“For my teenage self it was very startling that people would have to search out doctors at night miles and miles and miles away from their home in a closed down doctor’s office or motel room…It becomes kind of a moral issue about who you are, you know, and how you view the women in your life…” – Mark Ruffalo
The way liberals describe a world in which abortion is restricted is like reading a post-apocalyptic novel. The streets are barren, few have survived, and a young girl is with child. She must survive in this harsh world in which access to abortion has been cruelly restricted. She must not be burdened with a child, for she has a career to pursue. She walks for hundreds of miles in the searing sun, but no doctors are available to slice up her baby—I mean, give her freedom of choice.
President Obama said this on the 41st anniversary of Roe V. Wade:
“We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her constitutional right to privacy, including the right to reproductive freedom. And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children. Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams.”
The moral subjectivity with which liberals view the world is astounding. It’s unbelievable to hear Obama openly contradict himself in a single statement. He starts by reaffirming his commitment to abortion rights, then continues to claim he supports child health, and freedom. Which is it, Barack?
The Left, from Barack Obama to celebrities like Ruffalo love to use morality as a weapon against those who would restrict abortion access. The make grandiose claims that to deny women abortions is to be in the wrong. They then talk about how much they love children. They cannot have their cake and eat it too. It’s one or the other.
If you believe a child is human once they are born, but not prior to that, you are contradicting yourself. A child that has yet to be born is simply in a younger stage of development. Just as a baby isn’t as developed as a five year-old, and a five year-old is not as developed as a teenager, an infant in the womb is just a less developed human. To arbitrarily choose a moment when a child suddenly becomes human doesn’t work. If a child can be killed in the womb, it can also be killed at five years, ten years, and fifteen years. For that matter, if it’s a concern of viability, why don’t we execute those who have become too old to function without constant care? Let’s just kill those we no longer have the desire to care for. It would make life that much easier!
How morally wrong we are denying women the right to make their baby into chum. How morally wrong we are taking away a woman’s right to chuck her baby into a dumpster because she forgot to take her pill. Yes, we are the ones who are morally backward. It’s not celebrities or the president who have had their moral compasses busted, it’s us. They truly care about the children—well, the ones who have had the luck to be born. Once they become human, liberals want to give them the world, but seconds earlier, just suck ’em out with a sharpened hose. No big deal.
We are evil, liberals are kind and moral, and not at all contradictory. Just setting the record straight.