Alabama Supreme Court Rules ‘Unborn Children … Are Human Beings’ Entitled to Protections of Law

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that a woman’s wrongful death lawsuit against an OB/GYN accused of contributing to the death of her unborn child may proceed. It declared that unborn children are human beings whether or not at the point of viability and therefore are entitled to legal protection.

“In light of the legislative recognition that a ‘person’ includes an ‘unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability,’ we do not believe that probable progression to viability is the appropriate relevant proximate-cause inquiry in this case,” it wrote. “Rather, we hold that, in order to establish proximate cause, Stinnett was required to show that Dr. Kennedy’s actions probably caused the death of the fetus, ‘regardless of viability.'”

The matter at issue involved Alabama resident Kimberly Stinnett, who experienced abdominal cramping and fever early in her pregnancy and was consequently instructed to go to the emergency room. As she had experienced an ectopic pregnancy in the past, the doctor who saw her, Karla Kennedy, was concerned that the situation might be recurring.

“An ultrasound performed in the emergency room revealed intrauterine fluid in the endometrial cavity that could be a gestational sac, but there was no evident yolk sac, fetal pole, or cardiac activity,” Friday’s ruling noted.

Kennedy performed a dilation and curettage procedure to help determine whether the pregnancy was intrauterine or ectopic, and suspecting an ectopic situation, she administered methotrexate, which the court noted is “intended to cause the end of the pregnancy.”

However, when Stinnett’s regular physician, William Huggins, returned, he conducted an ultrasound, which “showed that what had previously been suspected to be an intrauterine gestational sac had, in fact, progressed to a ‘definite yolk sac.'” He concluded that she rather had an intrauterine pregnancy after all, which was now failing, possibly as the result of the methotrexate.

Weeks later, Stinnett miscarried and then sued Kennedy for wrongful death over the loss of her child. Kennedy asserted in court documents that the pregnancy was already failing and she was simply following protocol.

  • Connect with Christian News

A trial court dismissed Stinnett’s claims, so she appealed to the state Supreme Court. The justices unanimously reversed the denial on Friday and remanded the matter back to the lower court.

“Based on our previous holdings …, we hold that the trial court erred in dismissing Stinnett’s claim alleging wrongful death based on the death of her pre-viable unborn child,” it concluded. “Nor do we find that Dr. Kennedy was due a summary judgment on the wrongful-death claim on lack-of-proof-of-causation grounds or that the judgment of the trial court is due to be affirmed on the basis of the doctrine of collateral estoppel.”

The court largely based its decision on an amendment in Alabama’s Homicide Act, which, as stated, “changed the definition of a ‘person’ who could be a victim of homicide to include ‘an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability.”

Judge Thomas Parker also wrote a concurring opinion, noting that the “viability” standard in Roe v. Wade is faulty.

“The use of the viability standard established in Roe is incoherent as it relates to wrongful-death law because, among other reasons, life begins at the moment of conception. The fact that life begins at conception is beyond refutation,” he declared.

Parker stated that judges have a duty to protect life, including that of the unborn.

“Unborn children, whether they have reached the ability to survive outside their mother’s womb or not, are human beings and thus persons entitled to the protections of the law—both civil and criminal,” he wrote. “It should be all the more intolerable in Alabama, where the express, emphatic public policy of our state is to uphold the value of unborn life.”

“Members of the judicial branch of Alabama should do all within their power to dutifully ensure that the laws of Alabama are applied equally to protect the most vulnerable members of our society, both born and unborn,” Parker said.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Robert

    FINALY we have a supreme court using the brains God Gave them
    Alabama is fortunate .

    • Gregory771

      Alabama is mistaken.

    • Chris Clark

      Haha, the brains “god” gave them. Explains this idiocy.

  • Croquet_Player

    I honestly think these laws are made with no input from medical professionals. Apparently they have no idea at all what can go terribly wrong with a pregnancy, at any stage, and it can happen very quickly. My dear childhood friend and her husband were delightedly awaiting the birth of their first child. She was in excellent health, never took so much as an aspirin, never missed a pre-natal check-up, and did every single thing expectant mothers are supposed to do to aid in a healthy outcome. She went into labor a week early and things went very badly immediately. She nearly died on the table. (She was at one of the best hospitals in the country, not some minor clinic somewhere.) She and the infant survived, but barely. It was touch-and-go for days. At what point do we criminalize the behavior of doctors throughout this medical emergency? Are they really supposed to consult a lawyer before they do or don’t do one procedure or another? Let medical professionals do their jobs.

    • At what point do we criminalize behavior of doctors? How about when they administer methotrexate?

    • Royce E. Van Blaricome

      There have been a couple of articles written in the last month or two that can answer your question. I remember one was by Matt Walsh and he lists an article signed by a bunch of physicians that state abortion is never needed to save the life of the mother today. Another was written by a physician himself. Don’t remember his name but he said with C-Section and the advances made in medicine today it’s never needed.

      • Croquet_Player

        Tell it to the family of Savita Halappanavar, who was 17 weeks pregnant, and died of septicaemia in Ireland being denied an abortion.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          Tell it to the doctors who know better. They’re better equipped to educate you than I am.

          And btw, unless you were there and are a doctor, you don’t know that it was due to not being able to abort either. Given the progress made with medical science, the things that can be done today are phenomenal. When a group of doctors give a medical opinion, I’m more likely to trust that then some piece of anecdotal story that doesn’t come with anything.

          • Croquet_Player

            Look up her name, there is plenty of recent coverage of her tragic, agonizing, and thoroughly unnecessary death.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Nope. Not wasting my time. I’ll leave it to you to debate the doctors and prove the medical evidence wrong.

          • Tammy Valentine

            As a mother who almost died having my daughter 27 years ago I think I can tell you with no uncertainty that you are a bumbeling idiot. I would give up my life for my child anyday. My daughter has given birth twice in high risk pregnancies and now she is doing it again. She is also willing to give her life for her baby. You have no clue of what you are talking about. A woman who isn’t willing to die for her children probably never wanted children in the first place. Those of us who want children will take the risk.

          • Croquet_Player

            I’m grateful and happy to know you and your daughter survived risky childbirths. And I’m very sorry to hear they were complicated at all. I’m sure that was very frightening for you and your family, and I applaud your bravery in coping through an extraordinarily difficult time. Please accept my heartfelt very best wishes to you and your family for good health and happiness, now and in future. I think I’m probably very lucky in that of all my personal friends who chose to have children, only four of them suffered near-death consequences. One friend, having her third child had a stroke during delivery. She was hospitalized for almost a year, and while her recovery has been amazing, she will simply never be the same again. She is fortunate to have a wonderful husband who has held the family together with strength and love throughout an extraordinary crisis. When you say “A woman who isn’t willing to die for her children probably never wanted children in the first place.” I’m afraid I find this very unfair and unkind.

          • Tammy Valentine

            It isn’t unfair or unkind. It is the harsh truth that so many of you need to face. Sorry if that doesn’t jive with your beliefs but reality sometimes isn’t in line with what people want to believe.

          • alyxzandra

            Savita died as a result of sepsis. The miscarriage started as a result of the infection. The sepsis was not caused by a miscarriage. Abortion would not have saved her. the hospital did not treat her infection properly. Look up the whole case before making false claims.

        • patgo

          Abortion is likely to CAUSE septicemia. In fact, a pill abortion has killed many women this way.

          • Gregory771

            Incorrect, patgo.

          • patgo

            Your reply is totally WORTHLESS. You would have to prove a negative. Can’t be done. You don’t know the billions of women worldwide. You have stated no reasoning, just a bald assertion. You have not stated your expertise, if any. There is evidence women have been killed by septicemia, specifically caused by Clostridium sordellii.The process has been described. Nobody should take you seriously.

    • Jason Todd

      So what’s your point? Unborn babies aren’t human? The science was settled on that long ago, and the only people that wish to hold on to the dehumanization myth are modern-day Mengeles, i.e. Planned Parenthood.

    • Amos Moses

      “Are they really supposed to consult a lawyer before they do or don’t do one procedure or another? Let medical professionals do their jobs.”

      they are constantly counseled on an on going basis as to the legal ramifications and liabilities of their actions …… they are still required to follow the laws ………..

    • Bille25

      Using a (personal) isolated incident to invalidate the logic of a court’s common-sense ruling to protect the lives of the innocent & helpless in the wider population, is no less myopic than the effort underway in this country to eventually remove all guns from the law-abiding population because a very few will end up being used in committing a crime someday.
      Somehow, I can’t believe that the deaths (‘legal’ murder) of millions of unborn lives every year in this country has less moral weight than the few exceptions…exceptions I must point out that already have accommodations allowed in all proposed laws which will protect the unborn.
      I’m just sayin’…

      • Croquet_Player

        It’s merely one example. There are millions. Pregnancies can often go seriously wrong, and I for one am not in favor of letting women die as a result.

        • pcn65

          “there are millions”
          Credibility instantly lost.

          • Croquet_Player

            No, please look it up. Women around the world die in childbirth every year. Some of them die because there is little or no adequate medical care available to them, and some of them die with the best possible healthcare available. I’m sorry but this is true.

          • Jason Todd

            So you are going on record then to say abortion is better than childbirth?

          • Croquet_Player

            No, I’m saying abortion is better than dying from a septic pregnancy. Obviously.

        • patgo

          No one is advocating letting a woman die. Abortion is not as good a remedy as taking the baby alive, by Caesarian if speed is important. And we’re not advocating actively killing the baby and leaving her with empty arms, either. The incidence of suicide after abortion is eight times that of carrying to term. She could have her life “saved” only to commit suicide later. And no, there are not millions. pcn65 is right. Do you really think your friend wanted them to kill her baby?

    • Bob Johnson

      “Are they really supposed to consult a lawyer before they do or don’t do one procedure or another?”

      At this rate the doctors won’t have to consult a lawyer, insurance companies will stop issuing malpractice insurance and doctors will not attend to pregnant women for fear of financial or criminal ramifications.

    • patgo

      This example isn’t even ABOUT abortion. Abortion is a much slower way to resolve a late pregnancy than taking the baby alive. There is no medical condition where abortion is the better treatment. Not one. Even in the case of tubal pregnancy, where the baby may already be dead, or cannot survive, there is no reason not to remove the living baby intact, place him or her in a bowl of warm water, and let nature take its course. But you’re talking about a very late situation, and abortion is NOT MEDICALLY THE BEST ANSWER. It causes additional medical problems. And I would have to ask in this specific case how they mismanaged it to the point where the mother almost died, because there are a lot of things they tend to do wrong that cause problems.

      • Palsgraf’s Scale

        That is definitely not how it works. You can’t keep a fetus alive in a bowl of warm water.

        • patgo

          I didn’t say keep alive. The baby will not live anyway. The bowl of warm water just keeps the baby as comfortable as possible while he is still living, which will be at best only a few minutes. These babies cannot be saved with our current state of knowledge. Either the doctor must take the baby from his mother’s body, or both will die.

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            Putting it in a bowl of warm water without the same makeup of the womb will kill it the same way you kill a freshwater fish when you put it in a saltwater tank. That wouldn’t make anything more comfortable, its just a fresh new way to terminate it. There is probably no practical difference between that and leaving it exposed to the air except that it looks better to outsiders. Which is a terrible reason to do anything, regardless of your views on abortion.

          • patgo

            Lookit, I’m not going to argue with you. Find a liquid that will not cause discomfort, make the baby as comfortable as you can. The baby is dying. Putting him or her in a fluid that approximates what is in the womb, at about the same temperature, is the best you can do. I won’t tell you what to do if you are ever in that situation. This is what I would do if I ever were. I won’t be. Those days are past. But I wouldn’t just expose the baby to air. That seems like it would cause unnecessary pain. If the amniotic sac is intact, leave it.

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            No such liquid exists. That’s why artificial womb technology is about thirty years away.

          • patgo

            I said I won’t argue with you. In other words, you are saying, you are going to have the last word. Fine. You got it.

        • Dan

          Go work on that mail-order law degree, dippy.

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            Impressive. That has nothing to do with law at all. Basic chemistry, perhaps. A bit of plain old efficiency. But keep trying. You’ll find something that fits eventually. Go ahead, try again.

  • Lisa Dell

    I am glad the Alabama Supreme Court has ruled the unborn child is a human being, and is entitled to protection of law. Hopefully other states will follow.

    • zeddicuskotor

      At which point abortion becomes even more legal under the castle doctrine.

      • pcn65

        What do lead based paint chips taste like?

        • zeddicuskotor

          Republicans denied in the past that lead was poisonous.

          • pcn65

            And that proves the point: Any uneducated person can make claims or even completely make up data in an attempt to support a position, hoping that others will be as uneducated as they and accept what is presented as facts.

      • Tammy Valentine

        Castle Doctrine is written for defense. Not for aborting babies. Where do you get the insane notion that the Castle Doctrine will cause more abortion?

        • zeddicuskotor

          Defense that applies if you treat a fetus as a person. Since the womb still is the legal property of the woman and if she doesn’t want a person inside of it, and it resists eviction, then castle doctrine applies.

          It the same principal of having someone in your house that refuses to leave. Under castle doctrine you can use force to remove them and have that be 100% legal.

          • Deplorably Optimistic.

            Not sure your logic would hold up — Who’s womb is it? if a child is born in America, it is a citizen of America. its not like the child broke in …

          • zeddicuskotor

            Who’s womb is it? Seriously? If you need to ask that question then you have a serious problem.

          • Chris Clark

            You said, “if a child is born in America, it is a citizen of America”. Did you forget we are talking about unborn children? Is it THAT hard to stay on point?

      • Lapaho

        Uh… WHAT?!?

        • zeddicuskotor

          Look up castle doctrine.

          • Lapaho

            I suppose in a country of 320 million people, there’d be one that looks at the castle doctrine in that convoluted manner.

            More likely a weak attempt at sarcasm, because there’s certainly no factual basis for your unhinged claim.

            I bet you voted for Hillary in the last election. Am I right?

          • zeddicuskotor

            Like how there is no factual legal claim that a fetus is a person. Which is where conservatives fail at, in how they refuse to look at the whole legal picture when they try to deny civil liberties to others.

            Claiming that a fetus is a person means that abortion becomes a self defense argument. How you fail to notice this is your own problem.

            Speaking of the election, at least 50 electors that voted for Trump voted illegally. The constitution forbids electors from also holding public office. Their votes are nullified and gives Clinton the win.

          • Lapaho

            When you put it that way…it’s all so clear to me now…that you are a supremely confused person. I’m sorry for you and offer my prayers for your recovery.

          • zeddicuskotor

            So yes, what you’re saying is that women don’t have a right to self defense.

            And you call me confused.

          • Joe Dan Payne

            did the woman invite the person in?

          • zeddicuskotor

            So now you are saying is that women cannot take away consent once given.

            Neat. We would have to rewrite all the rape laws to take that into consideration.

          • Kathy Robinson

            Yes, when she committed the act that caused the pregnancy.

          • Jason Todd

            Only soulless monsters would deny the humanity of an unborn child. Again, science, through the introduction of technology such as 4-D ultrasound, effectively and definitely ends all speculation.

            Intentionally ending the life of a human being in the name of convenience, which is the reason for abortion almost exclusively, is murder. Simple as that.

          • zeddicuskotor

            Only souless monsters would deny a woman her right to self defense.

          • Jason Todd

            A woman has to defend herself from an unborn child?

            HAHAHA!!

          • zeddicuskotor

            When you treat a fetus as a person then that becomes a self defense argument. That’s the consequence of your ideology.

          • Jason Todd

            So, then, are you in fact arguing a woman has to defend herself from an unborn child? For the record?

          • zeddicuskotor

            So, then, you are arguing that a pregnancy isn’t harmful for the woman.

            Again, neat. We will need to rewrite a lot of medical textbooks and definitions.

          • Jason Todd

            Stop sidestepping me.

            Do you believe a woman has to defend herself from an unborn child?

            It’s a yes or no answer. Are you afraid to go on the record? Why?

          • zeddicuskotor

            A question you can only give if you think being pregnant is 100% safe for the woman.

            Which is just hilariously wrong.

            Meanwhile, self defense only applies when you are defending yourself from a person. Which is what you forced birthers want to say that fetus’s are. That’s the consequence of your ideology. By saying that a fetus is a person you are only strengthening women’s rights.

          • Jason Todd

            And you refuse to be plain and specific in your beliefs, even as you have been asked three times now to do so.

            What are you afraid of? The consequences of your own beliefs?

          • zeddicuskotor

            I am being quite clear, it is you that has a hard time dealing with reality. Including the reality that being pregnant is quite dangerous for women.

            You refuse to recognize that women have a right to self defense against people that harm them, and you refuse to notice the undisputed medical fact that being pregnant is physically harmful for women.

            What are you afraid of? The consequences of your own beliefs?

          • Jason Todd

            So you are saying then that abortion is preferable to childbirth?

          • zeddicuskotor

            So you are saying that women don’t have a right to self defense?

          • Jason Todd

            Answer the question and stop playing games.

          • zeddicuskotor

            So you don’t think women have a right to self defense, and are being cowardly about that by trying to change the subject.

            Adorable.

          • Jason Todd

            I cannot decide if you are a flat-out imbecile or a troll.

            You say pregnancy is harmful but will not admit that in your view abortion is favorable to childbirth.

            You refuse to admit unborn children are in fact human. As I said, the humanity is not subject to debate.

            Self defense is defined as, “The defense of one’s person or interests, especially through the use of physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge of violent crime.”

            The fact you have referred to abortion as self-defense is so patently absurd it has crossed over into sheer insanity.

            I have to wonder where this came from. It sounds like something a modern feminist would say. Are you a feminist?

            Look, it’s really very simple: If you don’t want to get pregnant, use contraception or better yet, abstain. If you are not responsible enough to do that and wish to get an abortion to make up for your irresponsibility, then, yes, that is murder and should be treated as such. Sorry, but you do not get to take the life of another human being because you are selfish and stupid.

          • zeddicuskotor

            “:You say pregnancy is harmful but will not admit that in your view abortion is favorable to childbirth.”

            So you disagree that pregnancy is harmful. Neat.

            “You refuse to admit unborn children are in fact human. As I said, the humanity is not subject to debate.”

            You refuse to admit that women have a right to self defense. Again, neat.

            Meanwhile, self defense is actually defined as a countermeasure that involves defending the health and well-being of oneself from harm. You don’t want women to protect themselves from harm because you don’t view them as individuals with civil liberties and feelings.

            The rest is gibberish and legal absurdity. Defense of oneself against harm isn’t murder and never has been.

          • Jason Todd

            Ectopic pregnancies can be harmful, yes. But that isn’t what you are talking about, is it?

            Look, I understand what you are doing. You are saying bizarre and insane things to get a rise out of people. Whether you believe it yourself or not is debatable, but considering what you have posted elsewhere, perhaps you do.

            Either way, you are morally retarded. And blocked.

          • zeddicuskotor

            Pregnancies in general are harmful. How you keep refusing to admit to this is amazing. You have no conscious.

            What I am saying is bizarre because treating a fetus as a person is also bizarre. This is what happens when you introduce new legal standards, you create other standards as a result. Including how this affects a woman’s right to self defense.

          • Dmuhlestein

            Who helps a woman “defend” herself & her potential life against the “harm” that pregnancy does to her body & her life? A doctor or other person providing the means for & the procedure of abortion! Who helps the embryo, the fetus, or the human baby defend themselves against the harm that the abortion does to their body, and life & potential?
            WHO CAN HELP THEM?
            If ending the situation of “harmful” pregnancy will allow the woman’s life & her potentials to heal and move forward & recover completely in most cases, then why does our society allow the life & potentials of the embryo, fetus, or baby to be permanently & brutally ended, with no chance of healing or future growth?
            A woman is allowed to submit to the HARMFUL procedure of abortion, even ending a life, in order to avoid harm & change her situation, yet the unborn is allowed no such human rights, I must ask Where is the equality & humanity for all human life? A woman is allowed to get an abortion which takes the life of the embryo, fetus, or baby away so it won’t harm her, yet the baby cannot take the woman’s life away so she cannot harm him or her! I ask you, where is equality for ALL human life & their Potential?

          • zeddicuskotor

            You have the explicit right to self defense, even if that defense causes the harm or death of another. The rest of your comment is gibberish, especially since you put scare quotes around harmful. Being pregnant is harmful to the woman. Full stop.

          • Dmuhlestein

            It seems one sided to defend the rights of a woman to protect herself from harm while ignoring the rights of the unborn life! If you value human life, I submit that you consider defending & protecting ALL human life without taking the life of one or the other! After all, we’re talking about a woman, a mother and her unborn baby, not some violent dangerous murderer seeking to harm a woman!
            (BTW, you suggesting that my comment was “gibberish” was unnecessary and probably meant to be rude). I’m sure you get what I was saying even if you don’t want to think about the life & rights of the unborn!

          • zeddicuskotor

            So you’re saying that women don’t have a right to self defense. That a rather ‘unique’ position for you to take. Also quite evil and immoral.

          • Kathy Robinson

            When you commit an act, you must suffer the consequences of that act.

          • zeddicuskotor

            Which is why abortion is legal.

          • Ashton Smith Cannoles

            THANK YOU! for the record, if pregnancy is harmful for a woman, there are several ways to prevent it from occuring!

          • Jason Todd

            Look up asinine.

          • Joe Dan Payne

            are you sick?

          • Jason Todd

            What kind of question is that?

          • Chris Clark

            Guess it was too painful to block zeddicuskotor like you said you did. No backbone.

          • Jason Todd

            What are you talking about?

  • Patty Cake

    This kinds of pregnancies never make it to term.They happen outside of a normal utero pregnancy, its tragic yes, but anywhere else besides a uterus an egg implanted will not survive. this kind of a pregnancy cannot be the basis for any law of rights its not a normal pregnancy. to start something like this put women at medical risk.
    Men should never be a judge to a women body ever, Women should never allow anything or anyone saying what is ok for her body which takes her rights of ownership of her own body away from her, but is this the point that laws want to have ownership of womens bodies. Laws have been trying to take ownership of people right to themselves away for future slavery type impositions. God does not create abnormal pregnancies something gone awry does. this women would of died if forced to continue these of pregnancies, that is murder knowing risk to a person and forcing of said situation.

    • A and D Johnson

      But they are saying it WAS a regular pregnancy, not ectopic.

  • Patty Cake

    “An ultrasound performed in the emergency room revealed intrauterine fluid in the endometrial cavity that could be a gestational sac, but there was no evident yolk sac, fetal pole, or cardiac activity,” Friday’s ruling noted.

  • Henry Wilson

    agreed, leaving in most states, under roe v wade, the only person legally entitled to murder or consent to the murder of the child in the womb to be….his mother. and so it goes… in this version of “alice in wonderland.”

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Thank God. Yes, unborn children are the same human beings. The Holy Bible has been teaching mankind all along. Psalm 139, Luke 1.

  • Beth McDaniel Rogers

    Wouldn’t the D&C the doctor performed cause a miscarriage as well? Unless I’m missing something. the definition I just looked up says that’s usually performed after a miscarriage or abortion to make sure no tissue is left behind to cause infection.

    • A and D Johnson

      I don’t understand this either. Generally that is when s D&C is performed. It makes no sense why they were doing one at that time.

  • RoverSerton

    Every miscarriage is a potential crime scene. Let the police investigate if it was murder or not. If the woman is using a birth control pill, guilty. If she smoked a cigarette or had a drink, guilty. Life begins when you start minding your own business.

  • Cool, can we drag Jesus in front of your kangaroo court for the nearly 50% miscarriage rate? I mean, he is God and all.. and seems to prefer natural abortion.

  • truthaddict

    “… the express, emphatic public policy of our state is to uphold the value of UNBORN life.” Like I have said for years — republicans don’t give a ship about you once you are born.

    • patgo

      You aren’t looking.

      In fact, our family took in four children whose mothers couldn’t care for them. Two were raised to adulthood, and two are halfway there. One of them needed a lot of help as an adult, and we provided it. Their mothers all chose to allow us to raise their children. Remember “freedom of choice”? Their choice.

      I can’t think of a better way to demonstrate that we DO care. I am a Republican because Democrats advocate and PUSH and FORCE the deliberate KILLING of defenseless children. If the GOP ever took the same stance, they wouldn’t even SEE me as I disappeared so fast.

      You have a very strange way to “prove” you are addicted to truth.The plain TRUTH is, these are human beings, and you are apparently standing on the side of axe murdering these tiny defenseless children, in the name compassion. Do you want someone to show you compassion that way? If not, then don’t advocate it for anyone else.

      • truthaddict

        I agree with you that abortion is an abhorrent practice. But, I don’t think I should be able to dictate medical decisions for other people. It’s called “minding my own business”. You want to lower the number of abortions? Provide free contraception. But, oh no. Republicans can’t spend a penny to for anything to be free, They prefer unplanned pregnancies, which means more Medicaid spending, more spending on the WIC program, more food stamps and Head Start, etc, etc. Republicans like to stick their heads in the sand and remember the good-ole-days when women only had sex with theirs husbands and mom could stay at home and be a housewife raising the children. If you want to mitigate the issue of abortion, you have to accept reality and realize that free contraception, comprehensive sex education, education on alternatives to abortion and access to adoption services are the best ways to curb the number of abortions.

        • patgo

          Better do your homework. Making contraception available INCREASES the number of abortions done. You have to teach women to respect their own bodies and not to give them away free to men who just want to use women for pleasure. That’s the only thing that works. Sex education just encourages irresponsible sexual activity as well. There is a REASON why Planned Parenthood provides contraception and sex education. This stuff is CALCULATED to INCREASE abortion clients, because that is where Planned Parenthood makes its money. It is simply NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS of a woman to have sex with a man who has not committed himself to cherish her. I’m all for education on alternatives. Funniest thing: Planned Parenthood tends to SUE anybody who tries to provide this service. Even when they “provide” it, again, it’s calculated to get more clients for abortion. And I’m all for access to adoption services. We have four adopted children in our family, so I am a firm believer, obviously. But you need to understand that free contraception DOES increase the number of abortions. That’s why most Republicans don’t favor it. It has nothing to do with providing something for free. As for “minding your own business”, what would you do if you saw a person beating a child in public? Walk by? That’s half the problem in our society today. When someone needs help, we don’t bother.

    • Nidalap

      Who cares about you is made irrelevant if you are never allowed to be born…