Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire BBLM, 18.7 million murdered

Well,...................................never mind,I can't say it.

Do Black Baby's Lives Matter?

18.7 million black babies killed by abortion.

Blacks comprise 13% of the population.

Blacks comprise 36% of the abortions.

Viewed through any rational lens this would be considered genocide.

But what is more important? The "narrative"? Or human lives?

So you want 18.7 million more people plus their babies collecting welfare?

Come on, AS. Are you saying that it is OK to kill someone if we think they might be on welfare someday? Putting aside from the obvious moral issues raised there for a moment, you must see that that is a very slippery slope, no? After all, suppose we decide that it's OK to kill under employed economists because they might one day go on welfare too. You wouldn't want that, would you?

That's 18.7 million people that are not on welfare.

I've no interest in playing a game of dodge ball tonight.

So you want 18.7 million more people plus their babies collecting welfare?

"The slippery slope goes both ways. How much of your religious beliefs should you be allowed to force upon others?

Additionally, when you call for an end to individual families being allowed to make their own reproductive choices, you need to think through the consequences of such a policy."


Playing devil's advocate here for a minute:

Since the Muslims believe that female mutilation and marriage to 12 year old girls is okay, as is rape of non-Muslim women, should we not be able to force our religious-based moral laws on Muslim immigrants?

Regarding families being allowed to make their own reproductive choices by permitting killing of fetuses before birth, then why not give them, say, maybe a year after the birth to decide if they want to terminate the life of their child. By then they will have more information to base their decision on. Some marriages fail within the first year after a birth. Wouldn't life be so much simpler for all parties if that pesky little infant was no longer in the picture?

Slippery slopes can tilt in all directions.

Black lives matter” has become the slogan of anti-police protests across the nation, but the target of the protests is so misplaced that the motives of the so-called civil rights leaders behind the movement must be questioned. Do they really care about black lives? Or are they cynically exploiting isolated incidents, such as the death of Michael Brown, to inflame the black population and advance their own political interests?
Today, on the somber anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, it’s time for black leaders to face up to the real danger threatening black lives in America. It isn’t the police. According to an anti-police brutality organization, the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, 313 blacks were killed by “police, security guards and vigilantes” in 2013. It isn’t even black criminals, who, as Rudy Giuliani famously pointed out on “Meet the Press,” are responsible for 93 percent of violent deaths among blacks. Sources estimate that between 6,000 and 8,000 blacks are murdered each year.
No, the greatest danger to blacks is found precisely where we ought to be safest: in our mothers’ wombs. In 2010, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 138,539 black babies were aborted.
Thankfully, abortion is on the decline in America, down 3 percent between 2007 and 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Strikingly, the number of surgical abortion clinics has plummeted, from 2,176 in 1991 to 551 today. Nevertheless, the CDC report that in 2010, a staggering 765,651 abortions were performed in the United States. Black women continue to have the highest abortion rate of any ethnic group, with a gruesome 483 abortions for every 1,000 live births.
The bottom line? I’ll say it again: 138,539 black babies, nearly one baby in three, were killed in the womb in 2010.
According to the CDC, between 2007 and 2010, innocent black babies were victimized in nearly 36 percent of the abortion deaths in the United States, though blacks represent only 12.8 percent of the population. Some say the abortion capital of America is New York City. According to LifeSiteNews, the city’s Department of Health reported that in 2012, more black babies were aborted (31,328) than born (24,758). That’s 55.9 percent of black babies killed before birth. Blacks represented 42.4 percent of all abortions.
Legalized abortion is working out exactly as Margaret Sanger intended. Sanger, the founder of the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, was part of the eugenics movement back in the 1930s. Her goal was to use abortion to cull what she considered inferior races from the human gene pool. According to Sanger, “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.” She opened her first abortion clinics in inner cities, and it’s no accident that even today, “79 percent of Planned Parenthood’s abortion facilities are located in black or minority neighborhoods.”
We mustn’t forget that babies aren’t the only victims of abortion. Sadly, more and more of the mothers are suffering and dying as well. Though many people continue to deny it, the link between abortion and breast cancer has been amply documented, and this deadly consequence of abortion is plaguing greater and greater numbers of black women.
Ironically, black women used to suffer from breast cancer less frequently than white women. Not any longer. The Black Women’s Health Imperative notes that according to an American Cancer Society report, black women now develop breast cancer almost as frequently as whites, and are more likely to die from the disease. LifeSiteNews also cites an American Cancer Society report that black women under age 40 now are more likely to develop breast cancer than their white counterparts. They can thank Margaret Sanger — and some of today’s so-called civil rights leaders.
Sanger relied on black ministers to act as Judas goats leading their sisters to abortion mills. According to LifeSiteNews, Sanger wrote in 1939, “We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Some black leaders are still acting as Judas goats today. LifeSiteNews cites black pro-life activist Ryan Bomberger: “Back in 2005, the NAACP praised the high black abortion rate as compared to the percentage of the population at a NARAL fundraising gala. When more black babies are aborted than are born alive in NYC and the NAACP responds by supporting Gov. [Andrew] Cuomo’s radical abortion expansion via the misnamed ‘Women’s Equality Act,’ one can understand how the targeting of minorities continues unabated.”
Abortion is the greatest threat to black lives in America today. People who claim to represent the black community while also abetting the black holocaust — abortion — are hypocrites. Any “civil rights leader” who genuinely believes that “black lives matter” should be working to see that every black baby is accorded the very first civil right — the right to life.
• J. Kenneth Blackwell is a policy board member of the American Civil Rights Union.

Planned Parenthood was the brain-child of a white supremacist, Nazi-collaborating, eugenicist. It is doing, albeit it too slowly, what she wanted.

Abortion is still an unjustified homicide (murder), which those like Snyper refuse to admit in the face of biology, physiology, logic, or any other argument. It is also a eugenicist Nazi's dream, which they also refuse to admit.

Yeah, I agree a bit... but sure is nice not to have all those extra thugs around.

Although I'd prefer it by repsonsibility IE birth control...

By our current legal definitions, the vast majority of abortions in this country are legal, and not classified as murder.

You are confusing your secular values for religions ones. Male circumcision has a long history in Judeo-Christianity. Islam just applies this practice to the opposite sex. Not mutilating the gentiles of children is a secular, not a religious value. Same thing with the age of consent. It's a modern secular value, not a religions one.

As for your one year old strawman, you are really equivocating, comparing a mass of undifferentiated cells with a live birth.

As for what the Bible says about the treatment of women and children of different religions, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with Numbers 31 and the Massacre of the Midianites.

And you are still advocating for the addition of 60+ million more unwanted welfare drawing, Hillary voting, gang banging middle school drop outs in this country.

That "mass of undifferentiated cells" has the same exact genetic code that it has when it "differentiates."

Of course, you know full well that the mass of cells is not undifferentiated anyway. But your "argument" fails based on the ontology of the genetic code contained therein.

Abortion is the premeditated unjust act of killing a defenseless human. Start there, and argue for it.

The best course of action to reduce abortions is to make birth control readily available and affordable, preventing unwanted pregnancies is pretty simple.

One could also make the financial costs of giving birth a non issue and make the adoption process much easier, basically make it easy to choose life.

Now we are into definitions.

What does it mean to be human, and who decides?

Is the Sin of Onan, since it contains your genetic code also the same as a 100 million acts of murder?

This is alway the topic that makes us, as conservatives, look like giant hypocrites. We want freedom for all and less government, but at the same time want to control everyone's sexual preference.

If we could just live our lives and let others live there's, it would be tough to beat.

This is alway the topic that makes us, as conservatives, look like giant hypocrites. We want freedom for all and less government, but at the same time want to control everyone's sexual preference.

If we could just live our lives and let others live there's, it would be tough to beat.

Explain to me how birth control - covered in a myriad of forms by ever health insurance in the nation, and especially by Medicaid, on top of condoms being cheaper than chewing gum - is not already "affordable".

Giving birth is a "non-issue" financially, as those who are most likely to abort are on Medicaid, and the taxpayer covers the costs of birth. Birth is also damned well covered by health insurance.

As to adoption - yes, the process sucks. It's a hell of a lot easier to buy a house or a dog or a car than to adopt a kid. Figure the responsibility, though.

Being human is easy. DNA answers that question. When the DNA says "human", you have a human.

Next?

What percentage of white people will adopt a black baby?

The reality is not very many will.

NeBassman and JoeMamma,

How many black babies have you adopted?

So, a batch of eggs are fertilized in a fertility clinic. Are they now a person? If every single one is not implanted and not brought to term, is that "murder"? How about discarding the unused ones?

And by your DNA standard, flogging the dolphin is not "murder".

Masturbation produces only 1/2 the genetic code necessary for life. That's a very poor argument on your part.

The reproductive lab is a better argument. However, it lacks implantation, which is the necessary step to create a human from a fertilized egg.

Can you address the biology and defend abortion? Must not be able to.

If you're jumping to racism to defend abortion, you've already lost as you are essentially siding with Margaret Sanger in her Nazi-colloborating, white-supremacist, eugenicist utopia.

How many have we adopted? None. Would we? Yes. No question; no hesitation:

How about you?

AS,

You keep trying to pin the "religious" label on 4ager and me, but neither of us have used religion based arguments.

What else do you have?

Let's push your argument to its logical conclusion, OK? You are fine with a mother killing her two hear old toddler because the mother is running her own life, right? After all, most of us can hardly run our own lives well let alone someone else's.

Did I get that right?

It's not about "running someone else's life."

It is about protecting another human's life from murder.

It's not about "running someone else's life."

It is about protecting another human's life from murder.

Come on, AS. Are you saying that it is OK to kill someone if we think they might be on welfare someday? Putting aside the obvious moral issues raised there for a moment, you must see that that is a very slippery slope, no? After all, suppose we decide that it's OK to kill under employed economists because they might one day go on welfare too. You wouldn't want that, would you?

Being human is easy. DNA answers that question. When the DNA says "human", you have a human.

Next?

And how do you propose to collect said dna from inside another human?

See, someone's rights have to be violated....either the moms right to choose her fate, or your right to run someone else's life.

I absolutely understand.I don't believe in abortion myself, but more than not believing in abortion I believe in minding my own life.

Lots of Christians like to play god. They apparently lack faith that God will be the judge.

And how do you propose to collect said dna from inside another human?

See, someone's rights have to be violated....either the moms right to choose her fate, or your right to run someone else's life.

I absolutely understand.I don't believe in abortion myself, but more than not believing in abortion I believe in minding my own life.

Lots of Christians like to play god. They apparently lack faith that God will be the judge.

Again, generally not defined as murder in this country, and you attempting to impose your religious concept of when person hood begin upon others.

So, you'd rather other play God instead? The only people playing God are those killing children without just cause. Once you figure that out, you'll be ahead of the game.

What percentage of white people will adopt a black baby?

The reality is not very many will.

NeBassman and JoeMamma,

How many black babies have you adopted?

I'd rather let people choose their own fate. I don't have to sleep with knowing that I killed a fetus nor knowing that I brought a baby with known life threatening problems into the world. .....nor anywhere in between. Site your verses that tell you to be the one who judoes when your neighbor should be unable to make choices, or the one that says you should judge when others make choices.

It's a fundamentalist thing, much like Muslims, they feel the world must conform to their beliefs or suffer.

If you kill a pregnant woman in America, you will be charged with a double homicide in 38 states (a majority) and in over 60 federal crime-types.
It's called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act on the federal level, passed in 2004. Public Law 108-212.

Originally Posted By 4ager
Planned Parenthood was the brain-child of a white supremacist, Nazi-collaborating, eugenicist. It is doing, albeit it too slowly, what she wanted.

Abortion is still an unjustified homicide (murder), which those like Snyper refuse to admit in the face of biology, physiology, logic, or any other argument. It is also a eugenicist Nazi's dream, which they also refuse to admit.

The point is: the unborn are considered "human" for matters of crimes against others. Abortionists here are trying to say that the unborn child is not human,
and claiming that American jurisprudence backs that assertion. It does not.

virtually every culture and religion in the world is against abortion. Ain't just Christians.

Let's push your argument to its logical conclusion, OK? You are fine with a mother killing her two hear old toddler because the mother is running her own life, right? After all, most of us can hardly run our own lives well let alone someone else's.

Did I get that right?

Bullshit.
You just want to force your standards on everyone else, when it's really none of your business.

You'd make a good ISIS recruit.
They like forcing their beliefs on others just like you.
They just aren't as hypocritical about it as you.

And don't waste your time on a reply because I only see your drivel when someone quotes it, since I've heard all the same bullshit from you already.

No you haven't gotten anything right.

You know that's an irrational argument to begin with since it advocates doing something illegal.

You won't get it right until you realize you only get to control what you do, not what anyone else does.

Two at last count. One is attending Grand Valley State College and the other is still in high school The younger one was considered a "special needs" adoption because he was 3 lb, 3 oz at birth. There were "complications".

And they are not coffee with a lot of cream. They are semi-sweet chocolate brown. Just getting ahead of your next question.

I, for one, do NOT like that slippery slope. After all, what if someday our culture decided that under employed chemical engineers might someday be on welfare so we should kill them to prevent that possibility? No, thanks!

While neither you nor I are presently underemployed, we both have been in the past. (shiver! )

You've run from the argument every time, because you cannot refute biology, logical, philosophy, or morality.

Run away again; it's the only play you have.

Reverting to legalism? Great; that could be used just as easily to justify and excuse slavery, or the Holocaust, as both of those were legal at the time. Female genital mutilation, the stoning of homosexuals and of women even accused of adultery, or just walking without a male relative as a chaperone, are also legal in parts of the world. Your reliance on legalism to excuse any action justifies those.

As to the "controlling only what one does, and not that of another" is exactly the point - the child is a human and ought to have the same rights as any other. You, and those like you, take those rights away from the child based upon mere convenience. Slavery has nothing on that.

Planned Parenthood was the brain-child of a white supremacist, Nazi-collaborating, eugenicist. It is doing, albeit it too slowly, what she wanted.

Abortion is still an unjustified homicide (murder), which those like Snyper refuse to admit in the face of biology, physiology, logic, or any other argument. It is also a eugenicist Nazi's dream, which they also refuse to admit.

The problems that the defenders of abortion face start with biology, followed by logic, and the Constitution (supported by philosophy and morality).

First, they must try to deny the biological fact that the child is human, which cannot be done. Logically, then, that child must be a distinct human and therefore a person, which they must also attempt to deny and that denial fails.

If the child is, in fact, a human and therefore a person, then it ought to be protected by the Constitution as would any other person. To deny this goes against the philosophical and moral underpinnings of American culture that holds that all men/persons are created equal, and that all are entitled to the life, livery, and the pursuit of happiness. In order for the pro-abortion stance to be justified, they must deny those rights to the child and they must hold that the mother has rights beyond that of any other person (that to simply kill another person for mere convenience). Those are anathemas to the Constitution and to the foundation of American freedoms.

In the end, they are left with having to defend an indefensible position that denies biology and logic, goes against the Constitution and thus the moral and philosophical basis of America, and they must hold that some are created inferior to others while others are created superior to the rest. To base a position like that, justified only by legalism echoes perfectly with the claims of slave traders, Nazis, Chinese communists, and the most hard-line of Islamists. They will, of course, attempt to deny this as well, but facts prove plainly otherwise.

Your argument falls at it's first premise.

An embryo is not a child, it is an embryo.

Is the DNA human, or not? The embryonic stage is very short, between conception and implantation, and abortion does not occur during this stage. The embryo, once implantation takes place, is a HUMAN fetus, by definition a human offspring, ergo a child. That's biology, and undeniable, though you must try to deny it as everything else stems from it.

Does an embryo have consciousness? The ability to react to stimuli and feel pain or comfort?

The point is: the unborn are considered "human" for matters of crimes against others. Abortionists here are trying to say that the unborn child is not human, and claiming that American jurisprudence backs that assertion. It does not.

Does an embryo have consciousness? The ability to react to stimuli and feel pain or comfort?

No, they are not.

They are considered either an embryo or a fetus depending upon their stage of development.

At what point?

No, they are not.

They are considered either an embryo or a fetus depending upon their stage of development.

Absolutely relavent if one believes that beginging of consciousness is the moment a soul begins. The concept of "quickening" is historically relevant in the in Old English law as to whether or not murder has been committed or not.

Once again, when does consciousness begin?