The oh so brave Dr. Kermit Gosnell.

 

Dr Kermit Gosnell when facing his own abortion

boudicabpi boudicabpi·31 videos

Published on May 15, 2013

Gosnell was bravely murdering babies but not so much when he faced his own life being aborted.

http://www.boudica.us/weblog.html

http://boudicabpi.boudica.us/

https://twitter.com/Boudicabpi

 

If you comment we reserve the right to use your comment in/as a post

Follow us, donate and help us stay on-line.

Follow Boudicabpi on Twitter

This entry was posted in abortion, Obama, USA and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The oh so brave Dr. Kermit Gosnell.

  1. upaces88 says:

    Laila, or whatever your name is, I DO NOT LIKE JEW HATING PEOPLE.
    Where are you from? What is your religion?

    • Laila Rasheed says:

      YO 88,

      So you like TALMUDIC Jews:

      THE HOLY BABYLONIAN TALMUD

      The Talmud is Judaism’s holiest book (actually a collection of books). Its authority takes precedence over the Old Testament in Judaism. Evidence of this may be found in the Talmud itself, Erubin 21b (Soncino edition):

      “My son, be more careful in the observance of the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah (Old Testament).”

      Jewish scholar Hyam Maccoby, in “Judaism on Trial,” quotes Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph:

      “Further, without the Talmud, we would not be able to understand passages in the Bible … God has handed this authority to the sages and tradition is a necessity as well as scripture. The Sages also made enactments of their own … anyone who does not study the Talmud cannot understand Scripture.”
      The Talmud (and not the Scriptures) is the legal/canonical text which obligates those who follow the Jewish religion. It is from the Talmud that laws, regulations, and world views are drawn. In practice, the everyday life of the modern religious person is drawn and influenced by the Talmud.

      Second century Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, one of Judaism’s very greatest rabbis and a creator of Kabbalah, sanctioned pedophilia—permitting molestation of baby girls even younger than three! He proclaimed,

      “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and a day is permitted to marry a priest.” 1
      Yebamoth 60b,
      Subsequent rabbis refer to ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia as “halakah,” or binding Jewish law. 2 Yebamoth 60b
      Has Rabbi ben Yohai, child rape advocate, been disowned by modern Jews? Hardly. Today, in ben Yohai’s hometown of Meron, Israel, tens of thousands of orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews gather annually for days and nights of singing and dancing in his memory.
      References to pedophilia abound in the Talmud. They occupy considerable sections of Treatises Kethuboth and Yebamoth and are enthusiastically endorsed by the Talmud’s definitive legal work, Treatise Sanhedrin.

      The Pharisees Endorsed Child Sex

      The rabbis of the Talmud are notorious for their legal hairsplitting, and quibbling debates. But they share rare agreement about their right to molest three year old girls. In contrast to many hotly debated issues, hardly a hint of dissent rises against the prevailing opinion (expressed in many clear passages) that pedophilia is not only normal but scriptural as well! It’s as if the rabbis have found an exalted truth whose majesty silences debate.
      Because the Talmudic authorities who sanction pedophilia are so renowned, and because pedophilia as “halakah” is so explicitly emphasized, not even the translators of the Soncino edition of the Talmud (1936) dared insert a footnote suggesting the slightest criticism. They only comment: “Marriage, of course, was then at a far earlier age than now.” 3

      In fact, footnote 5 to Sanhedrin 60b rejects the right of a Talmudic rabbi to disagree with ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia:
      “How could they [the rabbis], contrary to the opinion of R. Simeon ben Yohai, which has scriptural support, forbid the marriage of the young proselyte?” 4
      1 Yebamoth 60b, p. 402.
      2 Yebamoth 60b, p. 403.
      3 Sanhedrin 76a.
      4 In Yebamoth 60b, p. 404, Rabbi Zera disagrees that sex with girls under three years and one day should be endorsed as halakah.

      Out of Babylon
      It was in Babylon after the exile under Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC that Judaism’s leading sages probably began to indulge in pedophilia. Babylon was the staggeringly immoral capitol of the ancient world. For 1600 years, the world’s largest population of Jews flourished within it.
      As an example of their evil, Babylonian priests said a man’s religious duty included regular sex with temple prostitutes. Bestiality was widely tolerated. So Babylonians hardly cared whether a rabbi married a three year old girl.

      But with expulsion of the Jews in the 11th century AD, mostly to western Christian lands, Gentile tolerance of Jewish pedophilia abruptly ended.
      Still, a shocking contradiction lingers: If Jews want to revere the transcendent wisdom and moral guidance of the Pharisees and their Talmud, they must accept the right of their greatest ancient sages to violate children. To this hour, no synod of Judaism has repudiated their vile practice.

      Sex with a “Minor” Permitted
      What exactly did these sages say?
      The Pharisees justified child rape by explaining that a boy of nine years was not a “man” Thus they exempted him from God’s Mosaic Law:
      “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Leviticus. 18:22)
      One passage in the Talmud gives permission for a woman who molested her young son to marry a high priest. It concludes,

      “All agree that the (sexual) connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not.” Sanhedrin 69b 5

      Because a boy under 9 is sexually immature, he can’t “throw guilt” on the active offender, morally or legally. 6

      “…the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act.” 7
      The Talmud also says,

      “A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother’s wife acquires her (as wife).”8
      Clearly, the Talmud teaches that a woman is permitted to marry and have sex with a nine year old boy.
      5 Sanhedrin 69b.
      6 Sanhedrin 55a.
      7 Footnote 1 to Kethuboth 11b.
      8 Sanhedrin 55b.

      Sex at Three Years and One Day
      In contrast to Simeon ben Yohai’s dictum that sex with a little girl is permitted under the age of three years, the general teaching of the Talmud is that the rabbi must wait until a day after her third birthday. She could be taken in marriage simply by the act of rape.
      R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. (Sanhedrin 55b)

      A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation. . . .(. Yebamoth 57b)

      A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her she becomes his. (Sanhedrin. 69a, 69b, also discussed in Yebamoth. 60b)
      It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phineas (who was priest, the footnote says) surely was with them. (Yebamoth. 60b)

      [The Talmud says such three year and a day old girls are] . . . fit for cohabitation. . . But all women children, that have not known man by lying with him, it must be concluded that Scripture speaks of one who is fit for cohabitation. (Footnote to Yebamoth. 60b)
      The example of Phineas, a priest, himself marrying an underage virgin of three years is considered by the Talmud as proof that such infants are “fit for cohabitation.”

      The Talmud teaches that an adult woman’s molestation of a nine year old boy is “not a sexual act” and cannot “throw guilt” upon her because the little boy is not truly a “man.” 9 But they use opposite logic to sanction rape of little girls aged three years and one day: Such infants they count as “women,” sexually mature and fully responsible to comply with the requirements of marriage.
      The Talmud footnotes 3 and 4 to Sanhedrin 55a clearly tell us when the rabbis considered a boy and girl sexually mature and thus ready for marriage. “At nine years a male attains sexual matureness… The sexual matureness of woman is reached at the age of three.”
      9 Sanhedrin 55a.

      No Rights for Child Victims
      The Pharisees were hardly ignorant of the trauma felt by molested children. To complicate redress, the Talmud says a rape victim must wait until she was of age before there would be any possibility of restitution. She must prove that she lived and would live as a devoted Jewess, and she must protest the loss of her virginity on the very hour she comes of age. “As soon as she was of age one hour and did not protest she cannot protest any more.” 10
      The Talmud defends these strict measures as necessary to forestall the possibility of a Gentile child bride rebelling against Judaism and spending the damages awarded to her as a heathen – an unthinkable blasphemy! But the rights of the little girl were really of no great consequence, for,
      “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (three years and a day) it is as if one put the finger into the eye.” The footnote says that as “tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.” Kethuboth 11b.

      In most cases, the Talmud affirms the innocence of male and female victims of pedophilia. Defenders of the Talmud claim this proves the Talmud’s amazing moral advancement and benevolence toward children; they say it contrasts favorably with “primitive” societies where the child would have been stoned along with the adult perpetrator.

      Actually, the rabbis, from self-protection, were intent on proving the innocence of both parties involved in pedophilia: the child, but more importantly, the pedophile. They stripped a little boy of his right to “throw guilt” on his assailant and demanded complicity in sex from a little girl. By thus providing no significant moral or legal recourse for the child, the Talmud clearly reveals whose side it is on: the raping rabbi.
      Pedophilia Widespread
      Child rape was practiced in the highest circles of Judaism. This is illustrated from Yebamoth. 60b:
      There was a certain town in the land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Romanos who conducted an inquiry and found in it the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day, and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest.
      The footnote says that she was “married to a priest” and the rabbi simply permitted her to live with her husband, thus upholding “halakah” as well as the dictum of Simeon ben Yohai,

      “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest.” 12
      These child brides were expected to submit willingly to sex. Yebamoth. 12b confirms that under eleven years and one day a little girl is not permitted to use a contraceptive but “must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner.”
      In Sanhedrin 76b a blessing is given to the man who marries off his children before they reach the age of puberty, with a contrasting curse on anyone who waits longer. In fact, failure to have married off one’s daughter by the time she is 12-1/2, the Talmud says, is as bad as one who “returns a lost article to a Cuthean” (Gentile) – a deed for which “the Lord will not spare him.” 13 This passage says:
      “… it is meritorious to marry off one’s children whilst minors.”
      The mind reels at the damage to the untold numbers of girls who were sexually abused within Judaism during the heyday of pedophilia. Such child abuse, definitely practiced in the second century, continued, at least in Babylon, for another 900 years.
      10 Kethuboth 11a.
      11 Kethuboth 11b.
      12 Yebamoth 60b.
      13 Sanhedrin 76b.

      A Fascination with Sex
      Perusing the Talmud, one is overwhelmed with the recurrent preoccupation with sex, especially by the most eminent rabbis. Dozens of illustrations could be presented to illustrate the delight of the Pharisees to discuss sex and quibble over its minutest details.
      The rabbis endorsing child sex undoubtedly practiced what they preached. Yet to this hour, their words are revered. Simeon ben Yohai is honored by Orthodox Jews as one of the very greatest sages and spiritual lights the world has ever known. A member of the earliest “Tannaim,” rabbis most influential in creating the Talmud, he carries more authority to observant Jews than Moses.
      Today, the Talmud’s outspoken pedophiles and child-rape advocates would doubtlessly spend hard time in prison for child molestation.
      The Oedipus complex was the invention of Sigmund Freud!

      Freud originally discovered, in the treatments partially conducted under hypnosis, that all his Jewish patients, both male and female, had been abused children and recounted their histories in the language of symptoms. After reporting his discovery in Jewish psychiatric circles, he found himself completely shunned because none of his fellow Jewish psychiatrists was prepared to share the findings with him. Freud could not bear the isolation for long. A few months later, in 1897, he described his patients’ reports on sexual abuse as sheer fantasies attributable to their instinctual wishes.

      Freud’s father was a pedophile! In a letter to his friend Wilhelm Fliess, he wrote:
      “Unfortunately, my own father was one of these perverts and is responsible for the hysteria of my brother (all of whose symptoms are identifications) and those of several younger sisters. The frequency of this circumstance often makes me wonder.”

      Fliess’s son, Robert Fliess exposed his own father as being another pedophile who had sexually abused him when he was a child.

  2. Ken says:

    His ASSHOLE will be bigger than his MOUTH if the GEN POP gets a hold of him!

    • upaces88 says:

      Ooo, Ken, I think that he will be tortured first and then murdered; and no one will shed a tear for him.

  3. upaces88 says:

    When this man goes to prison…put him in with the General Population. They will take care of him. The man will have to spend his entire prison time in Solitary.
    Even hardened criminals hate child molesters and killers. This man is out and out EVIL.

  4. Laila Rasheed says:

    YEAH!

    Jews run a lot of Death Camps/Clinics in America!

    Strange.

    Abortion: The Kosher Slaughter
    By Jayne Gardener

    Who drives the abortion industry in the United States? Want to hazard a guess?

    If you said that the main movers and shakers behind the pro-abortion movement in the U.S. are Jews, you win the grand prize.
    While there are, of course, pro-life Jews who are disturbed by the abortion rates in both the United States and Israel, I would venture to say that they are certainly in the minority, especially in the U.S. Their low regard for Gentile life at any stage of development is reflected in the number of abortions performed by Jewish doctors (about half of all abortion providers are Jewish) [1] in Jewish owned “women’s clinics” (about a half of all such clinics are owned by Jews)[2] which is way out of proportion when you consider what a small percentage of our population Jews comprise.

    Various people have commented publicly about the disproportionate number of Jews in the abortion rights movement. For instance, Kenneth Mitzner, founder of an organization entitled The Pro-life League Against Neo-Hitlerism said:

    “It is tragic but demonstrably true that most of the leaders of the pro-abortion movement are of Jewish extraction.” [3]

    First, let’s take a look at the Talmudic view on abortion. The Mishnah, comprising the first part of the Talmud, provides a source for understanding the Jewish position which assumes that life arises only at birth which is when they believe that ensoulment takes place. So long as the fetus, or the most important part of it, its head, has not come out into the world, it is not called nefresh (a human soul) and therefore an unborn fetus is not to be considered a living being until birth.
    The old testament, in Exodus 21:22-23 shows us that the Jews did not regard unborn lives as human beings as reflected in the laws during that period:

    “If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”

    “Literally and by interpretation, this passage poses the basic legal principal that the destruction of the fetus is not to be considered punishable murder. Death of the unborn child is punishable by fine only, and capital punishment does not apply. Only if the mother is harmed, i.e. killed, does the law of capital punishment take effect.” [4]

    Clearly, the Jewish Talmudic view on abortion is a disturbing one since if a fetus is not considered a living being until birth it can only mean that Talmudic Jews would have no problem with abortion at any stage of gestation for any reason, up until birth. It is unarguable that a fetus is a living being and it is abhorrent to think that pro-abortion Jews would be fine with the destruction of a healthy, viable fetus no matter how late in pregnancy the abortion would take place.
    Abortion has pretty wide support among Jews in this country and various Jewish organizations in the U.S. are openly and unashamedly pro abortion, organizations such as:

    American Jewish Committee
    American Jewish Congress
    B’nai B’rith Women
    Central Conference of American Rabbis [Reform]
    Federation of Reconstructionist Congregations
    Hadassah Women
    Jewish Labor Committee
    Na’amat USA
    National Federation of Temple Sisterhoods [Reform]
    National Council of Jewish Women
    New Jewish Agenda
    North American Temple Youth
    Rabbinical Assembly Union of American Hebrew Congregations [Reform]
    United Synagogues of America [Conservative]
    Women’s League for Conservative Judaism [5]

    Many Jewish doctors as well as non-professional men and women are vastly overrepresented among American proponents of abortion on demand. Here is but a partial list:

    “All four original organizers of the most influential group of abortion pushers in the United States — the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) — were of Jewish birth, including now pro-life Dr. Bernard Nathanson.

    Dr. Christopher Tietze worked for the Population Institute and International Planned Parenthood Federation, and did more to promote the worldwide slaughter of innocent unborn children than any other person.

    Dr. Alan Guttmacher was president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America for more than a decade, founded Planned Parenthood Physicians, and did more than any other doctor to promote abortion in this country. He also advocated mandatory abortion and sterilization for certain groups in the United States.

    Dr. Etienne-Emile Baulieu, inventor of the RU-486 abortion pill, was born in 1926 to a physician named Leon Blum. He changed his name in 1942.

    Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich is the ‘father’ of the overpopulation myth. His ‘work,’ The Population Bomb, was the ‘spark’ that ignited the anti-natalist movement.

    Lawrence Lader, (New York University professor and co-founder of NARAL) king of the abortion propagandists, has written several books crammed with fabrications and outright lies that have helped advance abortion all around the world… Lader was quoted 11 times in Roe v. Wade, because he had a message that the Justices wanted to hear. (In the same decision, testimony from the world’s leading fetologist, Dr. A. W. Liley, was totally ignored because it decisively undercut the Court’s decision)… Lader also founded Abortion Rights Mobilization (ARM), which sued the Internal Revenue Service in court in a failed attempt to get the tax-exempt status of the Catholic Church revoked for opposing abortion too effectively. He also was one of the leading proponents of the abortion pill RU-486.” [6]

    The above mentioned Dr. Christopher Tietze, who died some years ago has left a legacy, albeit a somewhat distressing one. There is a Dr. Tietze Humanitarian Award from the National Abortion Federation which is awarded to doctors in the abortion industry for their contributions to, and advancement of, quality care in the abortion field.
    Of course it isn’t only Jewish members of the medical profession leading the way. They have certainly been aided and abetted in their morbid cause by various legislators, especially state senators Anthony Bielenson in California and Albert Blumenthal in New York who were the leading proponents of legalized abortion in their respective states and in this country.

    It is certainly a fact that there are other left wing organizations who are ardent supporters of abortion on demand which have large Jewish involvement, namely The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has opposed most proposed bills to restrict access to abortion and Norman Lear’s organization, The People For The American Way, which stands firmly on the pro-abortion side.
    Not surprisingly, even the Anti-Defamation League sits squarely and firmly on the pro-abortion side of the issue. On April 19th of 2007, the ADL publicly voiced its disappointment that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled to uphold the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act by saying:

    “We are deeply troubled by the ramifications of the Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion. By upholding, for the first time, an abortion statute which contains no exception for the health of the woman, the Supreme Court has undermined a woman’s right to choose and to act in accordance with her conscience and the dictates of her faith. We continue to believe that Americans should have the freedom to make difficult decisions of conscience and health without government interference.” [7]

    Abortion rights have pretty much become the litmus test for being an elected Democratic representative in this country as evidenced by the pro-abortion stance of Catholics like Sen. Ted Kennedy and others. “Of the 41 Jewish-born members of the U.S. Senate over the last 20 years, 32 (or 80 percent) have been stridently pro-abortion.” [8]
    The radical feminist movement, headed by Jewish women like Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan, has been a staunch driving force behind the pro-abortion movement since its inception. Their disdain for families and imagined female oppression by men in this country and their belief that gender roles are a social construct and not innate has caused them to push for abortion as being the great equalizer, liberating women from their ‘oppressive’ role as mothers.
    Simone Weil, former French health minister and Auschwitz survivor who led the drive to legalize abortion in France was quoted as saying:

    “We are out to destroy the family. The best way to do that is by attacking it’s weakest member, the unborn child.” [9]

    Kate Michaelman is another example. For many years, Michelman, president of Naral Prochoice America from 1985 to 2004, has been at the forefront of one of this country’s most contentious and divisive debates. Ever since Roe Vs Wade, NARAL Pro-Choice America, boasting in excess of one million members and supporters, has been the nation’s leading advocate for a “woman’s right to choose.”
    NARAL actively supports the election of pro-abortion candidates through various political action committees. They are heavily invested in lobbying Congress to fight any anti-abortion legislation as well as supporting bills which would protect abortion rights and expand women’s access to “reproductive health care.”
    The Lichter-Rothman (both Jewish by the way) study was officially suppressed and one can well imagine why. It’s information regarding members of the media and their proabortion stance was staggering, but not surprising. It’s findings?

    “Leaders of the motion picture industry: 95% pro-abortion, 62% Jewish:
    Leaders of the television industry: 97% pro-abortion, 59% Jewish:
    Leaders of the news media industry: 90% pro-abortion, 23% Jewish.” [10]

    Jewish groups are constantly involved in fund-raising efforts to keep abortion rights in the forefront, spending tens of millions of dollars to ensure that abortion remains legal. On February 28th, 1989, The American Jewish Congress ran a full page ad in the New York Times entitled Abortion And The Sacredness Of Life which cost them a staggering $30,000.

    Securing the right to kill unborn children comes with a high price tag.
    The press often gives pro-abortion Jews considerable coverage as well as considerable leeway. When Dr. Barnett Slepian (an abortion provider who was later shot to death by an anti-abortion activist) slugged a pro-life demonstrator over the head with a baseball bat (causing serious injury) for daring to picket his home, they not only demonstrated a double standard by excusing his behavior, they also claimed that he was targeted for picketing because he was Jewish and therefore the actions by pro-life proponents were anti-semitic.
    Marilynn Buckham, an abortion clinic owner told the Buffalo News that the picketing of Slepian’s home was nothing short of religious persecution and attacked Christians for not respecting other people’s relgious beliefs. As a result of Slepian’s assault trial, the picketing of abortion provider’s homes in New York state was declared unlawful and subject to a $500.00 fine and 6 months imprisonment.
    In Canada, the leading proponent of abortion is Dr. Henry Morgentaler, another concentration camp survivor who became one of Canada’s most proficient, prolific and notorious abortion providers who flaunted Canadian law and established illegal clinics in Canada where he performed abortions in direct opposition to Canadian law and for which security was provided by Canadian police. Morgentaler was once quoted as saying:

    “It took me years to get rid of this image [of myself helpless in the concentration camps]. And to do that, it was absolutely necessary to oppose authority — whatever the authority may be.” [11]

    It is a sad reality that Morgentaler has become somewhat of an icon in Canada, a man who is revered as being a champion for the rights of women. In 2005, Henry Morgentaler, at that time 82 years old, was given an honorary doctorate in law by the University of Western Ontario. Morgentaler spoke before the audience, saying he shared in the celebration of those receiving their degrees and told them that he believed that his work to make abortions safe and legal has “benefited society”, urging the graduates to stand up for their rights. Polls show that the vast majority of Canadians are pro-abortion and certainly many Canadians hold that view largely due to Henry Morgentaler’s influence.

    And there you have it. Although it is absolutely factual that there is considerable gentile involvement in the abortion industry in this country there is certainly a disproportionate representation of Jews as proponents of abortion rights as well as Jews accounting for about half of all abortion providers and clinic owners; a staggering fact considering that Jews in this country comprise only about 2% of the population.

    And why is this the case? Because they hate Gentiles and promote our destruction by any means at their disposal. Obviously there are Jews who oppose abortion but there are certainly many who not only condone it but push for it. And they not only push for it in the early stages of pregnancy but a lot of them have no qualms about abortions performed at any stage of pregnancy for reasons not encompassed by maternal risk or gross fetal abnormality. They are fine with it at any time for any reason.

    It is just another part of the Jewish supremacist agenda to destroy their enemy, the Goyim, no matter what they must do to secure our destruction. We are what stands in the way of the successful achievement of their agenda.

    They must be opposed. While I do not call for an outright ban on abortion, I do think that abortion on demand has become a national tragedy, leading to the destruction of close to one million American unborn children a year, some at stages where the fetus is clearly healthy, viable and could be safely delivered.

    While I am not a believer in the notion that women abort ” 5 minutes before birth,” as some pro-life advocates have claimed during debate, I do know from personal experience that many people in the pro-choice/pro-abortion movement would certainly and unequivocally be okay with that, should it be legal. As the mother of two children I find that immensely unsettling.
    A compassionate society based on Christian traditions cannot, in my opinion, enact laws that create unreasonable risk or hardship for women but we must balance the needs of women with a respect for the lives of the unborn, especially in the later stages of pregnancy.
    To not protect them at that point is unconscionable.
    [1] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [2] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [3] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [4] http://www.libchrist.com/other/abortion/jewish.html
    [5] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [6] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [7] http://www.adl.org/PresRele/SupremeCourt_33/5024_32.htm
    [8] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [9] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [10] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/
    [11] http://www.cwporter.com/abort/

  5. “Abtreibungen macht frei”!

    JEWISH RUN ABORTION CAMPS

    TORAH 101
    Abortion
    Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

    An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until its head has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and is not to be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the head has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.

    Talmud
    In addition to the written scriptures we have an “Oral Torah”, a tradition explaining what the Five Books of Moses mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe God taught the Oral Torah to Moses, and he taught it to others, and others taught it to others down to the present day. This tradition was maintained in oral form only until about the 2d century C.E., when much of the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah.

    Over the next few centuries, authoritative commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah and recording the rest of the oral law were written down in Israel and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Tosefta, Mekhileta, Sifra, Sifre, Jerusalem Talmud, and Babylonian Talmud. The last was completed at about 500 C.E.

    The two largest works are the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. The Babylonian one is more comprehensive, and is the one most people mean when they refer to The Talmud.
    The Mishnah is divided into six sections called sedarim (in English, orders). Each seder contains one or more divisions called masekhtot (in English, tractates). There are 63 masekhtot in the Mishnah. Most, though not all, of these masekhtot have been addressed in the Talmud. Although these divisions seem to indicate subject matter, it is important to note that the Mishnah and the Talmud tend to engage in quite a bit of free-association, thus widely diverse subjects may be discussed in a seder or masekhtah.

    “Dr. Mengele’s Still Drumming”

    See that baby in the corner?
    Her life might not be so good!
    I can tell she’ll be a problem…
    That much, ma’am, is understood!
    She’s not really quite a “person”;
    Yes, we’re sure she’s unaware.
    Her life may not be worth living…
    Let’s “abort” and show we care.
    She’s just not what we’d call “human”…
    She’s not really at that stage.
    “Cute” enough, but just not “with it”…
    Unaware and disengaged.
    She has no real moral standing…
    Not just yet, and that’s the glitch!
    She’s no diff’rent from a tomcat,
    Or some tiny mongrel !@#$%.
    We’ll decide for you what’s “human”…
    When a “what” becomes a “who”!
    On these shifting sands of reason,
    Moral Law we may undo.
    These things change, ma’am. Please don’t worry!
    We know best about these things;
    We’ve been schooled in Bio-Ethics,
    Singing songs that Singer sings!
    That’s the song of Peter Singer…
    (Margaret Sanger sang it, too).
    If that melody’s familiar,
    Maybe you should ask the Jew.
    That’s the downbeat of Eugenics,
    Euthanasia’s Rhythm Band.
    Dr. Mengele’s still drumming
    Out there on that shifting sand.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s