BREAKING NEWS!..Hillary Clinton defends partial birth abortion

Hôm qua khi nghe Trump và bà Hillary Clinton debate về phá thai , mới thấy bà Clinton quá  tàn ác ,  tán tận  lương tâm khi nhất quyết  ủng hộ hình thức  phá thai kinh hoàng   " Móc óc đứa bé "    , với bất cứ lý do gì .

     " Partial-Birth Abortion "    -   Third trimester abortion up to birth .

Ông Trump , dù có tệ hại đến đâu , cũng nói lên một lời tự đáy lưong tâm của ông :  " 

Tôi  không thể chấp nhận (  quan niệm của Hillary )  là  phá thai  giết đứa bé khi nó chỉ còn  một , hai , ba hay bốn  ngày  nữa là  ra đời ..."

On Thursday, October 20, 2016 4:21 PM, "HungThe > wrote:

 

       Kính chuyển quývị, xin anh chị em tín hữu hợp ý   Pray To end abortion in America, thân kính,  ht

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: John Tornado <johntornado02> wrote
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 9:50 AM
Subject: Fwd: BREAKING: Hillary Clinton defends partial birth abortion

Pray to end abortions in America...

In God we trust.

JT

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John-Henry Westen | LifeSiteNews <lsn@lifesitenews.com>
Date: 2016-10-19 23:33 GMT-04:00
Subject: BREAKING: Hillary Clinton defends partial birth abortion
To: john <johntornado02@gmail.com>

Trump and Clinton couldn't be more different on pro-life issues. View this email in your browser BREAKING NEWS! The third and final U.S. presidential debate just concluded. Throughout in the debate, both candidates shared their views on abortion, Planned Parenthood, and other life issues. Watch the full exchange where Trump and Clinton spar over late-term abortion and take time to read our coverage below. Trump blasts Hillary on abortion: she thinks it’s okay to ‘rip the baby out of the womb’ up to birth Read the Story Hillary defends partial birth, late-term abortion at beginning of third debate Read the Story

On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 12:15 PM, "H Duong pduong2120@yahoo.com  wrote:

 

Differences Between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton on Abortion are Actually Huge

     

HILLARY CLINTON , MỘT NGƯỜI ĐÀN BÀ  TÀN  ÁC VÔ NHÂN ĐẠO  !

Opinion   Karen Cross   Jul 28, 2016   |   1:13PM    Washington, DC

Every presidential election year, National Right to Life publishes a downloadable comparison flyer about the presidential candidates. This year’s flyer is entitled “Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?” The downloadable version of “Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?” is available at:www.nrlc.org/uploads/ 2016POTUScomparison.pdf

Not surprisingly, the candidates have very different views on abortion. Here is an overview of their positions on abortion-related issues.

Abortion on Demand

Donald Trump said, “Let me be clear – I am pro-life,” adding, “I did not always hold this position, but I had a significant personal experience that brought the precious gift of life into perspective for me.”

In contrast, in the U.S. Senate Hillary Clinton voted to endorse Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision which allows abortion for any reason. She says, “The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” later adding she believed this to be true even on the unborn child’s due date.

SIGN THE PLEDGE: I Pledge to Vote for a Pro-Life Candidate for President

Partial-Birth Abortion

The partial-birth abortion procedure – used from the fifth month on – involves pulling a living baby feet-first out of the womb, except for the head, puncturing the skull and suctioning out the brain. The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007, in a 5-4 decision.

In 2000, in his book The America We Deserve, Donald Trump wrote that after consulting with doctors about the partial-birth abortion procedure he concluded that he would support a ban on that method.

In 2003, Hillary Clinton voted against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (voted to allow partial-birth abortions to continue) every chance she got.

Nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court

The next president may have the opportunity to appoint three or four justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In May 2016, Donald Trump released a list of eleven conservative judges whom he would consider for a Supreme Court vacancy, saying, “By the way, these judges are all pro-life.”

Hillary Clinton has said that she would only nominate Supreme Court justices who would uphold the decision that legalized abortion on demand, saying, “I would not appoint someone who didn’t think Roe v. Wade is settled law.”

Vice Presidential Candidates

The contrasting positions of the vice presidential candidates are listed.

Donald Trump chose Indiana Governor Mike Pence to be his running mate. Mike Pence had a solid pro-life voting record on abortion during 12 years in the U.S. House, including votes for passage of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. As governor of Indiana, Mike Pence champions pro-life measures.

Hillary Clinton chose U.S. Senator Tim Kaine as her running mate. Tim Kaine voted against the pro-life position in the U.S. Senate every chance he got, even voting against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Tim Kaine co-sponsored a bill (S.217) that would nullify virtually all state limits on abortion, including late abortions.

Party Platforms

The party platforms reveal a great contrast on abortion.

The Republican Party Platform affirms “that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life,” opposes using government funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund abortion providers, and supports legislation to assist babies who survive abortion.

The Democratic Party Platform supports abortion on demand, and calls for repeal of the Hyde Amendment (which restricts the use of federal funds for abortion). The platform also supports government funding of abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.

Feel free to download and share the flyer. A downloadable version of the flyer, “Where do the Candidates stand on Abortion?” may be found here:www.nrlc.org/uploads/ 2016POTUScomparison.pdf

LifeNews Note: Karen Cross is the political director for the National Right to Life Committee.

 Hillary’s radical support for abortion

The candidate has lost touch with America’s values

Illustration on Hillary Clinton’s support for abortion by Alexander Hunter/The Washington Times more >

View Comments Print

By Lila Rose - - Tuesday, September 13, 2016

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

As we move toward the November elections, Hillary Clinton continues to demonstrate that a radical pro-abortion agenda is going to be a signature part of her campaign. Some of Mrs. Clinton’s highest priorities include increasing the availability of abortions — including forcing taxpayers to pay for them — and taking millions in campaign money from groups that advocate for abortion without restriction up to the moment of birth.

Mrs. Clinton showed just how prominent this issue would be for her when she invited the heads of America’s three biggest pro-abortion groups to speak at her nominating convention. Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America and Emily’s List are also some of Hillary’s biggest contributors.

This is quite a change from the 1990s, when the Clintons themselves came up with the phrase “safe, legal and rare” when referring to abortion. But “rare” is no longer a consideration. On the campaign trail, Hillary now equates abortion with women’s progress, emphasizing that unwanted children are obstacles to women’s success. She’s also demanding even more taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood, the scandal-plagued abortion chain that’s still under federal investigation for trafficking baby body parts.

In a Washington Post interview this month, Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards explained another part of the abortion industry’s political agenda, telling the newspaper, “We need to challenge or repeal every single restriction that’s out there.” That includes continuing to advocate for abortion-on-demand all the way into the ninth month, which is legal under federal law, but often regulated by the states.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton and her abortion lobby funders, a recent survey shows that most Americans disapprove of their agenda.

According to a Marist Poll released just weeks ago, 78 percent of Americans — including an overwhelming majority of “pro-choicers” — support substantial restrictions on abortion and would limit it to, at most, the first three months of pregnancy.

And while Mrs. Clinton wants to increase the availability of abortions by forcing taxpayers to directly fund them, that same poll shows the vast majority of Americans oppose paying for abortions — including 45 percent who say they are pro-choice.

Mrs. Clinton also staunchly defends the $550 million in federal taxpayer subsidies Planned Parenthood receives every year, claiming that those who want to end them would “wipe out safe, legal abortion.” The odd part about this claim is that Planned Parenthood has always said that their taxpayer funding isn’t used for abortions (under current law, it can’t be). If Planned Parenthood’s assertion is true, then why would taking away taxpayer funding have any effect on its abortion business?

Could it be because of what the pro-life community has said all along — that when the nation’s largest abortion chain gets our tax dollars to help with one part of its business, it can focus its fundraising efforts on another — such as buying the buildings and equipment that it uses to commit abortions?

Could it be that the abundance of taxpayer funding also lets Planned Parenthood focus its fundraising efforts on collecting millions to give to candidates who will ensure the subsidies keep flowing? The media has reported that “nonprofit” Planned Parenthood’s political arm will somehow find the money to spend up to $30 million on the 2016 elections — not on women’s health services — and that Mrs. Clinton will be its largest beneficiary.

So it’s not surprising that Hillary Clinton has not only defended the abortion chain’s current taxpayer funding, but has also called for increasing it. She wants more money for an organization that, according to its own annual report, is seeing fewer clients and delivering fewer services while committing more than 320,000 abortions every year.

In the end, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign has been hijacked by Big Abortion, which financially benefits when more abortions are committed. The abortion lobby is spending millions of dollars to get politicians elected who will ensure that any restriction on abortion — any impediment to getting more customers in the door and more taxpayer funding on the books — is stopped or repealed.

To Mrs. Clinton, I say: You call yourself an advocate for women and children, but making a deal with abortionists and promoting their agenda doesn’t advocate for women. The early feminists — and even defamed Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger — called abortion “barbaric.”

And calling children an obstacle to women’s success doesn’t advocate for children at all. Instead, it dehumanizes them as objects whose worthiness to live is determined by convenience, or worse, by the bottom line of the industry that’s funding you. No “women’s rights” euphemism you use can ever cover that up.

Mrs. Clinton, when 78 percent of Americans disagree with your agenda, it’s time to stop representing the extremists at Big Abortion and start representing the American people.

• Lila Rose is a young millennial and national pro-life leader who has been investigating Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry for the past nine years.

__._,_.___

---

Posted by: le huong