Many people during slavery thought it was fine to have it especially in the south where its economy was built upon slavery and benefited so many on a personal level--forget those who suffered under slavery, the owners benefited and they had a legal right to own! And given slavery's legality, it was their personal decision to have slaves and should not then be a legal debate as it concerns their personal choice to take advantage of the law that allowed slavery.
I could never figure out how good people in the segregated south, good people that I knew, wanted the segregated south to remain, separate but equal. Of course separate but equal wasn't! But it was the law and they abided, because someone was personally benefiting from this legalized institution in the south.
Since Roe V. Wade, abortion, like segregation and slavery before it, is legal and remains legal today--abortion the killing, the murder of innocent human life, homicide, is legal in the USA. Who bats an eye apart from fanatical pro-life Christians? Even the main stream media applauds a mother's right to kill her child, to commit infanticide, homicide, murder, all in the name of her personal needs discussed with her nurse or doctor. It is a personal decision not a legal debate after all!
And when pro-life Christians protest in front of an abortion clinic that its personnel murders innocent human life, which side does the press take and most of liberal America? The child's side, the one being murdered, or the murdering abortionists and the mother's right to choose to make this decision?
How is it that our progressive American culture today accepts abortion as evil as it is and wants to remove Robert E. Lee's statues from parks throughout the south because he supported the legality of slavery based upon states' rights and the fact that it was legal in the south? Logically, where is the difference and why do we uphold abortion clinics whose economy profits off of the murder of babies?
And as I recall both Hilary Clinton and President Barack Obama, our first mixed raced president, were in favor of partial birth abortion. Should they have statues and monument erected in their honor? And if there are statues and monuments already built in their honor, should not these be removed now and not wait for a future recognition of the great evil of abortion and the murders of millions and millions of babies since 1973?
2 comments:
That is something that cant be missed. Interesting how the press refers to one side of the protest as white nationalists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klan members. It doesn't give any description of the opposition. It doesn't refer to them as abortionists, or sodomites, or fascists, or the far-left extremists , or atheists, or witches, or former slave traders , or homosexuals, or communists or racists. They are simply "the counter protesters" and the reason for the protest isn't even mentioned. They (the counter protestors) are experts at exploiting the sins of history but totally ignorant of the sins of today. Statues and memorials are reminders of history; for good or bad. I wonder if those "counter protestors" want to erase the reminders of history so that they can better advance their agenda today. That agenda is abortion.
While we are busy at it, "rewriting history", there are some other statues that have to come down: Up in DC, lets remove FDR's---after all, he was visiting his mistress when he died at Warm Springs 72 years ago---and any monuments to Martin Luther King should be removed---LBJ (not exactly a faithful spouse to Lady Bird in his 38 years of marriage) had audiotapes clearly revealing King had affairs too. Somehow I don't think we'll get any takers on the left.
PC has wiped out a lot of the Democratic party in the South and elsewhere. 25 years ago, Georgia Democrats at the General Assembly were a mixture of liberal whites and blacks and more conservative rural Democrats. Then Barnes became governor and with little notice pushed to change the Georgia state flag (which had the Confederate emblem on it). Rural Georgia revolted, electing Sonny Perdue the first Republican governor of this state in modern times. Really these days, there is no ideological difference (or very little) between a "Georgia Democrat" and a "national Democrat." You can be sure that next year, for instance, the Democratic nominee for governor in Georgia will support abortion on demand, gay marriage and Obamacare.
Post a Comment