There was Auschwitz, and the Gulags, and now, we have America

But before I begin and before my American readers reach for their hunting rifles and come looking for me, yes, yes, I know, we, by which I mean the whole of western civilisation, are party to this enormous crime against humanity.  But, dammit, if you are going to claim the leadership of the western world then you must carry the responsibility.  I am prompted to this subject which I normally try to avoid because the arguments become both furious and pointless by the Steyn article I linked to in the post below.  In it, Steyn draws some very uncomfortable comparisons between Germany under the Nazis, and America increasingly under the cosh of the progressives.  I want to point to another huge stain on American decency, and to repeat myself, I do realise the stain has spread 'over here'.

Since 1973 the American authorities have authorised the killing of 53 million babies.  Let me repeat that - 53 million babies!  It would seem to be an impossibility to add any more shame and disgust at such a mass atrocity but you can, oh dear me, yes, you can!  Today, there is now a thriving trade in 'baby parts':

The CMP [Centre for Medical progress] has released three videos since July 13, the latest of which shows an interview with former StemExpress employee Holly O’Donnell, who says she was hired to “draw blood and dissect dead fetuses and sell the parts to researchers.”

She said employees at StemExpress, a for-profit company, tried to maximize the financial benefit of each fetus by obtaining the most profitable organs.

“The harder and more valuable the tissue, the more money you get,” Ms. O’Donnell said. “So if you can somehow procure a brain or a heart, you’re going to get more money than just chorionic villi or umbilical cord. That’s basically what it is. So I guess that’s an incentive to try and get the hard stuff.”

Needless to say, StemExpress needs must find a good and reliable source for all these profitable 'baby parts' and who better than one of the biggest of the mass killers in the USA, Planned Parenthood. Their top management people have been caught out on secretly recorded film recently discussing the, er, finer points of just what is the best way to yank out the remains of a dead baby without doing too much damage to its organs which are worth big bucks. 

In the meantime, the 'liberal' American media are doing their usual class act of shutting their eyes, sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting 'la-la-la-la-la' as loud as they can.  Most of the political class are doing the same.  A favourite question amongst Anglos and Americans is to wonder just how much the German people knew about the concentration camps at the time.  Well, at least our descendants will have a very clear answer when they ask how many of us today knew about this mass slaughter and its disgusting side trade - all of us!

Comments

[JK]

Just sayin' ... you realize David how, for instance the Polio Vaccine got developed?

"Although the scientific method of hypothesis formulation, testing, and verification is straightforward, even the most spectacular achievements involve complicated issues and tough choices. The scientists who raced toward effective polio vaccines tested their work on prisoners, institutionalized children ... ... "
______________

Of course these experiments took place in, I suppose a *more humane* eg "No fetal tissues" ... (which if actually true) ... "clinical environment" would've been a lot more, oh I suppose "nicer" might be a word ...

Now do not David & Fellow D&N Readers misinterpret/take me wrong where my purely human sentiments are but in my experience there's alot of stuff "the majority of people" would prefer to, either ignore or, in the first place - not know a damn thing about.

For instance - The 1954 Nobel Prize in Medicine:

http://amhistory.si.edu/polio/virusvaccine/vacraces.htm

[backofanenvelope]

Check out Sarah Palin's Facebook!

[missred]

This isn't an just a "yank" problem. We just have a bigger population
https://unitedfamiliesinternational.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/shocking-british-abortion-statistics/
However, it is just one aspect of our society I find absolutely abhorent and I don't understand the silence from the left while they scream death threats over the killing of a lion.
This morning, as I was driving my daughter to work, she had a sad pouty face so I asked what was wrong. She mentioned the killing of the lion. So I said yes, that is sad about the lion, however did you hear what planned parenthood is doing? She was profoundly unnerved.
We have done our children a great disservice by demeaning the value human life through legalised abortion.

[JK]

Watched her BOE on TV about 12 - 14 hours ago.

Oh is she gonna get in trouble placing that Confederate flag next to the Planned Parenthood sign!

[Timbo]

Anyone seen the statistics correlating abortions with the drop in crime about two decades later?

[Andra]

These 53 million "babies".........where would they all live?

[Peter Whale]

I am not a vegetarian but I deplore the guy who shot Cecil with an arrow. I deplore the Planned parent hood regime with their harvesting although I have paid for an abortion (not of my doing) because I thought the circumstances were right to do so at the time (not so sure now). No one is perfect or has infallible morality as we are all subject to our prevailing mindset. The one thing I do know is that all politicians are self serving bastards.

[jimmy glesga]

David the American authorities have no right to intervene in a woman's choice. It is her body and not that of the Authorites who are well paid and no doubt do it in secret in a clean clinical environment while the pleb women get the darning needle. I am sure you watched the original Alfie.

[john malpas]

This is only the beginning.
Soon the burdon of the aging population will be solved by suitable euthanasia.
The only good thing is that the feminists that aborted their children will likely be the first to be 'helped'.

[jimmy glesga]

Do you have evidense it was feminists? What about the male shaggers that agreed. Maybe rapists and the clergy should have a say in the matter. Just leave the woman out and let others decide her fate. Well it was her fault for opening her legs.

[David Duff]

Some general points in response.

First, I tried to make clear that it is definitely not just America that is guilty of this monstrous crime against humanity. I pointed to it simply because off its size and the coincidence of the Planned Parenthood scandal.

Second, if abortion (except in specific cases) was illegal there wouldn't be 53 million babies to house because women would be very much more careful. As Peter puts it, correctly, "No one is perfect or has infallible morality as we are all subject to our prevailing mindset." And the current 'mindset' is anything goes and sod the consequences.

Third, John is absolutely right, 'first they came for the babies, then they came for elderly'!

Fourth, Jimmy asks, in effect, was it the woman's fault "for opening her legs"? Answer - YES! If women claim to be responsible for their own bodies then they must take the responsibility for producing babies.

[backofanenvelope]

I think that abortion is a matter for the woman concerned - unless the abortion is performed by the NHS. In which case, the State is involved. In a civilised country, abortion would be legal, but efforts would be made to reduce its incidence as far as possible. However, the number of abortions increases year by year. Something is wrong.

[David Duff]

If abortion is acceptable, simply a matter of personal - but female - choice, why would you wish to try and "reduce its incidence"?

[Cuffleyburgers]

Duffers - as you say it is a moral minefield. The harvesting of killed babies is truly a montrous and sickening crime.

An epidemic of back street abortions which would be the inevitable consequence of banning abortion outright would be an almost equally unacceptable outcome.

My own view is that abortion carried out early on in a pregnancy under clinical conditions is probably an acceptable, unpleasant necessity.

Harvesting body parts implies that abportions are happening very late to baboes who in many cases would be viable, and I have to say I tend to agree that that verges on murder.

I certainly would not want to be a policy maker in this issue but I would look at setting a limit, fairly low say around 20 weeks, for "noseholding" purely pragmatic reasons.

The parallels with Cecil are obvious - there too for pragmatic reasons (high paying tourism paying to conserve wildlife populations) a rather unpleasant practice (the slaughter of splendid beasts, hopefully in a humane manner) is permitted, and rightly so. You can agree with the rightness of the policy without liking it.

[jimmy glesga]

David. In many cases women are forced to open their legs! I did work with a women who attended a well known private Catholic school in Glasgow and she told me she was in her twenties when she found out how a baby was conceived and she was appalled. She never did have children. My friend used to say he would have'returned unopened put oh her tombstone'.

[Jerven]

Here I am, late to the party as usual!

OK, as someone who has worked in health-care (nurse and midwifery trained) for a while (and who was 'forced' to attend such a 'procedure' as a student), here's the dirty secret no-one wants you to know:

No woman in the UK (I'd guess its similar in the US) has ever become pregnant since about 1975 except by choice (whether admitted or not), stupidity or just plain laziness! Fact! (and with the 'morning-after' pill, most unplanned/unwanted pregnancies then occur purely as a result of laziness). (There will be those who claim options aren't 100% effective but effectively all those <0.5% who appear to be the exceptions when pressed 'suddenly' admit they either weren't using them correctly or weren't using them at all).

We have, and have had for some decades, free contraception. We have contraceptives either free or so cheap anyone can afford them available in high-street chemists, hospitals, surgery’s, pubs, clubs, newsagents and sweet-shops (they even give them away free in my local library). The current 'catalogue' of available options runs to over a hundred pages – all freely available.

Abortion was made legal (and freely, tax-payer funded, available) based on the (spurious) claim of thousands of unwanted children conceived either with major genetic abnormalities (a minuscule occurrence) or by rape/incest (an even more minuscule occurrence since the freely available 'morning-after pill' has meant not one, zero, examples of such here). So who makes use of this 'service'? Overwhelmingly it is the I “forgot”, “was drunk”, “don't like” ladies but a significant number are 'repeat users' who see it as a viable contraceptive alternative (I 'know' a 'lady' of twenty-four who has already had seven abortions! And she isn't unusual). All of those are based, not on medical need, but on convenience (I don't want one now, I can't afford it, it'll interrupt my career/education/social-life) for the woman only. Yes, there are those with distressing, devastating choices to make about damaged babies but they number in the hundreds over the decades not the millions per year we see in the clinics.

Oh, and for the (predictable) statement of “we'll just have a return to back-street/coat-hanger abortions”. Really? The Victorian (to the sixties - although those numbers were extremely 'over-stated') era naïve, destitute waif driven to suicide or those back-street butchers was the result of no access to the modern contraceptives and a non-existent welfare state/employment legislation/preferential access which currently actively rewards women who have children (we won't even mention the fact that there is an ever growing, unfulfilled, demand for young children/babies for adoption as an alternative to this). No, removal of the abortion option will have one (unforgivable in the eyes of feminists and most women) effect – it will force them to accept responsibility for their choices/actions for a change (so the “who will look after/fund those 53 million babies” is a straw-man – and they know it).

But what about the men in all this, I hear some shout? Well, remember “a womans body, her choice”? No man has had any say in whether a child is born in almost as long. If the woman (even in a marriage) wants a child and the man doesn’t – there 'will' be a child (accidentally on purpose if need be - oops). If the woman doesn't want a child and the man does – there 'will not' be a child. Period! So if the entire, exclusive, unilateral, choice is the womans, just what effect/action/role (other than abstaining and/or being expected to fund 'her' choices) does any man have in this particular debate?

Also, you do realise that the self-same doctors and nurses involved in doing this are the very ones we also fund to the tune of millions to provide 'assisted conception' techniques (and the women on the wards are placed in alternating beds – one who is so desperate to have a child she will do almost anything alternating with one who wishes to destroy hers and will do likewise!). The thing is, the worst part is that the women who attend for an abortion are deliberately kept in ignorance regarding just what they are doing (although many/most don't try too hard/wish to know).

The abortion industry (for that is what it is, a production-line of atrocity for profit and ideology, visit any clinic and see the hundreds of buckets [literally] in the sluices filled with babies – millions are made by all concerned both in the US and here) is a stain our society we will never wash off (The Aztec’s and Bergan-Belsen have nothing on Planned Parenthood and the NHS Womans Health units! I suspect history will so judge us).

[David Duff]

Late or not, Jerven, that was an excellent comment - thanks.