Forum: Do you agree with recent legislation in several states limiting late term abortions?

Watcher of Weasels/Forum:  Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day.

As you may know, a number of states including Texas have placed major restrictions on abortions performed after 20 weeks. This week’s question: Do you agree with recent legislation in several states limiting late term abortions?

Rhymes With Right: I support these restrictions wholeheartedly. After all, they are consistent with Roe and its rationale that the state acquires a stronger right to regulate abortion the closer the child is to viability — because that child is undoubtedly a living human being that the state can and should protect.

Now some may point out Roe uses a trimester system for determining when a state may regulate abortion. Unfortunately for supporters of abortion, that logic was not based upon constitutional law, but upon the state of medical science in 1973. But over the last four decades, we have seen advances that make 20-22 weeks the point at which a child in utero becomes viable. As such, the courts are going to have to grapple with the reality that the bad law found in Roe is also bad science as well. As one of my professors (an ACLU board member at the time) agreed with me back during the Reagan years, the reliance of the Blackmun controlling opinion in Roe on medicine rather than the constitution makes Roe a decision inevitably on a collision course with itself. Well, today we have reached the point of collision.

So yes, these laws (including those in conservative hotbeds like New York, Rhode Island and Massachusetts) will be challenged and some of them may be overturned at the District or Circuit Court levels. That will put them on course for the Supreme Court — which will have three choices. What they will not do is overturn the notion of abortion as a legal right — doing so would upset too many other cases because they depend upon the reasoning of Roe. So while the morally and constitutionally correct thing would be to strike down Roe as bad law, that won’t happen.They will either have to constitutionalize medicine as it stood in 1973, remove all restrictions from abortion, or (and this is the best choice) declare that advances in medicine have changed the time and manner for regulating abortion. What the Supreme Court will do will be dependent upon the whims of Justice Kennedy and any changes that take place in the court’s lineup between now and some future decision day in these cases.

Liberty’s Spirit: I have to say, along with 80% of the USA, that third trimester abortions are infanticide. 60% of society also thinks that second trimester abortions are infanticide as well. Science has proven that babies feel pain, suck their thumbs, play, burp, hiccup, respond to music and even their mother’s voices by the end of the 5th month of gestation. It is ignorant of the pro-abortion groups to continue to simply say that the only issue here is the right of the mother to do what she wants with her body. They fail to acknowledge that by the end of the second trimester there are two viable human lives at stake and that is exactly what makes this issue such a moral and ethical conundrum. Additionally the pro-abortionists fail to acknowledge that NO right is absolute. It is always a balancing act between competing interests. The same should be for abortion; the right(s) of the mother to life versus the right of a viable baby to be born.

I do not think that restrictions on late term abortions are necessarily good or bad. Quite frankly I think it depends on exactly what the exceptions happen to be. There are terrible genetic anomalies, which cannot be seen until after the 5th month of gestation. Sometimes there are such painful choices to be made during a pregnancy that it is simply heartrendering and these decision must be private. But for some advocates, on both sides of the issues, in order to get their own way, they like to make these issues simple but these issues are anything but simple or always clear.

Not all babies develop normally and at times terrible tragedies occur. There is no point in a baby developing without a brain or kidneys to be born. If they were born to what end? What about genetic testing for diseases like tay-sachs? Are the results of these tests known before the end of the 5th month? What is the point of allowing such horrible suffering to occur? What is the point of such a terrible death? If there is a more humane way for all to end the suffering then so be it.

But there are also additional issues with unfettered abortion. Gendercide, and the disrespect of the right to life of the disabled. While gendercide is illegal in the west, pro-abortion groups do not denounce it. Babies diagnosed with Down syndrome have a 98% chance of being aborted. Basically the disabled are thought to be less worthy of life. Doctors also think they know everything about the life of the disabled but they have been proven terribly wrong over the past decades too. Gendercide will lead to economic instability and procreative issues for future generations. Dehumanizing the disabled has immediate consequences for human society. Only the Nazis in modern history felt the disabled unworthy of life.

A major part of the problem with abortion is that to kill we need to see our victim as not human. The pro-abortion groups try to tell society that the child growing in the womb is not a person, or that the disabled are less entitled to life, or that its OK to decide you don’t want to give birth to a girl. The reality is that this attitude reaches down into the heart of humanity, and characterizes a civilization. To dehumanize the unborn, to make this an easy question with an easy answer, is to dehumanize all of us. Is this the legacy that we want to leave our posterity?

JoshuaPundit: I’m hardly surprised that the ‘right’ to murder a baby over 20 weeks old who was conceived via consensual sex, poses no danger to the mother’s health and is developed enough to feel pain and and shock at being ripped out of the womb would not be thought of as ‘radical’. After all, look the proponent of infanticide whom the American people not only voted in as president but actually re-elected.His stance on abortion is not much different than Dr. Gosnell’s except he favored doing it in somewhat cleaner surroundings.

There’s no question these new laws will be challenged, and I’m not certain they’ll survive – we’ll have to see. But the fact that something like this would even be controversial at all, let alone our embrace of politicians that regard something like this as controversial and make political capital out of it  is..unholy. I can’t think of any other word for it. And I am by no means a hardliner who wants to see all abortion criminalized.

The Glittering Eye: Back when the Supreme Court initially decided Roe v. Wade, my immediate reaction was that the viability approach that the Court had relied on would result in abortion activists waging a losing war with technology. The recent controversy over a law limiting abortions after 20 weeks in Texas is just the most recent battle in that war.

I find it really fascinating that the Texas legislature’s position, actually a pretty moderate one and consistent not only with the laws of most other states but quite in alignment with public opinion nationally, is being portrayed by a compliant press as a radical position while a radical position, the one being taken by abortion activists and oddly inconsistent with the actual law of the land which has never held an unlimited right to abortion, is being portrayed as moderate and commonsensical.

The Independent Sentinel: I do agree with limiting late-term abortions. After seeing sonograms, I don’t know why everyone doesn’t agree with me. Babies are viable at 20 weeks and that should be the cutoff with the proviso that exceptions be allowed in cases of rape, incest or if a woman’s life is in danger.

For a woman who can’t make up her mind by 20 weeks, why should we justify abortion so she can rectify her “mistake?”

I am very tired of women calling their babies fetuses when they want to kill them but babies when they are looking forward to giving birth. It’s rationalization run amok.

Why did we bother prosecuting Kermit Gosnell if we are going to allow the murder of babies up to the moment-of-birth? What’s the difference between the two really?

We treat animals better in this country. Can you imagine how crazed animal lovers would be if we said that in order to reduce the dog & cat population, we were going to perform a partial-birth abortion on as many as possible. A partial-birth abortion, which is the means by which doctors abort late-term babies, requires the person performing the abortion to randomly pull out the baby in parts. It’s savage and we wouldn’t do it to cats & dogs.

While several states are limiting late-term abortions, we have governors like Andrew Cuomo of New York who wants abortion to the moment-of-birth enshrined in the state constitution as a civil right for political expediency.

The trend of limiting late-term abortions has peaked. Too many women believe they have the right to kill any baby in their womb because it’s their body. Unfortunately, a lot of men are only too willing to go along with them.

GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD: Uh, any “bortions after 20 weeks seems like baby killing… not Choice.

Well, there you have it.

Related: 

Late Term Abortion Supporters In Texas Chant "Hail Satan!"  Late Term Abortion Supporters In Texas Chant "Hail Satan!" 

Rick Perry:  Late-term abortion ban “is going to pass”

HORRIFYING: Hidden Camera Catches NYC abortion worker telling woman to “flush it” if baby is born alive 

Planned Parenthood’s Roots

Abortion Survivor Blasts Obama

The Negro Project 

Video:  Margaret Sanger

Abortion, Margaret Sanger and Eugenics

Obama’s 5 Most Controversial Statements About Abortion and ‘Women’s Rights’ During His Planned Parenthood Speech  -  A portion of the above text comes from the White House’s official transcript of the speech. This story has been updated.

The President of the United States Asks God to Bless an Abortion Factory 

Philadelphia DA calls abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell a ‘monster’ after he cuts deal for life in prison without parole or right to appeal 

Startling ruling in Gosnell abortion trial

Networks Give Rutgers Scandal 41 Minutes, Gosnell Abortion Horrors ‘0’ 

Degradation of cultural standards, religion, tradition, and moral decency are always at the heart of cultural decline…

Tiny Baby

Protecting Babies Who Survive Abortions

What do Beethoven, Justin Bieber and Tim Tebow Have in Common?

Technorati Tags: late term abortion,abortion,Watcher's Council,pro-life,pro-choice,murder,Life,godless,secularism,SCOTUS,Kermit Gosnell,choices,gendercide,God,religion,indoctrination,PLanned Parenthood,Roe v. Wade,babies,infanticide,Life is a Gift,Progressivism,Margaret Sanger,Obamaland,society

Sebelius Spends Your Taxes On Community Organizations

Betsy McCaughey – Author of Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for the New Healthcare Law

Investors.com Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius was criticized last week for soliciting private contributions to Enroll America, a non-governmental organization run by former Obama campaign operatives.

The real monkey business is what the secretary is doing with taxpayers' money — pouring it into community organizations.

The pretext is that community organizations will do a better job than government employees in enrolling the uninsured in ObamaCare. But the likelihood is that these community organizations will steer the uninsured into the Democratic Party.

And beware. The Senate immigration bill tries to repeat this unsavory use of community organizations. It pays community organizations to educate immigrants about American civics and the path to citizenship.

Last week's brouhaha came about because Sebelius raised money for Enroll America after House Republicans refused to approve more funding for ObamaCare enrollment efforts.

So what is Enroll America? Its board of directors is made up of insurers and hospital organizations that will benefit from enrolling millions of people in ObamaCare. But its management is 100% political.

Its president is Anne Filipic, formerly deputy director of the Office of Public Engagement in the White House, where she networked with community organizers. Before that, she had a top job at the Democratic National Committee, and before that she managed Obama's victorious 2008 Iowa Caucus bid.

To design a media campaign, Enroll America hired Lake Research, which also manages messaging for Acorn, MoveOn.org, LaRaza and 39 members of Congress, all Democrats.

Sebelius' fundraising for Enroll America was inappropriate, but it's minor compared with delivering taxpayer dollars to community groups.

Yet Sebelius isn't breaking the law. Amazingly, the Obama health law requires that community organizations be hired as "navigators" to enroll the uninsured.

So far Sebelius has announced $45 million in navigator grants. Who qualifies? You don't have to know math or insurance, but rules announced April 5 specify you have to match the race, ethnicity and language preferences of the neighborhood that will be targeted.

The odious presumption is that only Asians can assist Asians, only blacks can enroll blacks, only Harlem residents can help Harlem residents.

In addition to navigator grants, last week, HHS announced $150 million for community health centers to "hire and train staff to conduct community outreach efforts." Behind those weasel words is the truth that many community health centers engage in political activism.

The National Association of Community Health Centers states that part of its mission is registering people to vote and collecting patients' signatures on desired legislation. Employees hired by the community health centers can say and do things government employees can't. That's the problem.

Technorati Tags: Betsy McCaughey,taxes,taxpayer money,mis-use of taxpayer funds,Kathleen Sebelius,HHS,wathch the other hand,Obamaland,Sibelius,ObamaCare,smoke and mirrors,Sebelius-gate,Enroll America,scandals,The National Association of Community Health Centers,Lake Research,Acorn,MoveOn.org,LaRaza,and Democrat Congressmen,connect the dots

Toxic Chicken Jerky Pet Treats Pulled from Store Shelves!

And why should this matter to you, if you are not a pet owner?? 

The Nestle Group, that was one of the two companies that gets their chicken and poultry products for pet chicken sticks, just pulled from the shelves, from China owns Gerber Baby food…  And Del Monte is one of America’s major food distribution companies.

Story at-a-glance

• First, the good news. Nestle Purina PetCare and Del Monte have voluntarily recalled their chicken jerky pet treats imported from China. The brands removed from store shelves are Waggin’ Train and Canyon Creek Ranch brand dog treats, along with Milo’s Kitchen Chicken Jerky and Chicken Grillers home-style dog treats.
• Now for the not-so-good news. The reason for the recall is a potential issue of unapproved antibiotic contamination supposedly unrelated to the problem with these very same treats that has resulted in thousands of sick, and hundreds of dead pets.
• Interestingly, it was the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM) that found the antibiotic residue in the treats. They used a new, highly sensitive test to analyze the products in response to growing consumer concerns.
• So for now, the chicken jerky treats that may have been sickening or killing pets since 2007 are no longer on store shelves. Let's hope if they do reappear, they will be safe for your pets.

By Dr. Becker – Cross-Posted at Just One More Pet:

In a truly spectacular coincidence, the very same brands of chicken jerky treats suspected of causing sickness and death in hundreds of dogs since 2007 have now been identified as being possibly contaminated with “unapproved” antibiotics. (Apparently the antibiotics are approved for use in China, where the treats are made, and in other countries, but not in the U.S.)

According to NBC News, right after the first of the year, the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM) informed the FDA it had found trace amounts of residual poultry antibiotics in several lots of Waggin’ Train and Canyon Creek Ranch brand dog treats, as well as Milo’s Kitchen Chicken Jerky and Chicken Grillers home-style dog treats.

Treats Have Been Voluntarily Recalled

Fortunately for U.S. pet owners and potential future pet victims, it seems the suggestion of antibiotic contamination was enough to prompt Nestle Purina PetCare (makers of Waggin’ Train and Canyon Creek Ranch jerky treats) and the Del Monte Corp. (makers of Milo’s Kitchen products) to voluntarily pull their chicken jerky products from store shelves across the country.

The New York agriculture agency discovered very low levels of four drugs not approved for use in U.S. poultry, and one antibiotic that is approved for use, but for which quantities are strictly limited. The antibiotics found were sulfaclozine, tilmicosin, trimethoprim, enrofloxacin and sulfaquinoxaline.

The agency used new, highly sensitive technology to detect the presence of the antibiotics. The tests on the jerky treats were conducted in response to “growing consumer concerns.”

Whatever the reason, I’m extremely thankful NYSDAM took it upon themselves to run the tests. And while discovering antibiotic residue in food products is never “good news,” I’m grateful, in this case, something was found in those treats that caused them to be pulled off the market.

Treat Manufacturers and FDA Make Predictable Public Response

Needless to say, a spokesman for Nestle Purina says the issue with the antibiotics is in no way related to the issue with these very same chicken jerky treats that have allegedly sickened over 2,200 pets and killed well over 300.

The FDA also weighed in. From the agency’s January 9 CVM update:

Based on the FDA’s review of the NYSDAM results, there is no evidence that raises health concerns, and these results are highly unlikely to be related to the reports of illnesses FDA has received related to jerky pet treats. FDA commends Del Monte and Nestle-Purina for withdrawing these products from the market in response to this product quality issue. FDA also welcomes additional information about NYSDAM’s testing methodology, which is different and reportedly more sensitive than currently validated and approved regulatory methods.

As those of you who have been following this fiasco are aware, the FDA has conducted its own “extensive” testing and has to date been unable to find anything in the chicken jerky treats that would cause pet illness or death. Consequently, the agency maintains it is unable to take action to get the treats recalled, or even to effectively warn consumers of the potential for harm to their pets.

At Least for Now, Suspect Treats Are Off Store Shelves

It’s a small victory, but one that brings a sigh of relief. Tragically, for those pet owners who lost beloved companions, the recall does not help.

According to NBC news, a woman from New York whose 2 year-old pug died suddenly in 2011 after eating Waggin’ Train chicken jerky treats, said in a statement:

"How many lives could have been saved if, six years ago, when there was first doubt that the safety of our companions was compromised, the FDA and all manufacturers of imported chicken jerky had issued a precautionary recall until the toxin was found? How much pain and suffering could have been avoided if only they had met their moral obligation six years ago and did the job the taxpayers pay them to do?"

Related:

The Dangers of Genetically Modified Ingredients in Pet Food

Pet Jerky Death Toll Update: 360 dogs, 1 Cat According to FDA

A Raw Food KIBBLE?

When Raw Food is NOT the Right Food for Your Pet

Surprise, Surprise… the Best Food for Dogs Is Homemade Food

Free Homemade Dog Food Recipes

The Importance of Bones in Your Pet’s Diet

The Nutrient Your Pet Needs More of As They Age: Protein

Pancreatitis in Dogs

Good Diet and Advice for Dogs with Pancreatitis

“Holidays Are Great and Fun To Share With Our Pets, As Long As We Avoid the No-No Foods”

Gourmet Doggie Biscuits and Some Holiday Snacking Tips

Beef Verses Bison for Dogs – Variety is critical for your pet to receive the full spectrum of amino acids, essential fatty acids, trace minerals, vitamins and antioxidants necessary to thrive.

Fatty Acids May Improve Mobility In Osteoarthritic Dogs

Pets and Toxic Plants

Natural Pet Remedies For Everyday Problems

Allergies and Springtime Ailments in Pets

Do Vaccinations Affect the Health of our Pets?

How the Pet Food Industry Has Helped Create "Carnivore Metabolic Syndrome"

Now dogs Have a Food Truck of Their Own With Bow-Wow Chow

Dysbiosis: The Root Cause of Many Other Pet Health Problems

Cancer and Your Pet: Two Things to Avoid

Now dogs Have a Food Truck of Their Own With Bow-Wow Chow

The Nutrient Your Dog Needs More of As They Age: Protein – And Expecting Your Pet to Get It from Rendered Pet Food Is the Worst of the Worst of the Worst Options!

Pupcakes

Gourmet Doggie Biscuits and Some Holiday Snacking Tips

Beef Verses Bison for Dogs – Variety is critical for your pet to receive the full spectrum of amino acids, essential fatty acids, trace minerals, vitamins and antioxidants necessary to thrive.

Chicken Jerky Recipe for dogs

WHAT HUMAN FOODS ARE UNSAFE FOR PETS? (the 12 worst)–> chocolate, sugarless gum & artificial sweeteners, alcohol, yeast dough, grapes & raisins, Macadamia nuts, onions (bad for dogs and cats… but poison for cats), garlic (for cats), caffeine, fat trimmings and bones (bad for cats and limited fat and the right bones for dogs), raw eggs (for cats, but must be careful for dogs and humans), and milk.

Some of the best human foods for dogs: peanut butter (although peanuts and peanut butter can contain mold so could be bad for humans and dogs), cheese including cottage cheese (some some dogs can be prone to be lactose intolerant like people), yogurt, watermelon, honeydew and cantaloupe, blueberries, salmon, green beans, sweet potatoes, fresh raw carrots, pumpkin, and lean meat… cooked or raw.

Did You Know There are Two Kinds of Raw Pet Food on the Market?

Megacolon: A Terrible Outcome for Constipated Pets

Resources:

Not Fit for a Dog!: The Truth About Manufactured Dog and Cat Food

See Spot Live Longer – How to help your dog live a longer and healthier life!

Raw and Natural Nutrition for Dogs: The Definitive Guide to Homemade Meals

Keep your pets healthy and help extend their lives with:

StemPet and StemEquine – Stem Cell Enhancers for Pets

Technorati Tags: pet food recall,dog food recall,FDA,China,pet treat recall,chicken jerky pet treat recall,Nestle Purina PetCare,Del Monte,NYSDAM,Waggin’ Train,Canyon Creek Ranch,Milo's Kitchen,antibiotics,Chicken Grillers,healthy pet food,healthy dog food,homemade dog food,homemade pet food,chicken jerky treats,StemPet,StemEquine,Stem Cell Enhancers for Pets,Pet Nutrition,pet recipes,pet health,JOMP,Just One More Pet

Eugenics In Action: 3 Year Old Girl Denied Kidney Transplant ...

Eugenics In Action: 3 Year Old Girl Denied Kidney Transplant Because She Is “Mentally Retarded”

You are about to read about a 3 year old girl named Amelia that was denied a kidney transplant because she is considered to be "mentally retarded". The doctor that made this decision felt as though Amelia would not have a good enough "quality of life" to justify the procedure. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of eugenics in action and this is the kind of thing that starts happening when human life becomes cheap. When a society decides that life is not precious, all sorts of nightmarish things begin to occur. Women start aborting babies that are discovered to be less than "perfect". Life support systems are terminated for those that are considered to be "vegetables". Medical procedures are denied to elderly patients because they would be a "waste of resources". Terminally ill children are regarded as "not worth saving". We often look back in horror on the human sacrifices of past civilizations, but many of the things that we do today are extremely barbaric as well. And as the population control agenda of the global elite continues to be promoted in the classrooms of thousands of colleges and universities around the globe, the value placed on human life is going to continue to decline.

The following comes from an account by Amelia's mother of what it was like to hear a doctor tell her that her daughter was being denied a kidney transplant because she is considered to be "mentally retarded". You can read the full account right here. After dropping this bomb on Amelia's mother, the doctor and the social worker that were talking with her just got up and left the room. Unfortunately, scenes like this play out all over America every single day....

I am beginning to realize I want this over with so I can move onto the next person who will help me with the transplant. So I say the words and ask the questions I have been avoiding.

“So you mean to tell me that as a doctor, you are not recommending the transplant, and when her kidneys fail in six months to a year, you want me to let her die because she is mentally retarded? There is no other medical reason for her not to have this transplant other than she is MENTALLY RETARDED!”

“Yes. This is hard for me, you know.”

My eyes burn through his soul as if I could set him on fire right there. “Ok, so now what? This is not acceptable to me. Who do I talk to next?”

“I will take this back to the team. We meet once a month. I will tell them I do not recommend Amelia for a transplant because she is mentally retarded and we will vote.”

“And then who do I see?”

“Well, you can then take it the ethics committee but as a team we have the final say. Feel free to go somewhere else. But it won’t be done here.”

They both get up and leave the room.

Fortunately, there has been a great outcry over this story and this decision is being reconsidered. But the eugenics agenda has been promoted so hard for so long in this country that there are a lot of voices out there that are actually supporting the decision to deny the kidney transplant to Amelia.

For example, the following is from a Huffington Post editorial that supports denying a kidney transplant to this little girl because it would be "a waste of an organ".....

The stark reality then, is that a kidney that goes to one patient means it does not go to another. Giving a kidney to Amelia means that someone, whose name you will probably never know, but who will be loved just as fiercely as Amelia is, won't get one in time.

Which is why there are rules -- unemotional, clinical, detached rules -- for a situation that is none of those things. And it is why there are forms like the ones placed in front of Amelia's parents. Amelia is not being denied a donor transplant because she is, as her mother writes, "mentally retarded." She is being denied a donor transplant because she has a cascading syndrome that will shorten and limit her life, meaning that kidney will not "save" her in the way that it might someone who starts out healthier. In cold clinical terms this means that everything it takes to undergo a transplant -- the medications, the repeated biopsy procedures afterwards, the constant monitoring and machinery -- are difficult and sometimes impossible compared with a child who is less impaired. The less mobile a patient is, the far greater the likelihood that she will develop an infection, or pneumonia, or a host of other complications that make it probable that the transplant will eventually fail. Which, in those same cold clinical terms, would make it a waste of an organ.

If you feel like losing your lunch after reading that, it is perfectly understandable.

Somehow, millions upon millions of Americans have been convinced that just because a child is sick or disabled that they are not going to have a good enough "quality of life" to be worth saving.

In other instances, decisions about medical care come down to money.

The goal of health insurance companies is to make as much money as possible. When they can get away with refusing to pay for expensive treatments and procedures that increases their profits.

Anyone that has ever had a claim denied by a health insurance company knows what I am talking about. They will gladly take your money, but when the time comes that you really need them many of them will do whatever they can to wiggle out of paying.

Many health insurance companies even treat our injured veterans very badly. The following example comes from CBS News....

John Woodson, a 51-year-old contractor from Oklahoma who was featured on ABC's 20/20 in 2009, lost an eye and a leg when the truck he was driving hit a roadside bomb in Iraq. He is covered by an AIG government benefits program for employees of U.S. contractors working in Iraq and Afghanistan. But AIG refused to provide him with the new plastic leg his doctor had ordered, and even fought against paying for a wheelchair and glasses for his remaining eye. (He has only 30 percent vision in his remaining eye.) The insurance company eventually provided him with a better artificial limb made of replacement parts, but not the one his doctor ordered, according to ABC.

Can you believe that?

But at least that solider did not end up dead.

Other "health insurance victims" are not so fortunate.

This next example comes from a Huffington Post article....

Hilda and Krikor Sarkisyan went to CIGNA's Philadelphia headquarters, along with supporters from the California Nurses Association, to confront the CEO Edward Hanway over the death of her 17-year-old child.

In 2007, Nataline Sarkisyan was denied a liver transplant by the company, on the grounds that the operation was "too experimental" to be covered. Nine days later it changed its mind, in response to protests outside its office. It was too late: Nataline died hours later.

"CIGNA killed my daughter," Nataline's mother Hilda told security. "I want an apology." Sarkisyan was not able to speak to Hanway; a communications specialist talked to her instead. After their conversation, employees heckled the group from a balcony; one man gave them the finger. CIGNA called the police and had the family and their friends escorted from the building.

The health insurance system in America is completely and totally broken. At some health insurance companies, employee bonuses have actually been based on who can deny the most claims.

Hopefully you are with an ethical health insurance company. If not, you may not have the coverage that you think that you have. If there is the smallest thing wrong on your health insurance application, they will find it. And when they find it they will use it as justification to deny your claim.

We live in a very cold-hearted society.

Even the government is cold-hearted.

If something has gone wrong with your health insurance and you are slowly dying at home, the government is not going to save you.

But the government is very concerned about making sure that your kids get pumped full of toxic vaccines.

After all, they have to do what they can to increase the profits of the pharmaceutical companies, right?

Recently, the CDC has been ramping up efforts to put even more pressure on parents across the United States to vaccinate their children.

Unfortunately, that is probably going to mean that we are going to see even more healthy children become disabled or die. The following example comes from VacTruth.com....

It has been reported a fit and healthy 7-year-old girl died unexpectedly before Christmas after a flu vaccine. Kaylynne died in her mother’s arms four days after she was given a flu vaccine by her doctor at her annual check up.

Officials are now investigating Kaylynne’s death and an autopsy report is due in a couple of week’s time. Kaylynne’s mother is positive the vaccine killed her daughter and told reporters, “We’re just waiting for an answer,” “but we believe in our hearts that it was the flu shot.”

State officials however, are not convinced that the flu vaccine was the cause of the girl’s death.

What is even worse is when pregnant mothers get injected with vaccines. The immune systems of their babies are simply not developed enough to be able to handle the toxic vaccines and many of them die.

For dozens and dozens of stories of miscarriages that were caused by vaccines, please see this article and the comments that follow.

So why isn't the government doing more to protect us?

Well, that becomes easy to understand when you realize that most of the people in our government and most of those that make up the "global elite" actually believe that the world is massively overpopulated.

That is why they spend so much money promoting "family planning" programs around the globe. They are obsessed with finding ways to get us to have less children.

In fact, the global elite promote their population control agenda all over the world in dozens of different ways. If you are interested in learning more, please see the following articles....

#1 From 7 Billion People To 500 Million People – The Sick Population Control Agenda Of The Global Elite

#2 Al Gore, Agenda 21 And Population Control

#3 Governments Around The World Are Eagerly Adopting The Strict Population Control Agenda Of The United Nations

#4 Yes, They Really Do Want To Reduce The Population – 22 Shocking Population Control Quotes From The Global Elite That Will Make You Want To Lose Your Lunch

#5 The Dangerous Myth Of Overpopulation

#6 One Less Child? Environmental Extremists Warn That Overpopulation Is Causing Climate Change And Will Ultimately Destroy The Earth

#7 Hillary Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become The Centerpiece Of U.S. Foreign Policy

#8 New U.N. Report: We Must Reduce The Population To Fight Climate Change

#9 The Population Control Agenda Behind The Global Warming Movement: For The Environmental Extremists At Copenhagen Population Reduction Is The “Cheapest” Way To Reduce Carbon Emissions

#10 To The Global Elite The Math Is Simple: Human Overpopulation Is Causing Climate Change So The Solution To Climate Change Is Population Control

If we do not stand up for what is morally right now, in the future it will become "normal" to routinely deny kidney transplants to "mentally retarded" children because their lives will be considered "not worth living".

We look back in horror at the eugenics programs of the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s, but most Americans don't realize that the Nazis got most of their ideas about eugenics from America.

Now many of those same concepts are being repackaged for a new generation.

If we do not value human life, our society will fail.

It is as simple as that.

Throughout human history, whenever the value placed on human life in a society declines dramatically, mass death has usually never been far behind.

And with ObamaCare this will only get worse! We have embarrassed abortion for so long that this is the natural next step… rationing for special needs patients, then will come the the rationing or death panels for seniors… and then?

So what do all of you think about the 3 year old girl that was denied a kidney transplant because she was considered to be "mentally retarded"? Please feel free to leave a comment with your opinion below....

Source: The American Dream – h/t to AJ

Related Read: The Nazi Connection

Related:

New Year’s Tax to Help Ration ObamaCare

Uproar Over ObamaCare’s ‘Rationing Panels’ Intensifies

Big Pharma’s Eugenics Past

Bill Gates Confirms Population Reduction Through Vaccination on CNN

Anyone Recall Jane Bergermeister and the Letha Vaccinations???  It’s Back!

 ObamaCare… HIts, Misses and Perhaps a Look into the Future