» News
Stink Progress Twists Meaning In Order To Smear Joe Walsh
From The Stink -
On Thursday, after his debate against Demcorat Tammy Duckworth, Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) told reporters that an abortion exception is never necessary to save a woman’s life, explaining, “with modern technology and science, you can’t find one instance” of a woman dying from childbirth. Walsh claimed pro-choice advocates simply used the prospect of maternal death “to make us look unreasonable.”
Walsh went on to assert that women whose health would be jeopardized if they carry their fetus to term are simply using the exception as a “tool” to get an abortion for “any reason.”
With modern technology and science, you can’t find one instance…There’s no such exception as life of the mother. And as far as health of the mother, same thing, with advances in science and technology, health of the mother has become a tool for abortions anytime under any reason.
In fact, pregnancy-related deaths have increased in the US, climbing to a rate of 15.1 deaths for every 100,00 live births. Walsh’s own colleague, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), spoke on the House floor in 2011 about getting an abortion because her life was in jeopardy.
By pretending these women don’t exist, Walsh joins the ranks of his other colleague, Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), who ignited a firestorm over his opposition to a rape exception because “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
!snip!
I wish I could magically transport to a world where abortion wasn’t legal unless “the life of the mother was in danger.”
I would bet you a million bucks and a testicle of your choosing that their would be more than 15 abortions for every 100,000 births. My guess is that somehow the mother’s life would be in jeopardy about 15,000 times for every 100,000 births.
That is Walsh’s point, you friggin’ leftist ghouls.
Here’s a link to the Duckworth/Walsh debate. (Why are progressive women so shrill, severe, unhappy, unfeminine and generally distasteful?)
bitterclinger
October 19th, 2012
I’m so glad he said what he did. I doubt I’m the only one who has often thought about what he had the guts to put into words. Killing a baby somehow saves the life of a mother? Give me a break!
mkultra
October 19th, 2012
Because they’re usually as ugly on the outside as they are on the inside?
BILL
October 19th, 2012
lay off abortion.
how else will the democrats ever get rid of the black population if you stop democrats from killing them in the womb ?
its the only way democrats kow to balance the budget or something to that effect.
even steven
October 19th, 2012
“Why are progressive women so shrill, severe, unhappy, unfeminine and generally distasteful?”
Are they progs because they are ugly, or are they ugly because they are progs? I think it’s both.
Alpha Maser
October 19th, 2012
Progressives / Libtards / Socialists / Marxists / Commies or whatever you want to call them, are always angry with the system. The reason is, they deny God, and the fallibility of mankind and believe in the perfectibility of government, i.e. utopia. Since utopia can never be achieved by flawed people, they can never be happy and will always be agitated. People walking around with that much anger and usually a boatload of hypocrisy will be ugly people.
Jerry The Great
October 19th, 2012
Okay, I’ll be the first to admit that I really don’t know all that much about ladyparts but, I know there is something called ‘ectopic pregnancy” but that is picked up on very very early. I understand there might be some complications later on but why does the baby have to die? They can be kept alive earlier and earlier now seperated from their mother.
pcbedamned
October 19th, 2012
“Killing a baby somehow saves the life of a mother? Give me a break.”
Please allow me to introduce myself…
I am one of those mothers who’s life was saved by ‘killing a baby’. Actually, not “a” baby, MY baby. A very wanted and planned baby. Many years ago I had an ectopic pregnancy. Yes they are something that is caught early on, but not usually until the complications have already arisen {usually between 6-8 weeks into the pregnancy}. What I had initially just attributed to some spotting and cramping, turned out not to be. Had it not been for my husband insisting I go to the hospital to be checked out, I would not be here today, nor would I have had another child. I also would have left my then 3 yr old without a mother. See, when they had me opened up, they discovered that there was just over 100cc’s of blood in my pelvic area. My tube was on the verge of bursting. They told my husband that if I had waited another 24 hours, I would have been dead {my plan was to just take it easy, feet up on the couch until my Dr. appt. in 3 days}.
By definition, an ectopic pregnancy is one where the fetus attaches itself outside of the uterus. Therefore, the baby will not survive anyway. And especially in the case of an ectopic occurring in the fallopian tube, it will kill the mother once the tube bursts due to either infection or loss of blood.
I was very lucky in that my surgeon did all he could to save the tube. Even so, I suffered a miscarriage 6 months later. By the Grace of God I managed to carry my son to term, but then due to complications with the tube, ended up with an hysterectomy at the age of 32.
So, as you can see, yes, there are situations when the mothers life can and will be in danger. If there had been any way at all in which I could have saved that pregnancy, it would have been done. I mourned that loss for months. To this day, I still remember the due date {May 14/97). Not every case is as black and white as you think it is.
Thank you for reading. I am hoping that you all will take my words as intended – to inform. Not to flame.
Peace.
MaryfromMarin
October 19th, 2012
@pcbedamned–
Thank you very much for sharing such a deep and personal tragedy. I appreciate your reminder that behind every fact there are real human beings with real joys and sorrows. I forget that sometimes, to my shame.