Undercover: Late-Term Abortion

I wrote a post a few days ago explaining why a late-term abortion is never necessary. I also wrote another post discussing how many late-term abortions are being performed.

As soon as I have the time to put it together, I’m going to write another post showing how late-term abortions work in ordinary hospitals and the ways that doctors coerce women into having them.

For now, I want to make it clear that this Live Action video just touches the surface of the problem. It takes aim — and does it very well — at abortion providers who perform late-term abortion as part of a medical practice which specializes in doing late-term abortions.

I believe that this just the smallest part of the actual number of completely unnecessary late-term abortions that are performed in this country, most of them after the doctor has badgered the mother into consenting to it. This really is the monster that pro choice has built.

More on that later.

For now, this Live Action video provides a look into late-term abortions as they are practiced in clinics which are dedicated to performing them.

YouTube Preview Image

  • Bill S

    These covert operations are intended to play on people’s emotions. We are programmed by natural selection to be repulsed at the thought of killing a baby. We see that instinct as a God instilled conscience. And we see a doctor with a clinical attitude towards the same circumstances as cold and uncaring and Godless, which is probably true. People are entitled to look at situations like this using their own conscience. Somehow bothered by it and some are not. There is no perfect way to look at it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fabio-Paolo-Barbieri/1326821465 Fabio Paolo Barbieri

      Try and find a meaning to what you said. It literally means nothing. The strongest statement you made is that we are “programmed by natural selection” (a mighty and powerful pagan god, with the skill to build in complicated programs and the purpose to do so for a specific reason) to love and defend babies. Well, if that mighty and dreadful pagan power requires us to do so, I would say that it is as well to do so, and that the gods will not like it if we rebel against their will to such an extent. In other words, you gain nothing by stating the matter this way, except moving one step down from a Christian to a pagan theology. Your statement has nothing scientific about it, and nor could it, because science cannot answer questions of value. (Science certainly does tell us that the baby in the womb is a human individual separate from the mother, but then a man can say: “so what? There are so many good reasons for killing human individuals.” You can’t get away from ethics and metaphysics, especially if you are so ill-advised as to let in supernatural powers by the back door.)

      • pagansister

        Where did Bill S. mention a Pagan God, Fabio?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fabio-Paolo-Barbieri/1326821465 Fabio Paolo Barbieri

          It is called “Natural Selection”. If it is capable of “programming” human beings for a specific purpose, then it is intelligent and powerful. Natural forces are stupid – does electricity know how to program? Does gravity have a specific purpose? If it can program a specific purpose, what philosophers call teleology, in specific human beings, then it is intelligent and individual. And Bill S. is not even so wise as to try to propitiate it, which is what you should do with powerful pagan deities.

          • pagansister

            So Pagan God(s) is Natural Selection, Fabio?

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fabio-Paolo-Barbieri/1326821465 Fabio Paolo Barbieri

              It was an attempt to point out a gross flaw in Bill S.’s supposed atheism. He is not the first atheist I meet who has a habit of endowing abstractions and natural forces with personality and purpose.

              • pagansister

                OK, I understand better now, Fabio. :-)

    • TheodoreSeeber

      “We are programmed by natural selection to be repulsed at the thought of killing a baby. We see that instinct as a God instilled conscience.”

      Exactly what is the difference between the two?

      ” People are entitled to look at situations like this using their own conscience. Somehow bothered by it and some are not. There is no perfect way to look at it.”

      But you just said there WAS a perfect way to look at it: the way we are programmed by natural selection.

      Either you believe in evolution, theistic or atheistic, or you don’t. From an evolutionary standpoint, any species that limits its own genetic diversity, is one in danger of extinction.

    • TheodoreSeeber

      Finally found a comment by you.

      I’m hoping Disqus will find you. I would like to invite you to my blog. It is specifically less public, and I’ve got a question on where you fit on Dawkin’s spectrum of theistic probability from _The God Delusion_.

      http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/2013/05/fundamentalist-atheism.html

  • http://www.facebook.com/anna.dawson.9 Anna Dawson

    It’s interesting that the news piece called Ms Morbelli a ‘first-time mother,’ and even Carhart said ‘this baby will be a part of you forever.’

  • http://www.facebook.com/tom.quiner.1 Tom Quiner

    The human abortion industry is scrambling to control the terminology used in their talking points. Women’s “reproductive health” doesn’t sound so healthy anymore. And the term “abortion” is totally out of vogue. You have great content on this blog, Rebecca.

    • hamiltonr

      Thank you Tom! It’s good to hear from you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000651744387 Jim Russell

    God bless Live Action for its dedication and service to protecting the unborn and exposing the awful truth.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X