The video, in this post, is a great argument against abortion. Now, in addition to this video and others, like it, the Right has a strategy that shows concern for the "wanna-be unborn mother," and public opinion is on their side.

52 share

<<<<    Here is a 33 minute, anti-abortion video.  This sort of rhetoric and historical review,  has been the only weapon used,  by the anti-abortion lobby, since Roe v Wade was passed into law.  It (the video) is quiet good.  But the unwanted-baby-hating-Left,  has arguments in place,  to deal with what is said in the video.  Now,  the Right has something, the Left is not prepared to deal with   ---   its called "popular opinion."  

(Excerpt taken from The Guardian.com):   Last November, a new law went into effect in Texas: abortion clinics would now be required to have an agreement with a local hospital so that patients needing treatment could be transferred.

Now that sounds reasonable, doesn't it?

Sounds “reasonable” because it is reasonable.  These are “restrictions,”  they are “health and welfare standards.”  So the “don’t wanna-be mother”  has a serious problem during an abortion,  yet,  the clinic she is in,  has no agreement with a local hospital,  for such emergencies  -  should that be corrected? 

Perhaps, until you consider the fact that it caused one-third of health centers to stop providing abortions. Women in the Rio Grande Valley now have to travel hundreds of miles (if they're lucky enough to have the transportation and resources) to get access to a safe, legal abortion.

Again,  the only argument for maintaining all existing abortion clinics, is that those who cannot or will not meet specific health standards,  must close UNTIL they bring their facilities up to par.  AND,  the Supreme Court has deemed this,  fair and reasonable,”  so it is,  now, the law of the land.  Clinics,  in the future,  will meet these standards,  so what is the fuss?    

The Texas legislature has become an extreme example of new restrictions on abortion continuing to sweep statehouses in 2014, and the particulars buried by all those Wendy Davis profiles showcase a slick new tactic of the pro-life movement: a requirement for admitting privileges. At first glance, that kind of rule appears designed to protect women's health – to have an abortion provider make an arrangement with a local hospital in case of an emergency seems harmless, even helpful.

But this law, like so many others in the works, also imposes all kinds of obstacles to providers and clinics actually gaining these privileges.

They are only “obstacles,”  because up until now,  the abortion rights movement has shown no real concern for the health of a woman during her abortion.    Sorry, but THAT is not a good thing,  and reveals the abortionists for what they are:  politically driven with no concern for either the unborn or its host “parent.” 

The end result: abortion clinics are shutting down all across the country. And because the (often Evangelical) bill-crafting language is so deceptively reasonable and so effective at defusing public outrage, we might not even have noticed that our constitutional right to safe and legal abortions is being steadily eroded.

So the Marxist/Socialist/Secular world hates “Evangelicals” and wants to  blame all this on them.  Seriously?  Look, the Evangelicals I know,  do not believe in compromise,  when it comes to the war against abortion.  This is NOT their idea.  And that is why it is agreeable with the public and Constitutionally,  sound.  

Here is a 33 minute, anti-abortion video.  This sort of rhetoric and historical review,  has been the only weapon used,  by the anto-abortion lobby.  It is quiet good.  But the baby-hating Left,  has arguments in place,  to deal with what is said in the video.  Now,  the Right has something, the Left is not prepared to deal with   ---   its called "popular opinion."