Thursday, February 28, 2019

PRESIDENTIAL WANNABES VOTE FOR INFANTICIDE -- SICKENING

PARTY OF DEATH

PRESIDENTIAL WANNABES VOTE FOR INFANTICIDE -- SICKENING

Michael Brown on Senate failure of born-alive bill: 'May we never forget'

There is no spin that can be put on this. 
No justification. 
No explanation that softens the blow. On Feb. 25, 44 Democratic senators, including all six who are declared presidential candidates, voted against the Born Alive Protection Act. 
Put another way, they voted for infanticide.
As reported at National Review, 
“All six of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker, N.J., Sherrod Brown, Ohio, Kirsten Gillibrand, N.Y., Kamala Harris, Calif., Amy Klobuchar, Minn., and Elizabeth Warren, Mass., along with Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.”
The Democrats truly have become the party of death, joined enthusiastically by far-left Bernie Sanders.
But none of this is surprising at all. 
When the god of abortion is threatened by affirming the sanctity of a baby’s life, inside or outside the womb, the Democrats will opt for death.
Here is the most relevant part of the bill these leftists voted against. 
It is unambiguous in its language.
Ҥ 1532. Requirements pertaining to born-alive abortion survivors
“(a) Requirements For Health Care Practitioners.—In the case of an abortion or attempted abortion that results in a child born alive:
“(1) DEGREE OF CARE REQUIRED; IMMEDIATE ADMISSION TO A HOSPITAL.—Any health care practitioner present at the time the child is born alive shall—
“(A) exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age; and
“(B) following the exercise of skill, care, and diligence required under subparagraph (A), ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.
“(2) MANDATORY REPORTING OF VIOLATIONS.—A health care practitioner or any employee of a hospital, a physician’s office, or an abortion clinic who has knowledge of a failure to comply with the requirements of paragraph (1) shall immediately report the failure to an appropriate State or Federal law enforcement agency, or to both.
“(b) Penalties.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
“(2) INTENTIONAL KILLING OF CHILD BORN ALIVE.—Whoever intentionally performs or attempts to perform an overt act that kills a child born alive described under subsection (a), shall be punished as under section 1111 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.”
There you have it.
Should a baby survive an abortion, the health care practitioner shall “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”
Failure to do so would be a violation of the law.
That’s it.
Nothing about abortion itself. 
No statement about the immorality of killing a baby in the womb.
Not a syllable.
This bill simply guarantees the protection of a baby born alive despite attempts to slaughter it in the womb.
End of subject.
As Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stated plainly before the vote was taken, 
“It isn’t about restrictions on abortion. It isn’t about changing the options available to women. 
It’s just about recognizing that a newborn baby is a newborn baby, period.”
And he asked, “Can the extreme far-left politics surrounding abortion really have come this far? 
Are we really supposed to think that it’s normal that there are now two sides debating whether a newborn, whether newborn living babies deserve medical attention?”
The answer is, yes, we have come this far. 
Infanticide is now up for debate
After all, if the mother (or parents) want to terminate the life of their child, they should have the right to, even if it survives the abortion. That baby must die!
Under no conceivable circumstances should any person of conscience vote against a bill designed to protect a living baby outside the womb. 
And that means to vote against such a bill is to betray a woeful lack of conscience.
How, then, did these Democrats justify their vote?
According to Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the bill “is carefully crafted to target, intimidate, and shut down reproductive health care providers.”
That is utter nonsense (and note that Schumer was careful to speak of “reproductive health care providers” rather than refer to abortion providers).
He claimed that the bill “would impose requirements on what type of care doctors must provide in certain circumstances, even if that care is ineffective, contradictory to medical evidence, and against the family’s wishes.”
Nonsense again, unless, of course, it’s up to the family to decide whether their newborn baby should live. 
Or whether “medical evidence” would mandate letting the baby die without care.
In short, 44 Democrats, along with Bernie Sanders, including all declared presidential candidates, cast their vote for infanticide.
May we never forget.
Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2019/02/presidential-wannabes-vote-for-infanticide-sickening/#zSgdRhzWxZzmwAik.99

WHAT A PITY SOCIALISTS HATE POSTERITY

shredded_constitution


AMERICAN MINUTE

WHAT A PITY SOCIALISTS HATE POSTERITY

Bill Federer recounts vision of Founding Fathers for unborn generations

“A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children.” – Proverbs 13:22
The Declaration of Independence ended: 
“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divide Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
After signing the Declaration of Independence, John Adams wrote to his wife: “I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure, that it will cost us to maintain this Declaration. … Yet through all the gloom I can see the rays of ravishing light and glory. I can see that the end is more than worth all the means. And that posterity will triumph in that days transaction, even although we should rue it, which I trust in God we shall not.”
George Washington wrote in his Orders, July 2, 1776: “The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. … We have, therefore to resolve to conquer or die.”
Colonel William Prescott, who fought at the Battle of Bunker Hill, wrote: “Our forefathers passed the vast Atlantic, spent their blood and treasure, that they might enjoy their liberties, both civil and religious, and transmit them to their posterity. … Now if we should give them up, can our children rise up and call us blessed?”
Dr. Joseph Warren, who died in the Battle of Bunker Hill, wrote in the Suffolk Resolves, September of 1774: “That it is an indispensable duty which we owe to God, our country, ourselves and posterity … to maintain, defend and preserve those civil and religious rights and liberties, for which many of our fathers fought, bled and died, and to hand them down entire to future generations.”
Disbanding the Newburgh conspiracy, Washington stated May 15, 1783: “By thus determining … you will defeat the insidious designs of our enemies, who are compelled to resort from open force to secret artifice. … You will … afford occasion for posterity to say, when speaking of the glorious example you have exhibited to Mankind, ‘had this day been wanting, the World had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining.'”
Justice Samuel Chase, who signed the Declaration, warned in a letter he signed “Caution” (Maryland Journal, October 12, 1787) not rush in ratifying the Constitution: “The decision, for or against the plan … involves no less than the happiness or miser of you and all your posterity forever.”
James Warren wrote in an article signed “Helvitius Priscus,” published in the Independent Chronicle, Dec. 27, 1787, warned: “That assembly, who have ambitiously and daringly presumed to annihilate the sovereignties of the thirteen United States; to establish a Draconian Code; and to bind posterity by their secret councils.”
The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, 1787, states: “We the people of the United States, in order to … secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution.”
Daniel Webster stated in 1852: “The world will cry out ‘shame’ upon us, if we show ourselves unworthy, to be the descendants of those great and illustrious … men, who fought for their liberty, and secured it to their posterity, by the Constitution of the United States.”
Henry Clay addressed the U.S. Senate, 1850: “The Constitution of the United States was made not merely for the generation that then existed, but for posterity – unlimited, undefined, endless, perpetual posterity.”
James Wilson, who signed the Declaration, stated at Pennsylvania’s ratifying convention, Nov. 26, 1787: “After a period of 6,000 years has elapsed since the creation, the United States exhibit to the world the first instance … of a nation … assembling voluntarily … and deciding calmly concerning that system of government under which they would wish that they and their posterity should live.”
Benjamin Franklin, who signed the Declaration of Independence, wrote of the Constitution to the editor of the Federal Gazette, April 8, 1788: “I have so much faith in the general government of the world by Providence, that I can hardly conceive a transaction of such momentous importance to the welfare of millions now existing, and to exist in the posterity of a great nation, should be suffered to pass without being in some degree influenced, guided and governed by that omnipotent, omnipresent Beneficent Ruler, in whom all inferior spirits live & move and have their being.”
Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention, warned in his farewell address, 1796: “Avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt … not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.”
Jefferson, who penned the Declaration, noted in his second annual message, 1802: “We are able, without a direct tax … to make large and effectual payments toward the discharge of our public debt and the emancipation of our posterity from that mortal canker (open sore).”
Charles Carroll, the longest-living signer of the Declaration, addressed the city of New York, Aug. 2, 1826: “Grateful to Almighty God for the blessings which, through Jesus Christ Our Lord, He had conferred on my beloved country in her emancipation. … I am now the last surviving signer, I do hereby recommend to the present and future generations the principles of that important document as the best earthly inheritance their ancestors could bequeath to them, and pray that the civil and religious liberties they have secured to my country may be perpetuated to remotest posterity and extended to the whole family of man.”
Daniel Webster addressed the New York Historical Society, Feb. 23, 1852: “If we and our posterity reject religious instruction and authority, violate the rules of eternal justice, trifle with the injunctions of morality, and recklessly destroy the political constitution, which holds us together, no man can tell, how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us, that shall bury all our glory in profound obscurity.”
null
Chief Justice John Jay addressed the American Bible Society, May 13, 1824: “We thereby enable them to learn that man was originally created and placed in a state of happiness, but, becoming disobedient, was subjected to the degradation and evils which he and his posterity have since experienced. The Bible will also inform them that our gracious Creator has provided for us a Redeemer.”
Elias Boudinot served as the president of the Continental Congress where he signed the Treaty of Paris. Founding the American Bible Society, Elias Boudinot stated in New Jersey, July 4, 1783: “The deliverance of the Children of Israel from a state of bondage to an unreasonable tyrant was perpetuated by the Paschal Lamb, and enjoining (imposing) it on their posterity as an annual festival forever.”
Elias Boudinot’s brother-in-law was Judge Richard Stockton, who signed the Declaration. Stockton previously traveled to England in 1767, where he met with many leaders, including the Marquis of Rockingham, the Earl of Chatham and Edmund Burke.
Edmund Burke wrote in “Reflections on the Revolution in France,” 1790: “People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors.”
Richard Stockton had the honor of meeting with King George III on behalf of the trustees of Princeton College. His address acknowledging the repeal of the Stamp Act was favorably received. The Stamp Act, which had been passed by the British Parliament in 1765, required a tax on every piece of printed paper, including legal documents, licenses, newspapers, and publications, effectively restricting communication among American citizens.
Richard Stockton traveled to Scotland, where he met with a young Princeton graduate attending medical school – Benjamin Rush. Benjamin Rush, who signed the Declaration of Independence, married Richard Stockton’s daughter, Julia. Stockton and Rush persuaded Rev. John Witherspoon to leave Scotland and come to America to be president of Princeton. Witherspoon signed the Declaration.
When the British invaded New Jersey, Richard Stockton and his family had to flee for their lives. Stockton was betrayed by loyalists, dragged from his bed at night and imprisoned in New York. His farm was pillaged and his library, one of the best in the country, was burned. Richard Stockton’s health was broken from over a year in the British prison and he died bankrupt at age 51 on Feb. 28, 1781. New Jersey placed a statue of Richard Stockton in the U.S. Capitol’s Statuary Hall.
He wrote in his Will: “As my children … may be peculiarly impressed with the last words of their father, I think proper here, not only to subscribe to the entire belief of the great leading doctrine of the Christian religion … but also in the heart of a father’s affection, to exhort them to remember ‘that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.'”
Richard Stockton’s posterity included his son, also named Richard Stockton, who was a U.S. Senator from New Jersey, his grandson, Navy Commodore Robert Stockton, was a hero of the War of 1812. Robert Stockton helped freed slaves found the country of Liberia, West Africa. In 1846, Commodore Robert F. Stockton defeated the Mexican army and captured California, serving as its first military governor. Stockton, New Jersey, and Stockton, California, were named for Commodore Richard F. Stockton.
America’s founders were willing to sacrifice their prosperity for their posterity, pledging their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, to give freedom to generations yet unborn. Today, many are willing to sacrifice their posterity for prosperity, saddling their children and grandchildren with an unpayable debt just as long as they can maintain their standard of living.
Ancient Israel was a republic for 400 years where people ruled themselves under the Law. But when society became debased, “every man did that which was right in his own eyes,” respect for the law decreased, crime and insecurity increased, and naive citizens cried out for a king to restore order, not realizing that it would cost them their freedom.
Likewise, the United States was set up a republic, where people rule themselves under the law. But as society becomes debased, and students are taught to tolerate everyone doing what is right in their own eyes, respect for the law is decreasing, crime and insecurity are increasing, and naive citizens are crying out for the government to restore order, not realizing it will cost them their freedom.
Ambassador Alan Keyes stated in a Virginia high school assembly, Feb. 28, 2000: “How does it secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity, to those generations yet unborn, to kill them, aborting them in the womb?”
John Adams, who signed the Declaration, wrote on April 26, 1777: “posterity! You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it.”
Brought to you by AmericanMinute.com.
Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2019/02/what-a-pity-socialists-hate-posterity/#6kdT1aefBzqmds6u.99

TEACHER HAD SEX WITH 13 YR-OLD BOY IN CLASS AS ANOTHER BOY WATCHED

(AZCENTRAL) — An alleged illicit sexual relationship between a Goodyear teacher and her 13-year-old student started with a message on a school app.
Las Brisas Academy elementary teacher Brittany Zamora asked her sixth-grade students to message her on an online instruction app called Class Craft because she was going to be bored at school one day.
But police say a message from one male student quickly turned into flirting and then evolved into a sexual relationship between the then-27-year-old and her barely teenage pupil.
WND.COM
(AZCENTRAL) — An alleged illicit sexual relationship between a Goodyear teacher and her 13-year-old student started with a message on a school app. Las Brisas Academy elementary teacher Brittany Zamora asked her sixth-grade students to message her on an online instruction app called Class Craft be...

AOC EATS A HAMBURGER

(AMERICAN MIRROR) — Less than a week after raging against cow farts and urging Americans to stop eating so many hamburgers, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was caught oozing with hypocrisy.
On Tuesday night, an image scorched across Twitter showing Ocasio-Cortez and her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, sitting down for dinner together.
While sitting no more than a foot away, Ocasio-Cortez watched as Chakrabarti ordered a hamburger and chowed it down right in front of her.
WND.COM
(AMERICAN MIRROR) — Less than a week after raging against cow farts and urging Americans to stop eating so many hamburgers, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was caught oozing with hypocrisy. On Tuesday night, an image scorched across Twitter showing Ocasio-Cortez and her chief of staff, Saikat Chakra...

TRUMP HAS CUT RISK OF WAR WITH KIM

On the eve of President Trump’s second summit with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, the Washington Post reports foreign-policy experts at Stanford University assess that Trump has reduced the risk of war with the communist nation.
WND.COM
The Washington Post reports foreign policy experts at Stanford University assess that Trump has reduced the risk of war with the communist nation.

INSIDER: FACEBOOK DISCRIMINATES AGAINST CONSERVATIVES

A Facebook insider has confirmed the social-media giant discriminates against conservatives through software manipulation, using “special features” to “deboost” their traffic, especially near elections.
The former employee of the Big Tech firm now works with James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, which released a video of her testimony.
WND.COM
A Facebook insider has confirmed that the company singles out conservatives for its attacks, through software manipulation, that reduces the options right-leaning users have, and it then uses "special features" to "deboost" their traffic especially near elections.

BORDER CHIEF TO CONGRESS: YES THERE IS AN EMERGENCY

Countering the claims of Democrats and other Trump critics, the U.S. Border Patrol chief told Congress the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border is a national security crisis.
WND.COM
Countering the claims of Democrats, the U.S. Border Patrol chief told Congress the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border is a national security crisis.

SUPREMES TO HEAR ATHEISTS' DEMAND TO REMOVE CROSS

An atheist organizations argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday that a World War I memorial in Bladensburg, Maryland, must be destroyed because it’s in the shape of a cross.
WND.COM
An atheist organizations argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday that a World War I memorial in Bladensburg, Maryland, must be destroyed because it's in the shape of a cross.

SOCCER LEAGUE CALLED OUT FOR LGBT LOGOS

Two well-known world sports organizations, including FIFA, the governing body for soccer, are being criticized for allowing teams to mandate the promotion of LBGT themes in violation of their own rules.
WND.COM
Two well-known world sports organizations including FIFA, the world's governing body for soccer, are being called out for allowing teams to mandate the promoting of LBGT themes, in violation of their own rules.<