Print
Category: Abortion
Hits: 1666


Brian hopes to help release our wonderful country from the grips of the socialists and communists.

In this essay, Brian Kelly examines a "tough" issue many believe is settled law. Kelly believes legalized murder cannot be a valid law in any country. When we kill someone, have we committed murder?  Regardless of the "settled law," we are continually asked by our own consciences if killing a baby in or out of the womb, or killing an adult who is powerless or not is ethically and morally proper. Should we kill grandma off when we really need the inheritance and it would be inconvenient to live without it?  If we choose yes to that, should it be legal?

Moms and their Babies are Loving and Both Need Love!

Please enjoy this essay by Mr. Brian Kelly.

His essay title is:

Yes, I Am Pro-Mom and I Am Pro-Baby!
 
BRIAN KELLY ASKS PA 17TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT VOTERS TO VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO SUPPORTS BOTH MOMS and BABIES!

I am happy to tell the world that I support protection for the unborn. I am father to three wonderful grown-up babies and I would not trade any one of them for the whole world.  A baby is a heart melter for sure. Yet, in America, the same baby, if it could be reinserted into its mother's womb any time after birth, would again be eligible for the executioner's knife. 

When I ran for public office, first to become a Congressman and then again to become a Mayor; I took notice to the legal rights of the unborn, and the lack thereof. I learned that a baby in the womb has fewer rights than most all other living beings. A baby can be killed at will and tortured in the process as long as it is in a proper setting; and there is not one law to assure that it will not happen again and again and again. Millions and millions and millions of times! 

Ironically, there are laws about killing other forms of life. Yet, none of these life forms will ever grow up to be anybody's son or anybody's daughter, and none of these life forms will ever grow up to be President of the United States. For example, it is a fact that a turtle egg has more legal rights than an unborn baby, even though the baby is inside a mother's womb, and a turtle egg is buried in the sand on a beach someplace. 

Under the Endangered Species Act, It is criminal to disturb in any way a turtle egg since it may become a living turtle. However, In Roe v Wade, the Supremes said that aborting a perfectly formed unborn human baby is perfectly legal. But, it is not a moral right! We all live under God, the top Dog in the Universe. Tell God that killing one of his created and recently inserted souls in a womb-baby is OK if you dare.  

Would you consider it torture if a prankster intentionally stomped on a turtle egg or worse yet, poured acid on the egg? It would certainly be against the law. 

We may not hear it but a baby's first cry may happen in the womb long before its abortion in what some might call a delivery room. Why would the baby be crying? New research shows that babies in the womb may learn to express their displeasure by crying silently while still in the womb as early as in the 28th week of pregnancy. What if they knew their eventual fate? Would we then hear their cries? Can we hear turtle eggs crying? 

What if our laws changed and we were now forgiven if we chose to kill adults who were inconveniencing us in any way? How about a nasty neighbor law? If it were legal, and adults could be killed on a whim, as long as the venue were a hospital or a nice delivery-type room in an adult abortion clinic, we would surely want the death to be as painless as possible?  "Sorry grandma, but I can't really wait ten more years for the inheritance. Thank you for the power of attorney that lets me have my inheritance now." 

Suppose for example that it were OK for you or another adult to be dropped into an acrid solution that was so strong it would burn your skin initially; then eat your flesh; and then consume your organs until you stopped breathing.  Would that be OK? Would it be torture? Would you prefer to be water-boarded? Ask a baby who survived an abortion how that saline solution felt before they exploded out of the womb to possible freedom. 

Would any of this be even worse than water-boarding since, when it is over, unlike the "victim" of water boarding, who surely would have had a deep scare, you or the victim in this case, would not be alive. 

Well, guess what one of the most common methods of abortion is? You may already know that it is to use a saline solution, which is harsh brine, so to speak. When used in the process of a saline abortion for example, the acrid brine scalds the child from the outside-in. With constant contact, the intention is to have the solution cause the layers of the baby's skin to peel off; then, the flesh, until the solution reaches the organs and causes death. 

It is not an immediate process. It takes time. It's almost as horrific as you or I being dropped in a vat of that bad stuff. The difference of course is that it is just a baby, whereas you are an adult. But ask yourself: is that a valid difference? If there were a microphone in the womb, would cries be heard by those outside the womb until the baby's throat were so damaged that the little woman could make no more noise before the rest of her organs were destroyed? 

By the way, some of the little tykes that are supposed to be aborted swim like hell and they actually make sure that they are born alive, though they obviously have some body-damage from their painful journey. Barack Obama in Chicago chose not to vote to keep them alive if against the rules, they lived. After all, where did the term wrongful birth come from if not from the poor souls crying and running from the dangerous womb as fast as they could? 

Perhaps it is more sanitary to discuss babies that are just about ready to come out of the womb to be born than scalding babies in the womb. When we make such a discussion as sanitary as we can, perhaps we can put aside the fact that a baby dies in almost every abortion. For those that almost make it, we may still use the term abortion, though the child is for the most part, already out of the womb at the time. But, to be more accurate, it is better that we use the term infanticide to describe the killing of a baby when it no longer is in the womb or it is only partially in the womb, and despite all odds, it is looking for a caring human being to help make it alive.  

These horrific acts upon our smallest and most defenseless human beings can be performed legally, as they can euphemistically and conveniently be called late term abortions. You may know that at the most recent DNC convention the delegates voted to keep all forms of abortion legal by removing restrictions and protections for the unborn. Did you hear Republicans stand up in opposition? 

Before Congress decided not to inject itself into the baby organ harvesting debate, the infanticide methods such as partial birth abortion, in which the baby's head is pierced or perhaps crushed by forceps, though the latter may occur in the womb also were not described well by the press. Yet, some of those, who decide to kill a baby in this fashion sometimes are able to convince themselves that there is no torture involved in the process.

But, they still cannot convince me or the baby who feels the pain of that! Well, at least it is not as torturous as the saline solution abortion?  Who really knows maybe it is especially when at the end, the abortionists tools suck the brain out of the baby's head.  I wonder what that feels like. It sickens me so I do not wonder long. 

If the baby is not killed before it gets out of the womb in an in-womb abortion, the person that chooses to abort their child may even have a second chance to rid themselves of this potentially lifelong problem, i. e. an unwanted child. Once the baby is fully out of the womb following a botched abortion, and it is deemed to have been born wrongfully, some hospital caretakers, in some hospitals may even help out by not feeding the infant. 

In this way, your baby girl starves to death instead of being killed in the womb. It is the same result but starving takes a few days or a week or so. Because it is not instantaneous, it may keep you tied up longer than a quick saline abortion that actually works. So, do we think it is torture to deprive a newborn of lifesaving nutrition?  I vote yes and the baby if given a voice would vote yes. Do you think water boarding is worse? Maybe it is? Perhaps that is why the US has laws against water boarding. 

For those who need a refresher on human development, since human children are not born in eggs and are not listed in any law as being in danger of imminent death, and thus are not protected by the Endangered Species Act, it might help to know when it is (exactly) that a baby becomes a person. I mean exactly. If it was never, even your humble scribe would not be able to write about anything.  

Why wouldn't God just tell us unless, like me, the Almighty thinks that it doesn't really matter? Why would God think that anybody would ever use such knowledge to hurt one of His innocents? There you have it--finally we have the proof that God was not born in the twentieth or twenty-first century or he would know that answer for sure. Choice! We have choice! Is this a choice that any of us think God has given us?  

Perhaps it would be easier to kill little unborn babies if the slayer knew exactly when person-hood arrived. But then maybe it would not matter at all to the abortionist. If we studied the issue, we might just learn that those who kill unborn babies in the womb really do not want to know the answer to that question. 

Maybe God will never tell us, but I have a feeling that if pressed, and we could squeeze it out of Him somehow, our Lord would say that life begins at conception, if not sometime even before that. After all, who knows when God builds those nifty little immortal souls that he eventually and so quietly installs in all the newborns while they are in the womb. 

Most God-fearing people would agree that person-hood occurs when a baby is conceived. Some would add that is when God gifts the new life with her unique and immortal soul. Others, such as adults looking to expand their choices in life might use technical terms to cover up the murder of an innocent. But, I have a feeling God would call it, "Murder," no matter how assured the Supremes may have been. 

If we can check back into the refresher course on human development for a minute here, you may learn that by 20 weeks, halfway through the fifth month, a live-born baby's lungs may be developed enough that the baby may breathe for an hour or so on its own before dying outside the womb if unattended.  

By 23 weeks, which is just into the sixth month, 1/3 of the babies survive the birth process and become normal people. Unfortunately, we never really get a full sampling on who would live and who would not, in other words, we cannot tell which given baby would have been part of the one-third that make it. You see; before the live-born baby even has a chance to cry, during the partial birth abortion, her skull is punctured and her brain is removed, unless of course there is value to cutting off her head with the moral equivalent of an ISIS machete. 

More often than many of us would believe, a live-born baby from a botched abortion is starved in a hospital. It could be counted in the third that make it, even though this already handicapped baby will get to live only a few days to a week before, with no care from the well-instructed, caring staff, the little lady starves to death. 

After all, this baby already survived an experts attempt to kill it painfully in the womb. If it were not for lack of nutrition after such an unwanted baby is placed on a hospital shelf to starve to death, it would not be too many years for her to be just like any other toddler when she learns about the miracle of Santa Claus. But, she will have not have any Christmases and there will be no presents and nobody will pay for her death. This is the real war on future women. 

There is a group called the Center for Medical Progress. It has chronicled a Planned Parenthood abortionist in Texas, who freely admitted that she systematically alters the position of the baby during an abortion to not risk hurting the baby's brain. In this way, they are able to surgically remove the baby's brain in its full head while it is alive. They do what they call "harvesting an intact baby head." Since nobody claimed foul when the abortionist would pierce the head to cause death, there would be no reason for these profiteers to believe there would be a problem in severing the head at the neck as long as they knew the "art of the harvest." This is a necessary act in the abortionist's quest to sell the baby's head to the highest bidder for human organ procurement purposes. They get paid for the abortion and for the extracted parts. Such a deal! 

Nobody wants to believe it but this is the latest morbid reality that seems to get no attention from the mainstream corrupt press that would abort their very own mothers if their ideology demanded it. If somehow, this same group, Planned Parenthood, found that they could sell the yolk of a fertilized turtle egg for more money than a human head, just so they could watch the little turtle embryo starve to death, the media would be outraged. However, showing that human life does not matter, since it is only a baby, nobody in the corrupt press, driven by the perverted ideology of the new Democratic Party, seems to care. 

The abortionist in this death play, just one of many dramas that will never be on TV, happens to work for Planned Parenthood in Austin, Texas. Dr. Amna Dermish has been recorded telling a guiltless, emotionless tale about how she was trained by the abortion business senior director of medical services, in the art of harvesting the body parts of babies during abortions to assure the most money for the harvest.  

The "art" was not to minimize the pain of the baby being killed, but to assure the company would reap a hefty fee for the baby parts that were bagged and chilled in a for-sale scheme much like Tysons trying to preserve only the best chicken wings. This gruesome "art" of course is more real than fictional. Boris Karloff, if he were alive and the film were made, could have played all the parts, but he probably would have been too outraged to accept the "parts." Hollywood, however would have found another actor.  

The objective of the profit-seeking abortionists is to use a "legal" partial-birth abortion procedure to terminate living, late-term future babies. This "clever art" can provide intact fetal heads for brain harvesting and ultimate research. Perhaps with all this research, a nice head transplant will be possible in the future as the human race outdoes itself by creating the first FrankenBaby? Can any of this be true? Don't we wish it were not? 

To help these little people that are killed indiscriminately so that other more worthy adult humans can have more choices, I am an advocate for both the baby and the mom. I am pro-baby and pro-mom. Unfortunately, the laws of the United States currently do not support my stance that a baby is a human being. 

The pro-death crowd, or the pro-choice crowd as they euphemistically like to be called, insist that abortion is a valid and positive reproductive choice, but none would agree to giving the baby a choice in the matter, while in the womb or even afterwards. Afterwards, for example, in just a few days after a live-birth, a disease eliminated long ago in the US gets to afflict the child. It is known as starvation to many. It sets in and takes the baby's life.  It comes about from a process known as neglect. 

Logic dictates, and we all know it intrinsically, that a baby in the womb or out of the womb would chose life if it were able to be asked. And, so to give more meaning to the reckless killing of millions of tiny people each year, I decided to change the words describing my stance from pro-life to pro-baby. I want the little guy, who is forming his or her life in the mom's womb to be the focus of the argument of whether she lives or dies. 

Unfortunately, the notion of killing live babies in the United States has become very political. From the last Democratic National Convention, I got the sense that all Democrats wanted the right to kill unborn babies at any time right up to the time prudent people would call it infanticide, and perhaps even after that. Yet, I am a Democrat and I do not feel as the DNC Democrats. I do not want abortion or infanticide. 

I think that just a small group of choice at any cost advocates, want their choice to kill babies legalized by the rest of us, who do not feel as they do about the matter. I know there are many Democrats just like me who think that a baby, in or out of the womb, is a person and therefore should be protected by law, not killed so some adult someplace has the opportunity to exercise a choice. 

Unfortunately, the # 1 Democrat in the country, Barack Obama is not on my side. Back in his days in Illinois, todays President Obama was the only Illinois Senator to not only vote against babies, but he actually rose up and gave a speech against a bill that would have protected babies who survived late term labor-induced abortions. He also voted against a bill designed to prevent partial-birth abortions.  I know I would not have spoken up against that bill and I would not have voted the way then State Senator Obama voted. What would you have done?  Would you have voted for the right to kill or the right to save babies from a torturous death? Ask yourself that question if you dare. 

Yes, I am pro-mom. 

Pro-baby and pro-mom are synonyms.  Aborting female babies is clearly a war on the future of women. Aborting black babies does nothing to enhance the "Black Lives Matter" movement. Obviously, the greatest friends to live babies in America are their moms, and I commend all moms for all they do. Besides the moms, one of the greatest friends of babies in America has always been one-time Congressman Ron Paul. I have a little story about the Congressman coming up shortly.  

Thumbs up or thumbs down? As hard as it is to believe, there are many who think that fully grown adults ought to decide the fate of newly born babies who "wrongfully" survived abortion attempts. You remember the gladiators in the Colosseum. Thumbs up or thumbs down? Life, or death? 

While running for office in 2010, I wrote an article that I titled, "The Butcher of Lyon" as my perspective on those who would prefer to butcher the newly born survivors of abortions, rather than save them. You can access this on Google or another search engine by typing in: The Butcher of Lyon and Brian Kelly. Perhaps you would be surprised to find who thinks that babies are not people, and who thinks babies born-alive and living outside the womb should be starved in hospitals. 

When we think of a baby, don't we all project the virtues of kindness and innocence? Of course we do! Would you not bet that if the babies were given the choice, they would make better and more pure decisions about whether adults should live or adults should die?  Would babies vote to kill their parents if they were permitted to do so? 

Can you not see babies always giving thumbs up as to whether elders should live or die? Don't you think? Ask yourself who is it that has given man such power over God's precious creations? If your answer is nobody, then you and I are on the same page. 

My mother was as nice to me as any mom to any child, and I love her for it. My wife was as wonderful to our children in the womb, out of the womb, and on through life as any woman could possibly have ever been. I love her intensely, and her care for our little ones was an eye-opener for me. 

As much as I loved my wife as I asked her to marry me, her selfless caring for our children was just awesome. She was a professional person with a college degree, but the three little ones were more important to her than anything else. That's probably how most moms feel when they make the big decision to have a baby, and they are fortunate enough to have a husband who can pick up the slack.   

Sure, some people get caught in the middle of their lives with unwanted pregnancies.  Some would suggest that because I love babies that I do not support the individual liberty of a potential mom to decide.  I would never want to decide who lives or dies under any circumstances.  Thumbs up or thumbs down? But, if somebody wanted to kill the mom, I would fight against it with the same intensity that I fight the notion that sinless babies in the womb can be killed. Babies and moms should both live. That is the natural plan. 

Is the abortion pill RU486 safe for women? 

Treatment with Mifeprex ( mifepristone) and misoprostol, both part of the RU486 phenomenon for the termination of pregnancy is seen by women with unwanted pregnancies as a miracle drug. Sometimes real miracles are hard to come by. Those lookning for babies to adopt might think that a new baby with a sould from God is a miracle. Unfortunately for women who are unaware, RU486 has major some issues and if it were not politically incorrect to say so, the abortion industry might even call it dangerous. For example, to help assure that the mom does not die in the procedure, it requires three office visits. It is a documented  dangerous drug and nobody would take it if they were not about to abort a child that would have no home if born. 


Mifeprex (RU486) is a synthetic steroid indicated for the medical termination of intrauterine pregnancy through 49 days of pregnancy. It stops growth and causes the death of the womb baby. Mifeprex Tablets are also available in generic form. Side effects of this drug are not trivial and must be checked out to assure the mother remains healthy. The effects include pelvic pain or cramps, nausea, diarrhea, stomach pain, dizziness, tired feeling, or back pain. Other side effects of Mifeprex include allergic reactions such as closing of the throat, swelling of the lips, and tongue, or face. Seek emergency medical attention if any of these allergic reactions occur.

The FDA, not trying to alarm a community that would prefer to throw warnings and precautions was careful to release a recent report without any fanfare. It showed conclusively that 14 women in the United States alone have died from using the mifepristone abortion drug and 2,207 women have been injured by it. Being pro-mom, I would advise against putting a woman in harm's way. 

Having a baby is a tough road for a family but especially a mom.  Then again, we must remember that nothing in life worth having is easy.  Moms go through the arduous process of a nine month pregnancy, the trauma of birth, and then the first two years.  Wow! It is tough! But let me say again nothing in life worth having is easy.  

Giving birth and raising a child is an intrinsic part of a mom's life, and the dads role is also a huge part of the dads life. If nobody chose to do what was right, the world would be extinct of people. 

If there were not another living being involved in whether a baby should live or should die, I would agree with those who value choice first that there would be a denial of liberty and in this case, the mom should decide the baby's fate. But, again this would be only if the baby were not a baby! But, the baby is a living baby in or out of the womb and this living being is unbelievably dependent and helpless.  Just because it is helpless does not mean that a powerful adult has a right to determine if such a living child is to be terminated.  So, I am very comfortable in being pro-baby and pro-mom.  I want both to live and to live well. 

I am convinced that the individual human beings,  the smallest Americans, our mom-womb babies, whose liberties are most vulnerable, are the unborn. We must agree to protect them and their right to be born and to live. No human has the right to take another human's life, regardless of how fragile or in need of care the other human may be.  I am pro-baby and I am pro-mom. 

I certainly support a woman's right and freedom to choose whatever she wants in life. I would submit that the decision to abort a human, causing its death is not something any man or any woman has a right to choose under God.  Death is murder when an innocent child is killed. Women, men, and babies, in and out of the womb, are equal in Gods eyes. How can they not be?  

Is not the womb of a dog or a cat sacred until it produces its offspring? Even then, what American does not feel that the living puppies are sacred? Who thinks killing puppies or kittens is a good thing? How much more sacred is a child in the womb, especially when the conclusion is that it is a human, with the same DNA as other members of the family? 

The choices humans make, both women and men, with regard to humans cannot include the termination of the life of another human. God has not given any of us that right. An aborted / killed unborn baby, whose soul had just been placed in the womb by God, would not have chosen death. Who are we to take away the purpose for that soul?  

I have a picture of Ron Paul that really melts me and it shows his inner goodness. It is of Dr. Paul in his hospital scrubs delivering a baby.  While a Congressman from Texas, Ron Paul, an Obstetric M.D. both before and after he was elected to Congress, would go home on weekends from Washington to Texas, and deliver his patient's babies. He is a clear champion of liberty, and if I may be so bold, I am talking about your liberty as well as the liberty of a ton of little babies. 

In a campaign picture from December 18, 2007, Dr. Ron Paul is shown with Baby Liberty, wrapped in an American flag, shortly after Dr. Paul delivered the baby. The picture was submitted by Michael Nystrom and it can be seen on the Web by doing a simple search. It is impressive. Who would be so bold? I agree with Dr. Paul about how precious is a baby. 

I am 68 years old and not many things affect me in the same way that they did when I was younger.  Ron Paul is a bit older than me but he offers the best thoughts that I have heard in ages on the humanity of a womb-baby. When I saw the picture of the flag-draped baby it just hit me how important this issue really is for all human beings.  

The Democratic Party platform, which unsuccessfully tried to remove all references to God in the last presidential election has become the abortion always is right Party to the point of infanticide with partial birth abortion. I do not agree. 

When babies are partially born alive, right when they should be making their first big cry, they are killed in a very cruel and painful way. A game of whack-a-mole is more civil than what happens to the little baby's head, before harvesting was made profitable, once it pops out of the womb and harvesting is not the objective.  On the way out, the baby, whose faculties are developed probably thinks it is her birth process. President Obama is a Democrat and he approves the killing plank in the Democratic Platform. What does that say about him? 

The overriding message that you have been reading in this essay is for moms to love themselves and to give birth to their babies. Then, mom needs to know that God will help you love your baby intensely. 

One day your baby will make you so glad that you chose the light of God by choosing life. Your baby will love you, and you will be blessed. Life is real.  Babies are real. Moms are real.  Dads are real. Moms who give babies their opportunity for a real life are the most wonderful people on earth and this act pleases God for God surely loves his little children. 

In your heart, you know that all babies are given their souls by God so they can live and serve the world and the Lord. Let us permit the babies to live. I am pro-baby and I am pro-mom. How about you? ------------------------------------------
 
Brian W. Kelly is the most-published and thus the leading conservative author in America. He is an outspoken and eloquent expert on solutions to help America and Americans Though a Democrat, he is a JFK Democrat, and does not subscribe to the anti-American precepts of the new Democrat Party. One of Brian's pet peeves is the chicanery and deceit of RINOS and DINOS on conservative Americans.