Kirsten Powers, writer for USA today, is a very outspoken liberal. She is a staunch supporter of same-sex marriage and even feeds Hillary Clinton propaganda against GOP candidates, like Ron Paul.
With this record, her surprising statement on abortion shows that the pro-life position should cut across party lines – it’s a human rights issue.
She intensely criticizes her Democratic party for turning a blind eye to abortion:
“Democrats like to talk about the importance of being on the ‘right side of history.’ This phrase was invoked frequently during the same-sex marriage debate. Yet when faced with a series of videos detailing grotesque human rights abuses against unborn children by Planned Parenthood Federation of America doctors, Democratic Party forces have eschewed all concern for historical or moral rightness.”
Powers points out to the liberals in the Democratic Party that public opinion is and was against what Planned Parenthood is doing… even before the release of the horrific videos.
“Guess who supports second trimester abortions, barring extreme extenuating circumstances? Almost nobody.
“When Gallup asked in 2012 whether abortion should be legal in the second trimester, only 27 percent of respondents said yes. This percentage has been nearly unchanged since Gallup began asking this question in 1996. As Slate’s Will Saletan noted in a 2014 piece analyzing abortion polling, ‘Even the most pro-choice people aren’t sold on abortion rights beyond the first trimester.”
In the videos released, Dr. Deborah Nucatola (PP’s senior director of medical services) explains that second trimester abortions “yields the tissue that you want” and admits that a quarter of Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles abortions are performed in the second trimester. In the Los Angeles facility alone, PP is performing 3,000 abortions of second trimester babies per year.
Dr. Savita Ginde (PP of the Rocky Mountains VP and Medical Director) states in another video that they do abortions in the second trimester, so they have “fairly large identifiable [body] parts.”
Indeed, not only is PP motivated to perform these late abortions to get good “specimens” for profit, but they also charge more for abortions of older babies.
Though the general public draws a line at a certain age – where they can no longer tolerate the thought that abortion is a woman’s right – the truth is: a fetus is a human baby, at all stages of pregnancy.
And Planned Parenthood knows this.
That’s why no one who works for Planned Parenthood is allowed to convey any message other than that abortion is permissible during the entire nine months. As soon as they admit the humanity of the baby at any stage in the womb, they‘ve lost the battle.
The general public – which already condemns second trimester abortions – is now outraged by these videos showing that PP doctors and employees prefer second trimester abortions, sell these dead baby’s body parts, and all the while callously talk about “body parts in a bag” and killing (or “crushing”) techniques that will keep the organs intact.
Planned Parenthood is in MAJOR damage control mode. And the Democratic Party is trying to help.
How? By silencing the people who are exposing them.
Judicial activism is rearing its ugly head again… this time to suppress truth and attack freedom of the press.
A federal judge in California, William Orrick III, has issued a restraining order to the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), which has recently released several videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s underhanded dealings.
He has cited ridiculous reasons for the order: that the CMP is likely to subject the National Abortion Federation (NAF) to “harassment, intimidation, violence, invasion of privacy, and injury to reputation.”
Harrassment? Intimidation? Violence? There is no empirical evidence for his claims.
Moreover, if taxpayer dollars are funding Planned Parenthood, then taxpayers have a right to know what their money is funding. There is no “privacy” that PP, the NAF, or any other abortion leaders are entitled to in this case.
Perhaps the abortionists and abortion leaders should be responsible for injury to their own reputations, not CMP.
Investigative and undercover reporting is a practice crucial to the uncovering of truth and to freedom of the press.
Nowhere does the law specify that undercover reporting warrants a restraining order; in fact, it is well established that this is not an appropriate legal remedy – even if the evidence released was classified and did require legal action.
If this is legally unprecedented, what’s really going on here?
It’s that the Obama administration will do whatever it takes to protect the practice of infanticide in our nation.
Incidentally, Orrick (appointed by Obama) has donated at least $230,000 to Obama. Furthermore, his wife is a pro-abortion activist.
This judicial activist is not only acting as a legislator from the bench – he’s simultaneously violating First Amendment rights and trying to keep the truth from the public.
What do you think? Email me at email@example.com.