That’s because America should be, in the opinion of the ACLU, a place where you’re free to have an abortion any time, even if your baby is born alive after the process is finished.

In that case, they just throw the placenta on top of the baby so that it can’t breath fresh air, while it cries in agony for its mother.

It’s no wonder that there is a lobby out there which is trying to allow for death certificates for stillborn children. The abortionists object to that, because it might get the “pro life” peoples’ feet in the door to claiming that a fetus is a person; a living being, separate from its mother. The only time they recognize that now is if the child is ‘wanted’.

I’m not sure what the legal grounds are for the medical community to kill an infant that they’ve tried to abort and failed, because it was born alive….but that’s what Partial Birth Abortion is all about, and that’s the nasty word that the ACLU didn’t use in the article on its website here. Stressing women’s rights, autonomy and health concerns doesn’t diminish what it is we’re talking about here, which is a horrifying Joseph Mengele type procedure that should be outlawed in all of its forms. In my opinion, even a back alley abortionist should be jailed or given capital punishment if it can be proven that they’ve perpetrated this horrendous, vicious, murdering crime against a child.

WASHINGTON – The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Abortion Federation (NAF) today sharply criticized a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding a federal law banning certain abortions. It is the first abortion decision from the Supreme Court since Justice Sandra Day O’Connor retired. Both organizations said that the Court’s decision will endanger women’s health.

Now how can banning certain abortions ‘endanger women’s health’? As far as I can tell, this has to do with the health of the baby, and not a woman’s health. Notice how they’re not mentioning the actual name of the Act that they’re attacking, which is the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Let’s stop obfuscating the facts, shall we, and call things by their real names and get down to what it is precisely that these people are advocating: The procedure at issue involves partially removing the fetus intact from a woman’s uterus, then crushing or cutting its skull to complete the abortion. (FoxNews, 2007) The abortionists who are wailing about the decision have come out and said that this decision isn’t going to affect the number of abortions that are done in this manner, because it doesn’t prevent them from using an alternative method of murdering these children: dismembering the fetus in the uterus — which is an available alternative, and, is indeed, much more common.

“Today’s decision has placed politics above protecting women’s health,” said Vicki Saporta, President and CEO of NAF. “This ruling is a set back for all Americans who believe politicians should not legislate medical decision-making. The decision disregards the opinion of leading doctors and medical organizations that oppose the ban because it is harmful to women’s health.”

This is a rather disingenuous argument when you consider ripping apart an innocent baby who’s done nothing wrong inside the mother’s uterus before pulling the parts out. This is Joseph Mengele type science, and what’s even more outrageous and sickening is how calmly the proponents of it are arguing in favor of it.

The Supreme Court upheld the Partial Birth Abortion (hereafter referred to as PBA) ban based on Gonzalez v. Carhart, (Through a Glass Darkly) which might be another one of the reasons that the leftists are so adamantly opposed to Gonzalez; he’s made some serious headway on issues that all conservatives consider important. The firing of the 8 US Attorneys is just obfuscation as far as I’m concerned, under Clinton, all 93 US Attorneys were fired by Janet Reno, and there was not a peep out of the media or anyone else over that.

The majority clearly wants to revisit Roe Versus Wade, based on what happens to an infant during PBA:

At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the fingers of the left [hand] along the back of the fetusand “hooks” the shoulders of the fetus with the index and ring fingers (palm down).

“‘While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of bluntcurved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger.“‘[T]he surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Havingsafely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening.“‘The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he appliestraction to the fetus, removing it completely from the patient.’” H. R. Rep. No. 108–58, p. 3 (2003).

Here’s court testimony from a nurse who assisted Dr. Haskell in a partial birth abortion:

“‘Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms—everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. . . .“‘The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall. “‘The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. . . . “‘He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.’” Ibid.

The Court ruled today on two challenges to the federal abortion ban, called by its sponsors the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.” The two cases are Gonzales v. Carhart, brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Dr. LeRoy Carhart and three other physicians, and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, brought by Planned Parenthood Federation of America on behalf of its affiliates throughout the country.

Planned Parenthood was started by Margaret Sanger, who was a racist communist. Sanger’s goal wasn’t even something that she covered up; she bragged about it.

“We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population”-Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest provider and promoter of legal abortion in the United States.

So using Planned Parenthood as an example of an organization which is involved in attempting to legitimize this ill-conceived and sick practice of PBA is also very telling.

Margaret Sanger, through her Planned Parenthood organization, advocated abortions on Afro-Americans in order to eliminate what she called “socially undesirable people”. This site is an excellent Afro-American response against Sanger’s racist eugenics: Genocide against Afro-Americans

It looks as though it’s worked, because the birth rate for black people across the country has decreased by incredible numbers: Blacks make up 12% of the population, but 35% of the abortions in America. (blackgenocide.org)

On average, 1,452 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.

This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 10 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated “Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 31 million, the missing 10 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America’s Black community would now number 41 million persons. It would be 35 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member.” (blackgenocide.org)

That’s fitting, because Engels, who helped Karl Marx write the Communist Manifesto, wrote that NATIVE BLACKS DUMBER THAN AN EIGHT-YEAR-OLD

Engels. “Notes to Anti-Duehring”: “If, for instance, among us the mathematical axioms seem self-evident to every eight-year-old child, and in no need of proof from experience, this is solely the result of “accumulated inheritance.” It would be difficult to teach them by a proof to a bushman or Australian negro”.

This is the reason that we need affirmative action, apparently - so that Blacks can get into universities and obtain good jobs - based not on good grades or academic prowess, but instead on the assumption that they’re not able to compete in a free marketplace. This is also a reason that Stanger felt that they’re ‘undesirable’, and why, in her twisted thinking, they needed to be ‘exterminated’ through legitimizing and socializing abortion as a method of birth control.

A third challenge to the ban, National Abortion Federation v. Gonzales, was brought by NAF and seven individual physicians, represented by the ACLU, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, the ACLU of Illinois, and the New York Civil Liberties Union. In 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit put that case on hold until the Supreme Court issued a decision in the other two cases. Today’s Supreme Court decision requires that the ban be upheld in this case as well.

We know all too well the junk science they prop in order to pull off their legal gymnastics.

“Today’s decision undermines a core principle of Roe v. Wade that women’s health must remain paramount,” said Louise Melling, Director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “The decision invites politicians to meddle even further into the doctor-patient relationship by passing additional restrictions on abortion.”

Not a very intelligent statement when you consider the history behind this and the facts of the sickening medical procedure they’re they’re trying to legitimize through the courts, but then leftists at the ACLU are all about ‘feelings’ and not about ‘facts’.

What’s irritating to me is their stupidity over the ‘health of women’ rather than recognize whose health this procedure truly affects. We are not facing overpopulation in the United States, I don’t know why it is that they keep pursuing this in the face of all those who still believe that protecting the innocent is a moral imperative.

Leading doctors and medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which represents 90 percent of OB-GYNs in this country, opposed the federal ban.

Could that be because their cash registers wouldn’t be ringing anymore? Then again, if they keep whining about embryonic stem cell research, this might be another source of income for heartless scientists who use the theory of evolution as their guide for medical ethics.

Congress passed the federal abortion ban and President Bush signed it into law in 2003, despite numerous court decisions striking down similar state bans, including the decision in 2000 by the Supreme Court in Stenberg v. Carhart.

As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her dissent to today’s opinion: “Though today’s opinion does not go so far as to discard Roe or Casey, the Court, differently composed than it was when we last considered a restrictive abortion regulation, is hardly faithful to our earlier invocations of ‘the rule of law’ and the ‘principles of stare decisis.’”

The ‘rule of law’ has completely ignored the rights of the innocent who can’t speak for themselves, and the cruel, heartless murder of unborn innocents because it gets in the way of the sexual lives of their cold and irresponsible mothers.

Today’s cases are Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, No. 05-1382 and Gonzales v. Carhart, No. 05-380.

The National Abortion Federation (NAF) is the professional association of abortion providers in the United States and Canada. Our mission is to ensure safe, legal, and accessible abortion care to promote health and justice for women. Our members include health care professionals at clinics, doctors’ offices, and hospitals, who together care for more than half the women who choose abortion each year. For more information, visit our website at www.prochoice.org.

They should change the name of that website to legitimized back alley abortionists dot org.

The ACLU is our nation’s guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States. For more information, visit: www.aclu.org/reproductiverights.

What a lie.

X Posted at STACLU