Friday, February 28, 2014

Abortionist Morals

From National Review:
Planned Parenthood President: When Life Begins Not ‘Really Relevant’ in Abortion Debate By Andrew Johnson

The president of the country’s largest abortion provider said she didn’t think the matter of when life begins is pertinent to the issue.

“It is not something that I feel is really part of this conversation,” Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood told Fusion’s Jorge Ramos on Thursday. “I don’t know if it’s really relevant to the conversation.”

When pressed, Richards said that in her view life began for her three children when she delivered them.

She explained that the purpose of her organization is not to answer a question that “will be debated through the centuries,” but to provide options for pregnant women.
The total lack of moral concern is blatant. According to this logic, anyone at anytime could fall afoul of the need to be aborted, since the start of life is not an issue.

1 comment:

  1. The Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, asserted:

    "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument."

    So the grounds for the (logically erroneous) decision in that case rests on the very thing that Ms. Richards believes to be NOT "really relevant" to the issue.

    Illogical to the core!


ANONYMOUS comments and comments by banned parties will be deleted without being read.