eugenics without birth control seems to us a house builded upon the sands. It is at the mercy of the rising stream of the unfit” (“Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” Feb. 1919, The Birth Control Review).

“Stop our national habit of human waste.” (Woman and the New Race, 1920, Chapter 6).

“By all means, there should be no children when either mother or father suffers from such diseases as tuberculosis, gonorrhea, syphilis, cancer, epilepsy, insanity, drunkenness and mental disorders. In the case of the mother, heart disease, kidney trouble and pelvic deformities are also a serious bar to childbearing No more children should be born when the parents, though healthy themselves, find that their children are physically or mentally defective.” (Woman and the New Race, 1920, Chapter 7).

“The main objects of the Population Congress would be to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring[;] to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.” (“A Plan for Peace,” 1932).

2. PP's Aims
  • 79 percent of Planned Parenthood’s surgical abortion facilities are located within walking distance of black or Hispanic communities.
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Abortion Surveillance report revealed that between 2007 and 2010, nearly 36 percent of all abortions in the United States were performed on black children, even though black Americans make up only 13 percent of our population. A further 21 percent of abortions were performed on Hispanics, and 7 percent more on other minority groups, for a total of 64 percent of U.S. abortions tragically performed on minority groups.
  • According to Dr. Maureen L. Condic, an associate professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine: 
"... 89 percent of U.S. counties did not have an abortion provider in 2011 (down approximately 1 percent since 2008). These counties were home to almost 40 percent of American women in their reproductive years (ages 14 to 44). The study concludes that while the abortion rate continues to decline (as it has been doing since the early 1980s), “no evidence was found that the overall drop in abortion incidence was related to the decrease in providers or to restrictions implemented between 2008 and 2011.” 

"Despite hysterical claims that defunding Planned Parenthood will set loose an apocalypse for women who rely on PP for cancer and STD screening, this simply hasn’t happened. There has been a 20 percent decline in the number of PP clinics since 1995, and over this same period, there has also been a steady decline in both STD and cancer incidence for women. No apocalypse here."

  • According to David Daleiden, Project Leader at The Center for Medical Progress:
"In short, women will go to federally qualified health centers, which provide all the services Planned Parenthood does and more, except abortions. FQHCs also treat you regardless of your ability to pay (PP does not provide any services for free). Like many millennials, I have received care at FQHCs, and they are great."

3. What PP Does With Our Tax Money

According to PP's own records as reported by The Family Research Council: 
  • From 2009 to 2013, cancer-screening and -prevention programs dropped by about half.
  • From 2009 to 2013, breast exams dropped by 41 percent. (PP does not do mammograms.)
  • According to PP’s 2013-14 report, out of total services for pregnant women (adoption referrals, prenatal services, abortion), abortion made up over 94 percent. Prenatal care made up only about 5 percent of pregnancy services.
  • Meanwhile, PP’s abortion numbers have consistently increased every year, from 289,000 in 2006 to 327,000 in 2013.
4. More Than "Cells" Are Killed: A  Human Being Is Murdered

According to Dr. Dianne N. Irving: (See "Abortion and Rights," a special edition of the International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, edited by Doris Gordon and John Walker of Libertarians for Life (Vol. 19, No. 3/4, 1999, Barmarick Publications, England)

"In sum, a human sperm and a human oocyte are products of gametogenesis - each has only 23 chromosomes. They each have only half of the required number of chromosomes for a human being. They cannot singly develop further into human beings. They produce only "gamete" proteins and enzymes. They do not direct their own growth and development. And they are not individuals, i.e., members of the human species. They are only parts - each one a part of a human being. On the other hand, a human being is the immediate product of fertilization. As such he/she is a single-cell embryonic zygote, an organism with 46 chromosomes, the number required of a member of the human species. This human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes, directs his/her own further growth and development as human, and is a new, genetically unique, newly existing, live human individual.

After fertilization the single-cell human embryo doesn't become another kind of thing. It simply divides and grows bigger and bigger, developing through several stages as an embryo over an 8-week period. Several of these developmental stages of the growing embryo are denoted as a morula (about 4 days), a blastocyst (5-7 days), a bi-laminar (two layer) embryo (during the second week), and a trilaminar (3-layer) embryo (during the third week)."

4. Summary and Conclusion

  • PP and their supporters lie about the concern and fate for women's health.
  • They were founded upon eugenics/racism. 
  • Their #1 business is abortion. They lie that it is not.
  • Abortion is the taking of innocent human life, i.e. murder--and this is based on science. Even IF "we don't know when life begins," the burden of proof lies with those claiming it is non-life since human life could be taken. They lie that abortion is just about a group of cells.
  • If PP were defunded, $500 million a year could be channeled to health care service providers that do more than PP ever did. They lie about their role in health care. 
"Pope" Francis tells us not to worry about these "small-minded rules," concerning abortion, and concentrate on the environment instead. As a result, the world weeps for "Cecil the Lion" and rushes to defend the murder of human babies by a racist organization. The media claims the videos exposing PP  are "lies" while PP is nothing but a pack of lies. PP is truly the "Lyin' King," and those like Ms. Pollitt, who defend murdering little babies with zest, have earned the title "King of the Beasts."


  1. Wish this was a new thing w/ "francis" but these videos were made 20+ years ago.

  2. Cruelty to Animals
    “Catholic ethics has been criticized by some zoophilists because it refuses to admit that animals have rights. But it is indisputable that, when properly understood and fairly judged, Catholic doctrine — though it does not concede rights to the brute creation — denounces cruelty to animals as vigorously and as logically as do those moralists who make our duty in this respect the correlative of a right in the animals.”

    1. I do not disagree with the comment above. I made it clear that I detest animal cruelty, and Walter Palmer deserves to be punished for his crime. I object to the sad and unfortunate killing of the lion as "murder" while abortion is considered a "woman's right to choose"--as if the unborn child were a mere group of cells in her body like an appendix to be removed.

      The outrage over the killing of Cecil the Lion was greater than that over abortion--- and greater even over the selling of baby parts by Planned Paenthood. Society is sick to the core.