The Final Word on 'Pro-Choice' Abortionists

Logically, you can't claim that the life you kill in the womb isn't a life if you champion the right to take its life.

You could say that it hasn't fully matured into a child, and therefore can be killed. Similarly, you could kill a child for not having fully matured into an adult, or those whom are mentally partially developed, or even those whom are partially physically disabled as they too have not matured to their final state as 'normal' life.

You could say that the child that is already born is a fully sentient being and therefore has a right to life. In which case, i can kill abortionists in their sleep as they are not in a fully sentient state.

You could say that your sleep is a temporary condition as you are still mature enough to make decisions when awake. Similarly, a child in the womb is a 'temporary condition' and will be mature enough to make decision when out of uteral hibernation.

You could say, 'my body my rules'. But that is only alright if abortionists are alright with the landlord being able to do what he will with them because it is 'his house and his rules'.

Abortionists can only claim the right to take the child's life in self-defence, which is, if carrying the child leads to the death of the mother. It is then that 'prochoice' comes in and the mother may decide if she wants to kill her child or not to save her own life.

A Child is a Child the Moment it can Become One

The approach that the child isn't a child yet, and can therefore be killed, is a false and illogical argument that takes the child's CURRENT state as its only state. The state of a phenomenon is not only valued according to what it is, but what it will be. Or are prochoice murderers willing to throw away the winning lottery ticket because it has yet to be exchanged for cash? Or can a person's right to vote between elections be taken away because they have yet to vote? It is the potential of your future state, action, and intention that adds value to your current state or the current state of anything.

Every child that is born wouldn't wish that they had been aborted. That is post-natal evidence that every child in the womb desires to live. If you want to know what the child-in-the-womb's response to abortion would be, you will have to wait till it can tell you. 

The fact of the matter is, every child that is born wouldn't wish that they had been aborted. That is post-natal evidence that every child in the womb desires to live. If not, we can have sex with abortionists in their sleep and claim that we weren't sure that they would say no to that. That is as ridiculous as taking the life of a child before the child is in a state to say, 'no! You can't kill me bitch! Feck off!' 

Just as i can't presume without asking, if you want to know what they child-in-the-womb's response to abortion would be, you will have to wait till it can tell you. Aren't you people always banging on about giving the child a choice when it comes to religion, gender, and whatnot? What about life? Sorry if you're offended by my tone, but i don't feel the need for niceties in the face of murdering whores who'll pay a child's life as the price of a one night-stand or just to assert that they are free. When Aretha Frankling sang, R.E.S.P.E.C.T, she didn't mean, kill the child to respect yourself.

(someone ought to tell this black girl that those who colonised, enslaved, and lynched her people in the past were also 'prochoice' too, in determining that they were a lower lifeform and hence not deserving of the same right to life as whites.)

The same argument of the 'immaturity' or 'savagery' of the colonised was used by white supremacist colonialists to slaughter, plunder and enslave non-whites throughout the world by their millions, and it still underlies many other decisions by the west from the creation of 'israel' to killing brown children by their hundreds of thousands through embargoes or killing children in the womb. I suppose they were, and are, 'Prochoice' too, claiming ascendency over other lives because it doesn't match their definition of sentience. It is no surprise that a 'civilisation' like that produces abominations like the Eurofeminist, Abortionist, LGBT movements to their gory gaming to entertainment.

The Final Word on Pro-Choice Abortionists

All those whom claim the right to abort babies they are carrying, when the time comes, should have their babies safely removed, and reared under appropriate conditions. If they aren't in agreement with that, then similarly, a landlord can claim the right to kill tenants he doesn't want to bother to evict. Your right to freedom cannot come at the expense of the child's right to life. Like i said, no child born would have wished s/he was aborted. That is post-natal proof or pre-natal intent.

All pro-abortionists should be rounded up, incarcerated, and have their uterus removed, unless they sign an agreement that they will never seek to kill a life in their womb. And if they ever break such an agreement, they will be sentenced for pre-meditated murder - but no death penalty.

Abortionists are no different from those whom are planning pre-meditated murder, and should be treated as such. And all abortionist groups should be charged for 'conspiracy' to kill as well.

All those whom are carrying a child, can opt for removal of the child and its care under appropriate conditions. Abortion can only be approved under conditions where carrying the child poses a clear and present danger to the life of the mother.

Being a mother doesn't give you the right to kill the child, but an obligation to care for it. If you need to reserve the right to kill it for some perverse sense of freedom, then you are a psychopath and must be sent for mental evaluation and treatment.

This is not open for debate. One doesn't debate when self-defence of innocents is warranted.

In the face of such evil, an emergency must be declared pending the arrest of all abortionists and their uteral removals or declaring that they wouldn't engage in such an act without approval. When it comes to saving the lives of innocence, there is no time for debate. Eurofeminism is a Disease

Eurofeminism is a disease, and a blight on humanity. Part of their claim is the right to sleep around without care. And to complement their perverse idea of freedom, the Eurofeminists step in again for the right of such sexually debauched women to kill the children they conceive our of a drunken or, and, debauched stupor. A Eurofeminist morality cannot be accepted where it comes with the price of the lives of millions of children. That is domestic terrorism, and they must be treated with extreme prejudice.

What we are seeing here is the dual notion that one isn't free until one can be as evil as one can be with impunity (or like Taylor Swift in a recent incident, accuse anyone who dare to term such behaviour as wrong as 'sexist') AND that if anything doesn't fit, isn't convenient, just dispose of it. 

(in a scandinavian production i watched recently - Bordertown, video clip above - a teenage daughter asks the father if it is alright to abort a child. To which, the father, knowing that the daughter might have gone for an abortion, says, 'on a philosophical and ethical level, there is nothing wrong with going for a abortion so that your teenage years and career isn't interrupted.' This is the morality of the perverse. The west is as such.)

These wave of Eurofeminist abortionists plaguing the world, and corrupting and incorporating children and teens globally, like LGBT, is no different from ancient societies that sacrificed babies to vile gods for a good harvest. In fact, the abortionists are far worse. They fight for the right to kill their babies just to prove they are free. So i suppose all rapists should be let off as they were only trying to prove that they were virile? How have these 'women' descended to turning their God-endowed womb to a hellish dungeon of terror? A murderous crime scene, or an impending scene of a murder, and all for some perverse psychotic form of 'women's rights'. Society has indulged the feminist women to the point that nothing but blood would satiate them.

These evil women are sacrificing the life of innocents to a God of Freedom that demands the blood of children for the people to be free? You can see such tendencies in their entertainment now, with babies having their chests torn for their hearts, to children slaughtering parents and each other with axes. Such is the diseased western mind of recent decades. It is no wonder that a people who find entertainment and profit in such abject horror would also be on the streets seeing the murder of children in the womb as 'being free' and call all men who oppose them as 'sexist'. To cast aspersions on bad behaviour on the part of a woman is sexist? Bad behaviour is bad behaviour. A pussy isn't proof of absolution. Eurofeminists throughout the globe are getting from bad to absolutely hellish.

Killing, to many westerners, is either used for 'pre-emptive' attacks; its victims carelessly dismissed as 'collateral damage'; as evidence of freedom; and when it isn't, a product of entertainment in their movies. When a great evil arises, it will always be based on evils that have already been approved in the past. When you see great evils like Pro-abortion to LGBT, they are a culmination of a historical course of events, not an abberation. Believing that to be true is your only defence against evils that are yet to be. I always wondered if the Devil exists. The way things are going on in the west in recent decades, one would be foolish to wonder.

edX

#prochoice #abortion #prolife