Many People Still Don’t Know How Pro-Abortion Hillary Clinton Is
Latest Pro Life News
Just this afternoon I was talking with a journalism mentor of mine who (seemingly like everyone) blogs these days. Over coffee, he wryly noted that he has been in the business 40 plus years. And while he understands people lead incredibly busy lives, he is still amazed by how many citizens do not know where the two candidates running for President are on many of the most important issues of the day.
Few outside of pro-life circles know the specifics of why National Right to Life supports Donald Trump against Hillary Clinton. They may vaguely sense that, like her husband, Mrs. Clinton is pro-abortion. But, outside pro-life circles, few know how it would be nearly impossible to exaggerate how tightly bound Clinton is to Planned Parenthood, NARAL, EMILY’s List, and the like.
Consider how far to port Clinton is, how all-encompassing is her embrace of the ideology of the most militant fringe of the abortion movement.
Whomever is the next President, he or she will fill the vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia but as many as three more Supreme Court justices. In no uncertain terms, Clinton has pledged to nominate only U.S. Supreme Court justices who will continue legal abortion on demand. Three or four appointments could solidify abortion on demand for a generation.
SIGN THE PLEDGE! We Oppose Hillary Clinton!
Clinton broke new ground earlier this year: eliminate the Hyde Amendment which for 40 years has kept the abortion industry from picking the taxpayers’ pockets. The American public robustly opposes federal funding of abortion.
And we need not belabor the obvious: like all pro-abortionists, Clinton is always looking for ways to steer more money into the coffers of Planned Parenthood.
Donald Trump has already cited a list of potential Supreme Court nominees. All are pro-life.
Unlike Clinton, Trump opposes the use of your tax dollars to pay for abortion. He has also made it clear he opposes taxpayer funding of organizations that perform abortions, including Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the nation), so long as they continue doing abortions.
And whereas Clinton would launch a full-throated offense against federal pro-life laws, Trump would veto laws attacking pro-life laws at the federal level.
Final thought: our next President will be either Trump or Clinton. That simple fact cannot be stressed enough.
You can be sure that NRL News and NRL News Today will continue to remind pro-lifers and the public at large why NRL opposes Clinton and supports Trump, day in and day out.
TradCatKnight: Most people have not pointed this out yet but the reality is with Trumps support of Israel he is every bit a supporter of "killing" as Hillary. These people behind the NWO have killed more people than anyone else in history. The puppet state of Israel will soon house the antichrist.
Hillary Clinton Defended Partial-Birth Abortions, Opposed “Criminalizing a Medical Procedure”
Hillary Clinton once claimed that she, like her husband, wanted abortion to be “safe, legal and rare.” But did she really?Back in 2003, then-Sen. Clinton opposed a bi-partisan measure to ban the gruesome late-term partial-birth abortion procedure, CNS News’s Terence P. Jeffrey recalled in a recent column.
On the Senate floor in 2003, Clinton argued that legislators should focus on reducing the national debt rather than protecting unborn babies from abortions. Partial-birth abortion is a horrific procedure where a viable, late-term baby is partially delivered outside the womb and then killed, usually by puncturing the back of the skull and removing the baby’s brains.
Here is part of Clinton’s speech defending the procedure, as CNS transcribed from a C-SPAN recording:
Clinton argued that what she described as a move “to criminalize a medical procedure” would start America down a road that would end up making this country like Cold War-era Romania and Communist China.Clinton was in the minority at the time. The measure had support from a number of Democrats, including then-Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle and future Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, according to CNS.
“In pre-democratic Romania, they had a leader named Ceausescu, a Soviet-style Communist dictator, who decided it was the duty of every Romanian woman to bear five children so they could build the Romanian State,” Clinton said. “So they eliminated birth control, they eliminated sex education, and they outlawed abortions.”
“Once a month you would be rounded up at your workplace,” she said.
SIGN THE PLEDGE! We Oppose Hillary Clinton!
“You would be taken to a government-controlled health clinic,” she said. “You would be told to disrobe while you were standing in line. You would get up on the table. You would be examined by a government doctor with a government secret police officer watching. And if you were pregnant, you would be monitored to make sure you didn’t do anything to that pregnancy.”
Then there were the Communists in China.
“If you wanted to have a child in China, you needed to get permission or face punishment,” Clinton said. “After you had your one allotted child, in some parts of China, you could be sterilized against your will or forced to have an abortion.”
The move to ban partial-birth abortion, Clinton argued, would move America toward a Romanian or Chinese-style police state.
“I don’t think we could dismiss these examples,” Clinton said in that 2003 speech. “I have seen where government gets this kind of power, it can be quickly misused. The old standard maxim by Lord Acton: Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
“I raise these issues not because they are part of the past or because they happened somewhere far away, but because I can guarantee you, standing here as a senator, if we go down this path, you are going to have the same kind of overzealous, interfering prosecutors and police officers doing the very same kinds of things in this country,” Clinton said.
“Why aren’t we debating how we can get our federal budget back on the road to balance and begin to diminish these overwhelming deficits and this increasing debt load we will leave on the backs of our children?” she said.
The Democratic presidential candidate’s position has not changed in the past 13 years. If anything, her position on abortion is even more extreme and out of touch with most Americans.
In a September 2015 interview with NBC, Clinton defended partial-birth abortions again and voiced her support for late-term abortions up until birth, too.
“My husband vetoed a very restrictive legislation on late-term abortions, and he vetoed it at an event in the White House where we invited a lot of women who had faced this very difficult decision, that ought to be made based on their own conscience, their family, their faith, in consultation with doctors. Those stories left a searing impression on me,” Clinton said.
She also openly supports forcing taxpayers to fund these abortions by repealing the Hyde Amendment. The amendment prohibits direct taxpayer funding of abortion in Medicaid. If repealed, researchers estimate that 33,000 more babies will be aborted every year in the U.S.
It’s clear that Clinton has never wanted abortion to be safe or rare.
The Netherlands considers itself oh, so rational. Its laws around controversial social issues involve the concept of harm reduction.Harm reduction? Once the country accepted killing as an answer to suffering, it was sure to include the mentally ill.
Now a new study reveals the law’s cruelty. From the Reuters story:
Overall, about a third of the people helped to end their lives were age 70 years or older, 44 percent were between ages 50 and 70 and about a quarter were 30 to 50 years old. Seventy percent were women.And now, Netherlands is following Belgium by conjoining euthanasia with organ harvesting, raising the prospect that the mentally ill will come to see their deaths as having greater value than their lives.
While fully 55 percent of patients were diagnosed with depression, the others had a number of different conditions, including psychosis, posttraumatic stress disorder or anxiety, neurocognitive issues, pain without any physical cause, eating disorders, prolonged grief and autism.
Don’t expect this to slow down anything. The only thing that really matters to the Dutch around this issue is transparency.
But what good is transparency when things go from bad, to worse, to evil, and it matters not?
Most people in the Netherlands long ago swallowed the hemlock premise of euthanasia. So I guess we could say about this study and others like it: At this point, what difference does it make?
"Christian" University Offers Students Credit for Planned Parenthood Internship