KILL 'EM ALL

Ah, the New York Times. So liberal, so out of touch with the rest of the country when it comes to abortion, oh, I mean, “basic reproductive rights”. In an editorial today, the Times fears:

“the Republican campaign against women's basic reproductive and privacy rights reached an ominous new stage last week. “

What is this ominous stage? It was the signing of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Yes, a common sense law that protects a child in utero was distant steps of jack-booted storm troopers, led by George Bush and Karl Rove, coming to trample on our civil rights. It’s all part of:

“…the administration's anti-choice agenda…”

You know what? Proving the old adage that just because you’re paranoid that doesn’t mean people aren’t out get you, the Times is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! Thank God for people like George Bush, Rick Santorum and everyone else who work tirelessly to chip away at the mass slaughter of our youth. For all of President Bush’s faults, I salute him for his unwavering advancement of the pro-life cause.

The editorial also goes into the court challenges of the Partial Birth Abortion Law. It quotes Dr. Amos Grunebaum, who was mentioned in Mel’s Diner last week. The Times quotes him as saying:

“He also noted that the removal of an intact fetus, which the bill supposedly takes aim at, is sometimes the safest procedure, since it is less invasive, thereby reducing the risk of infection and other complications.”

What the Times didn’t mention were these quotes from Dr. Grunebaum:

“He said the law was so vague that it could outlaw virtually any type of abortion performed during the second trimester because the fetus is sometimes still alive as it is brought outside the body.”

And this one...

“He said doctors used to hide the fetus from women after an abortion before studies in the late 1970s and early 1980s showed that women grieved less after a failed pregnancy if they get to see the fetus.

"It is the same as any baby dying. People want to hold the fetus," he said, adding that he goes so far as to put a cap on the head of the fetus just as he would a newborn.”

Yet, he sleeps at night.

If the Times editorial board had any conscience, any sense of right and wrong, we wouldn’t get this final quote:

“The administration's defense of its "partial birth" ban and the new "unborn victims" law have a common theme: profound disrespect for women.”

How about these laws show a profound RESPECT for CHILDREN.