Hilary White

, ,

British politician: ‘consider compulsory abortion’ for Downs babies

Hilary White
Hilary White
Image

LONDON, December 19, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) has suspended a candidate after an uproar when he wrote that it should be mandatory to kill all disabled unborn children. Geoffrey Clark wrote on his website that women carrying children suspected of serious disabilities like Downs syndrome and spina bifida should be forced to have abortions in order to cut back on health care costs. He also called for legalization of euthanasia, free “euthanasia counselling” for people over 80 years old, and the introduction of a two-child population control policy.

Clark, a 66-year-old chartered accountant wrote in his political manifesto that the government should review the National Health Service’s expenditures, saying the review should “re-examine the pregnancy abortion time limit. Consider compulsory abortion when the foetus is detected as having Downs, spina bifida or similar syndrome which, if it is born, will render the child a burden on the state as well as on the family.”

Until today, Clark was UKIP’s candidate for Kent County Council and was standing for Gravesham Borough Council in a by-election on Thursday, a stepping-stone to a parliamentary seat.

The NHS review, he said, also ought to reconsider medical treatment for people over the age of 80, which he called “disproportionately costly.” The NHS ought to consider offering “free euthanasia advice to all folk over 80 years of age,” Clark suggested, “and indeed to all others.”

He described the rise in population in Britain as “desperately bad, pitiable, scary, and a cause for bowing of heads in national shame.” Citing the 18th century father of eugenics Thomas Malthus, Clark wrote, “Population growth and declining quality of life go hand in hand.” He said that the UK should “attack mercilessly” those developing countries with high rates of population growth like Kenya, Nigeria, and Mexico.

“We must attack them for their wantonness; we must reduce their overseas aid to zero if they do not reduce the rapidly rising trend of population growth. Criticize the Pope and the Catholic Church for their wanton negligence on this subject,” he suggested.

“In the UK, restrict Child Benefit and Child Tax Credit to the first two children only, and withdraw those benefits if there is a third and fourth child. The state should not subsidize large families. Educate people to have no more than two children,” he proposed. “We must use all fair means to stabilize the UK population at 62 million, including leaving the EU.”

The comments caused an uproar in the media and social media sites like Twitter. Later, Clark appeared to backpedal from them, saying, “they are for the commission to consider how best to cut service levels if it is decided to do so.”

UKIP issued a statement on Tuesday saying that Clark has been suspended as a candidate and that his views do not reflect the party’s policies. A UKIP spokesman said the party rejects the “abhorrent views expressed in the personal manifesto of Mr. Geoffrey Clark.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

“The party was not aware of these views when it allowed him to stand under our name. We can confirm that Mr. Clark has been formally suspended as a UKIP candidate. His membership is undergoing disciplinary hearing.

“UKIP would like to apologize to anyone who has suffered distress as a result of this matter.”

The learning disability charity Mencap called Clark’s comments “abhorrent,” but his comments, while politically damaging, generally reflect the feelings of most in Britain where eugenic sentiments have grown. Polls have suggested that as many as 75 percent of British people think abortion should be allowed for disability and abortion lobbyists agree.

In 1990, when some MPs introduced legislation lowering the legal age limit for abortion, abortion campaigners in parliament allowed it to pass on the condition that all age restrictions be removed for eugenic abortion.

Since then, it has become the norm for doctors to recommend abortion under “Ground E” whenever a prenatal test finds a chance of Downs or another “serious” disability. This pressure from doctors to abort disabled children is starting to be noted by medical groups. A 1999 report in the Independent said the Association for Improvements in Maternity Services reported “a stream of complaints” from women who tried to refuse prenatal tests, who were “bullied or treated like pariahs.” The group said that some women would go so far as to avoid all prenatal care until 24 weeks to avoid pressure to abort a potentially disabled child.

In 2001 in England and Wales, there were 1,641 abortions committed under Ground E alone with a further 81 being Ground E combined with another reason. Of this number, 127 were for spina bifida and 347 for Down’s syndrome, six of these abortions being done after 24 weeks.

Since the Conservative Party started adopting more and more left-liberal social policies, refused to bring forward a promised referendum on Britain’s membership in the EU and has done nothing substantive to stem unregulated immigration, UKIP has surged in the polls. This week a former Tory MP reported that more than one in ten Conservative voters at the last election now backs the libertarian UKIP.

Of those, only one-quarter cite the Conservative party’s position on Europe that once formed UKIP’s raison d’être.

Since UKIP started opposing the coalition government’s plans to introduce same-sex “marriage,” polls started showing a jump in the party’s popularity. It has now, without a single MP in the House of Commons, moved to replace the government coalition partner Liberal Democrat party as third after Labour and the Conservatives.

Former Tory vice chairman Lord Ashcroft said that even if the Cameron government offers a referendum now, it is too late to woo disaffected supporters back. Ashcroft’s poll of more than 20,000 voters found their main interests lay in economy growth, welfare, immigration and the deficit.

“These voters think Britain is changing for the worse. They are pessimistic, even fearful, and they want someone and something to blame. They do not think mainstream politicians are willing or able to keep their promises or change things for the better,” Lord Ashcroft told the Daily Mail.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus

Medical staff arrested in India after accidentally aborting baby at 8 months

Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus
By Thaddeus Baklinski

A doctor and a nurse at a prominent private hospital in India have been arrested after they allegedly administered abortion drugs to a eight-months pregnant accidentally, resulting in the death of her unborn child.

"We have immediately registered a case and arrested the doctor, whose negligent act has caused this," said South Jammu Superintendent of Police Rahul Malik, according to the Hindustan Times.

The woman's husband, Rakesh Sharma, told the paper that the doctor mistook Shruti Sharma for another patient who was scheduled for an abortion at the JK Medicity Hospital in Jammu on Friday afternoon.

Shruti had gone to the hospital after her gynecologist advised a routine medical examination to safeguard her and her baby's health.

Rakesh alleged that the doctor gave his wife the abortion pills without consulting her medical records. “Doctors and paramedical staff instead of administering glucose, gave her abortion medicine, which was actually meant for another patient,” he said.

"It is the worst case of negligence. I feel strongly that such hospitals should be closed. If this has happened to me today, tomorrow it can happen to any body else," Rakesh said.

While the JK Medicity's administration said it has launched an inquiry into the incident, a report from the Jagran Post stated that the district government has revoked the hospital's license.

"Jammu and Kashmir Government has ordered sealing of the private clinic after suspension of its license to operate in the wake of the incident," said Minister for Health and Medical Education Taj Mohiuddin according to the report.

National media have reported that the incident has brought illegal abortion practices in India to the attention of both the public and government officials.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

According to the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, abortion is legal in India up to 20 weeks. However, the opinion of a second doctor is required if the pregnancy is past its 12th week, and abortion-inducing drugs such as mifepristone and misoprostol are allowed only by prescription up until the seventh week of pregnancy.

Moreover, abortions can be performed only in government licensed medical institutions by registered abortionists.

Indian Express reported that the accused in the incident, Dr Amarjeet Singh, practices ayurvedic medicine (traditional Hindu medicine) and is "unsuitable for carrying out abortions."

A video posted by IndiaTV shows the parents surrounded by family members and relatives at a protest outside the JK Medicity hospital where the group is demanding punishment for those involved in the death of the child.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Queen James Bible
Kirsten Andersen Kirsten Andersen Follow Kirsten

,

News editor fired for criticizing ‘gay Bible’, files complaint

Kirsten Andersen Kirsten Andersen Follow Kirsten
By Kirsten Anderson

The former editor-in-chief of Iowa’s Newton Daily News has filed a religious discrimination complaint after he was fired over a post on his private blog criticizing the pro-gay Queen James Bible.

The Bible revision was produced by homosexual activists who claim to have edited the eight most commonly cited verses against homosexual behavior “in a way that makes homophobic interpretations impossible.”

On his private blog, which has since been deactivated, Bob Eschliman wrote in April that “the LGBTQXYZ crowd and the Gaystapo” are trying to reword the Bible “to make their sinful nature ‘right with God.’”

After public outcry from homosexual activists, Shaw Media, which owns the paper, fired him on May 6.

In a statement the day of his firing, Shaw Media President John Rung said Eschliman’s “airing of [his opinion] compromised the reputation of this newspaper and his ability to lead it.”

“There will be some who will criticize our action, and mistakenly cite Mr. Eschliman’s First Amendment rights as a reason he should continue on as editor of the Newton Daily News,” Rung said.  “As previously stated, he has a right to voice his opinion. And we have a right to select an editor who we believe best represents our company and best serves the interests of our readers.”

Rung said the company has a duty “to advocate for the communities we serve” and that “to be effective advocates, we must be able to represent the entire community fairly.”

Eschliman, who has been writing professionally since 1998 and became editor-in-chief of the Newton Daily News in 2012, says that the company was aware of his personal blog when he was hired and never indicated it would be a problem for him to continue sharing his personal political and religious views.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

In his religious discrimination complaint against the company, filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), he says that he believes he was singled out for termination because of his Christian views concerning homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”

“As a lifelong writer, I have maintained a personal blog on the Internet with some personal thoughts and writings,” Eschliman wrote. “Newton Daily News, my employer, never had a policy prohibiting personal blogging, Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media. In fact, my employer encouraged us to engage in social media on a personal level and I am aware of several employees of Newton Daily News who continue to blog and are still employed with Shaw Media.”

“There is no question that I was fired for holding and talking about my sincerely held religious beliefs on my personal blog during my off-duty time from the comfort of my own home,” Eschliman wrote. “Shaw Media directly discriminated against me because of my religious beliefs and my identity as an evangelical Christian who believes in Holy Scripture and the Biblical view of marriage.

“Moreover, Shaw Media announced that not only were they firing me based upon my religious beliefs, but that they would not hire or allow anyone to work at Shaw Media who holds religious beliefs similar to mine, which would include an automatic denial of any accommodation of those who share my sincerely held religious beliefs,” he added.

Neither Shaw Media nor the Newton Daily News have been willing to provide further comment to the press on the matter, citing pending litigation.

Matthew Whitaker, an attorney with Liberty Institute who is assisting Eschliman with his complaint, said the law is on his client’s side.

“No one should be fired for simply expressing his religious beliefs,” Whitaker said in a statement. “In America, it is against the law to fire an employee for expressing a religious belief in public.  This kind of religious intolerance by an employer has no place in today’s welcoming workforce.”

According to Whitaker, if the EEOC rules in Eschliman’s favor, Shaw Media could be forced to give him back pay, front pay, and a monetary settlement.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

If you find this filthy book in your home, burn it

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

I don’t believe in book-burnings, but for the 50 Shades of Grey Trilogy, I’ll make an exception. I prefer charred books to scarred people.

The 50 Shades of Grey Trilogy, for those of you living outside “civilization,” is a repulsive and poisonous stack of porn novels that celebrates the seduction and manipulation of an insecure girl by a powerful businessman who happens to like spending his recreational time engaging in what is now popularly known as “BDSM.” For those of you who are fortunate enough never to have heard of this glorification of sexual assault, the acronym stands for bondage, domination, sadism, and masochism. In 50 Shades of Grey, the man in question inflicts all sorts of pain on the girl, because he is a sadist, which used to be a bad thing. (How utterly confusing it is to see the “feminists” of Planned Parenthood and elsewhere celebrating this phenomenon—wasn’t domination something they sought to subvert? Didn’t bondage used to be something one wanted to be freed from? And sado-masochism—I could vomit.) And now this trash has been developed into a film, the trailer of which is all over Facebook.

50 Shades of Grey and the new “BDSM” phenomenon are nothing more than the celebration of pain, rape, and destruction.

A lot of people seem to be taken with these books, especially based on the number of people I’ve seen unashamedly reading it at airports. These porn novels are “hot,” many reviewers tell us confidently. Yes, hot as Hell and halfway there, I think.

Consider this, for just a moment: In a culture where broken families are often the norm, we have a generation of girls often growing up without fathers, never receiving the paternal love and affection that they need. Thus the famous “Daddy Issues” that so many comedy sitcoms repulsively mock, as if hurting girls seeking love and affection in all the wrong places is some sort of joke. Conversely, boys are also growing up without fathers, never having a positive male role model in the home to teach them how to treat women with love and respect. And what is teaching them how to treat girls? At an enormous rate, the answer is online pornography, which increasingly features vicious violence against girls and women. The average first exposure of boys to pornography is age eleven. It is an absolutely toxic mess—insecure and hurting girls seek love from boys who have been taught how to treat them by the most vicious of pornography.

Introduce into this situation a book, written by a woman, glorifying the idea that girls should expect or even enjoy pain and torture inside of a sexual relationship. How does a girl, insecure and unsure, know what to think? The culture around her now expects her not to need a safe relationship, but a “safe word” to employ in case her sadist partner gets a bit too carried away in the pain-making. Boys who might never have dreamed of asking a girl to subject herself to such pain and humiliation are now of course emboldened to request or even expect this fetishized sexual assault as a matter of course in a relationship. After all, much of pornography now features this degradation of girls and women, and a woman wrote a book celebrating such things. It might seem sadistic and rapey, but hey, sexual freedom has allowed us to celebrate “bondage” and sexual liberation has allowed us to liberate our darkest demons from the recesses of our skulls and allow them out to play in the bedroom. Boys used to get taught that they shouldn’t hit girls, but now the culture is telling them that it’s actually a turn-on.

I genuinely feel sorry for many teenage girls trying to navigate the new, pornified dating landscape. I genuinely feel sorry for the legions of fatherless boys, exposed to pornography before they even had a chance to realize what it was, enfolded by the tentacles of perverted sexual material before they even realize what, exactly, they are trifling with. It brings to mind something C.S. Lewis once wrote: “Wouldn't it be dreadful if some day in our own world, at home, men start going wild inside, like the animals here, and still look like men, so that you'd never know which were which.”

50 Shades of Grey and the new “BDSM” phenomenon are nothing more than the celebration of pain, rape, and destruction. Find out if the “sex educators” in your area are pushing this garbage, and speak out. Join campaigns to make sure that promotion of this filth isn’t being funded by your tax dollars. And if you find these books in your home, burn them.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook