4 4 mins 7 yrs

2008_0311floor2de0009As I write these words, I have only to glance sideways at the framed photos of my three grandsons which adorn and decorate my sideboard and mantelpiece, and to reflect upon my own, as well as my wife and my sons’, good fortune.

I have often observed that there are no new ‘news’ items, but the same ones repeated many, many, times; withg only the date and the names changing. When David wrote of the incineration of aborted babies in hospital furnaces, I was busy with other ideas, but have found the time to reflect upon this strange and savage disgrace.

Apart from the natural revulsion expressed by many, these ‘burnings’ are of course against any guidance given by, amongst others, the Royal College of Nursing’s Guidance on theSensitive Disposal of all Foetal Remains; especially in view of the quotation which states, “on the potential to develop into a human being; the foetus  is entitled to respect;”, and I was reminded of the post I made upon my own site a while back on the saddest space I have ever seen.

A strange yet telling silence from just about all the political punditry is evident on this story, with the sole exception of Labour M.P.  Jim Dobbin, who expressed his disgust when he said:- “This callous disregard for young humans is the fruit of 50 years of legal abortion in the UK”. and “And it is no use pro-choice people wringing their hands about treating unborn babies as clinical waste when it is their relentless dehumanisation of unborn life that has led us to this point.”

As can be seen by the statistics for 2012, some 185,122 abortions were performed in Great Britain, ( but not of course in Northern Ireland, which sends all its butchered babies to the Mainland, as the Province has apparently moral scruples about legal murder in its hospitals, but not elsewhere) in a ghastly clinically-cleansed routine which is mirrored only by the published statistics of establshments with names such as Bergen-Belsen and Auschwitz.

Many might state that I should never equate legal abortions with even the shades of the Holocaust, but, I ask sincerely, what else did you expect? When the so-called grounds for abortion are so wide that you could drive a Caterpillar tractor straight through the middle. I have maybe written before of my own view that abortion should be the personal path of the woman involved, but the sheer laxity of the law allows virtual ‘abortion on demand’, and when a muslim Pakistani or Bangladeshi woman demands that her pregnancy be terminated because the child would be a girl, and so much less desirable than a boy within their humourless ‘culture’; the medical people cannot refuse, because if they do, they will be accused of ‘racism’ faster than a scalpel hits the ground. The same applies to the majority seeking abortion, or to use the ‘correct’ terminology, a ‘termination’; those of course being white and British. Whatever the reasons, they are all allowed, I mean; have you ever read of an abortion being refused? That folks is what the Law has become; access to an inconvenience removal service!

And you voted for these people; you knew that this would happen, and yet no-one stood against the flow, and said “Enough”, so you should be content with the resultant increase in hospital central heating fuel usage!

 

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

4 thoughts on “Abide with me; and repeat!

  1. If anyone is interested try and get hold of a book by Dr Everett Koop and Francis Schaeffer called
    “Whatever happened to the Human Race?”
    Written in 1976 it predicted that this is what would happen once abortion on demand became state ordained.

  2. Mike, do you know any women who’ve had abortions? I know four who had it done for different reasons and each and every one of them agonised long and hard over the decision.

    None of the women I know who had abortions subscribe to this ‘abortion on demand’ allegation.

    And when a muslim Pakistani or Bangladeshi woman demands that her pregnancy be terminated because the child would be a girl, and so much less desirable than a boy within their humourless ‘culture’; the medical people cannot refuse, because if they do, they will be accused of ‘racism’

    Are there definitive stats to prove this? I remember a story being run in ATW a while ago about this and AFAICR, the argument was at best inconclusive.

  3. “And it is no use pro-choice people wringing their hands about treating unborn babies as clinical waste when it is their relentless dehumanisation of unborn life that has led us to this point.”

    A Labour MP gets something right. I’ve seen it all now.

Comments are closed.