Paul Derengowski, ThM
Abortion is murder, plain and simple.
That stated, however, some people seem appalled over the idea that anyone would deprive them the “right” to murder a child in the womb, even though there is nothing right about it.
Take, for instance, the recent rallying email dispatched by outgoing Planned Parenthood CEO, Cecile Richards, who is apoplectic over the recent formation of the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Not only does Ms. Richards want to keep up the slaughter, in her skewed opinion, there should be no conscientious objectors either.
According to an email she sent out to supporters of government sponsored murder, she wrote the following:
President Trump continues to outdo himself when it comes to pushing health care policy that will do nothing but hurt patients.
First, all President Trump has done is follow the U.S. Constitution, and specifically the Bill of Rights, by preventing the government from imposing its will upon those who have the conscience to refrain from killing unborn children.
Of course, if Ms. Richards had ever actually read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, she would have noticed this phrase: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (Amendment I, U.S. Constitution).
Second, she should really be talking about health care policy that hurts patients, given that she supported the worst health care policy in American history, called “Obama Care” or the Affordable Care Act.
It not only “hurt patients” by depriving them of necessary attention, due to its Socialistic structure, it was literally bankrupting families due to the exorbitant expense.
Third, murder is not about “health care.”
It is about taking the life of another human being in the most insidious ways to impossibly satiate narcissistic behavior.
A vast majority of abortions are not because of health issues, but because someone wanted to sweep their immoral activity out of sight to prevent personal embarrassment or inconvenience.
In the end, everyone is “hurt,” whether it is friends and family, the general public, or the mother herself.
Ultimately, abortion takes the life of a child, who ultimately is not afforded a voice in the whole process, because people like Cecile Richards wants to revise the lingo to make murder sound more attractive and defensible.
Well, there is nothing defensible when it comes to premeditated murder. Period. End of story.
But his latest attack is truly shameful: a proposed rule released by HHS seeks to encourage health care workers to discriminate against patients by refusing to provide care because of religious, moral, and personal objections.
What is truly “shameful” is that anyone would dare wish to commit murder, especially of a defenseless child, and then call it “health care.”
In fact, to call the person contemplating murder a “patient” is tantamount to calling a bank robber a debtor on a permanent loan.
Then, to try to shame those who object to the idea of murdering a child by distorting the word “discriminate,” as if no one should differentiate between what is right and what is wrong, is equally “shameful.”
Again, not only does the U.S. Constitution allow Americans to “discriminate” based on “religious” convictions, there is an even higher, biblical standard that serves as the object for any Christian to base his/her moral and personal objections.
Of course, if Ms. Richards understood either the Constitution or the Bible, then she would refrain from her “shameful” attempt to undermine both.
She then opined,
Health care workers might refuse to treat…a person seeking an abortion.
Indeed. It is their right to refuse to participate in the murder of a child, just like it is right to refuse to be an accomplice to murdering anyone.
Just because a murderer is “seeking” to commit murder does not mean that because I have a loaded gun, I should join in on the carnage.
In fact, if I knew someone was seeking to commit murder, I should use the gun to prevent the murder from taking place, if I found myself in a situation where that became necessary.
But, that’s the difference between calling a spade a spade and calling abortion a health care procedure.
Ms. Richards then wrote,
HHS is collecting official public comments on this outrageous new proposal, and it’s our best opportunity to stop it before it becomes law—impacting people all across the country.
Since when is it “outrageous” to uphold the rights of U.S. citizens as outlined in the U.S. Constitution?
Since when it is right to “stop” anyone from committing an act of murder?
Given the number of murders committed against the unborn since 1973, when abortion was legalized, does Ms. Richards really believe that that has not negatively impacted “people all across the country”?
It would seem that being an accomplice to murder has severely skewed and numbed Ms. Richards’ view of reality.
Take a moment to submit your official comment to HHS: Don’t encourage discrimination against people seeking health care.
In other words, it is not okay to “discriminate” against those seeking to commit murder, but it is okay to “discriminate” against those willing to prevent it.
Such a hypocritical double-standard makes a person wonder, if someone broke into Ms. Richards’ house, seeking to appease their own definition of “health care,” whereby extinguishing her life was part of the definition, and a neighbor heard her screaming for help, would she want that neighbor to “discriminate” and come to her aid, or would she simply tell the intruder to go ahead and plunge the knife into her chest?
For some odd reason, I believe she would want the neighbor to come running to here rescue.
Afterward, she would be blubber all over herself just how wonderful and thoughtful the neighbor was.
But, when it comes to doctors and nurses exercising their rights to stop the callous murder of a child, well then, that is just not right, at least according to Ms. Richards. What hypocrisy!
The number of comments we collect can be used in legal challenges to stop these attacks—so your submission really matters (and it only takes two minutes!).
So, Ms. Richards is encouraging a collective effort to legally strong-arm those doctors and nurses into doing something that the law already guarantees them the right not to do.
This is the twisted nature of Leftist thinking.
It has no regard for history, law, and what is already on the books; it is only interested in satisfying its own selfish agenda, even if that means running roughshod over another person and their rights as both a U.S. citizen and a human being with a conscience.
If anyone is being “attacked,” it is those stopping the murder by those who wish to perpetuate it through an abuse of legal system.
Ms. Richards drones on,
In each and every one of Trump’s attacks on reproductive health care, it’s patients who are hurt the most. From people living with HIV to trans people to those seeking abortions, these attacks make it even harder for people to access care.
When was the last time murdering a child reproduced anything, much less health care?
If anything, murdering a child was deleterious to everyone involved.
And as if Ms. Richards’ whole line of desperate argumentation was not enough to show just how irrational she is, she throws in those infected by HIV—a majority of whom continues to be the militant, in your face, homosexual—along with “trans people,” or those with a mental disability that those on the Left wish to exploit (i.e. “hurt”) for political reasons.
How is it possible to “care” for people, if those, like Ms. Richards, encourage the very behavior that puts them jeopardy?
Again, if anyone is doing any “attacking,” it is the Ms. Richards-types out there waging war against the doctors, nurses, President Trump, the law-abiding American citizen, and God Almighty Himself.
Ms. Richards concluded her rant by writing,
At Planned Parenthood Action Fund, we will always stand firm in our mission to expand access to care and to make it easier for people to get the services they need to live full, independent lives. These discriminatory policies fly right in the face of that mission—and we won’t stand for it.
So, what about all the babies that Ms. Richards and PPAF have murdered?
What kind of “care” did they provide them, as they extinguished their lives in any number of gruesome ways, sometimes resulting in the resale of body parts for financial gain?
What kind of life did the murdered baby live to the “full,” Ms. Richards?
Just how independent were they, given they were dependent upon rational, sane, responsible human beings to nurture them until they could have their own children?
If your mother, Ms. Richards, stood for the same kind of butchery that you seem to believe should not come under “attack,” where would you be today?
Clearly, if there is anything truly “outrageous” about Ms. Richards’ “attack” upon HHS, Donald Trump, and the doctors and nurses who refuse to commit murder, it is the fact that despite all the allusions to “care” about people, she does not care about anyone at all; not even herself.
For if she cared, she would step back a moment and reflect upon the source all these stupid comments she made in the advocacy of murder, and then retract them.
But, we know that is not going to happen, because Ms. Richards and Planned Parenthood are a contradiction unto themselves.
When you live a life of contradiction, and you actually begin to believe that a lie is the truth, then it is all downhill from there.
What is right becomes wrong and what is wrong become right, with the end result being that people (babies) are murdered, and the murderers believe they are providing “health care.”
It is a sick, demented, irresolvable conundrum that cannot be reasoned with or reformed. It must be abandoned.
Thank God for President Donald Trump stepping up and putting a stop to the “attacks” upon our children, our rights, and our country.
May Ms. Richards now fade away, like a bad dream, into history, and may she never be allowed to rear her ugliness to torment the unborn again.