Obama Hits New Low

Obama Hits New Low October 5, 2012

…exploits Down’s Syndrome folks as human shields.

The King of Life and Death neglects to mention to his human shields little facts like his fanatical support for making sure that 92% of Down’s Syndrome kids are murdered in the womb.

How disgusting can you get?

"Well. Religion is interesting. :)"

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"But you're searching and questioning …. and, in Jack's experience, people without any sense of ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"I'm very sorry to hear about your illness. Of course I hope the cancer never ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"A "hard Brexit" will never happen. Britain will leave with a deal of some sort. ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Confederate Papist

    Nothing to see here…move along….truth matters not…Obama sez it, it must be true unless it refutes what Obama sez…

  • Andy, Bad Person

    I’m looking forward to the media jumping down his throat just as they attacked Palin for “using” her own child who has Down Syndrome.


  • ivan_the_mad

    This fits the narrative of the ruling class completely. When good press, trot out the marginalized; when not, abort them for “quality of life”.

    • Hezekiah Garrett

      Took the words right out of my mouth.

  • Jonathan

    The down syndrome statistic reminds me of this:


    You read it, then you’re like, wait…oopsie.

    • Ted Seeber

      Give Obama a 2nd term, and he’ll get there. 800k people/year killed currently for having the wrong genes.

  • Peggy R

    Maybe she’d be a worthy bowling partner for Barry too.

  • Jenny

    The 92% statistic is a very telling one, IMHO, about what Americans really think about abortion. And particularly what so-called “pro-life” conservatives think about abortion. If 92% of babies suspected to have a higher risk of having Downs Syndrome are aborted then less than 10% of Americans are actually pro-life. Of course Catholics make up more 10% of the population and about 50% of Americans claim to be pro-life so there’s a huge disconnect between what someone says they believe about abortion and what they actually believe when presented with test results showing an elevated risk of Downs Syndrome.

    • ivan_the_mad

      Careful there. I can’t vouch for the 92% figure, but that would likely be of diagnosed cases. Speaking from personal experience, there are many out there who, learning that they are at a higher risk for a Down’s pregnancy, decline further testing for a variety of reasons (in my/our case, it wouldn’t make a difference since abortion is murder and the test of the amniotic fluid carries its own risks).

      • We’re in the same boat. We had a slightly increased risk with our last pregnancy (kid is perfectly normal) and the doctors wanted to do an amnio which we refused because a 1 in 300 risk of causing a miscarriage was 1 too many. The doctor did say that there can be heart problems that need to be address immediately after birth with a Downs baby but since the baby’s heart was so strong on the ultrasound she wasn’t too concerned about that. Otherwise they couldn’t give us a good reason to get the amnio beyond ‘feeling better’ because we knew one way or the other.

      • Michael F.

        This is exactly true, ivan. I can verify it in my own family’s life and in the lives of many pro-life friends.

      • Glenn

        Similar situation for my wife and me. #4 son was increased risk for DS at 1:900, based on non-invasive testing. #5 son was 1:9, all but certain to be DS. We again refused amniocentesis due to risk to baby (and resisted the accompanying not-too-subtle pressure to abort him). What really torqued me off, though, was when he was born, they refused to do the Karyotype testing to determine, once and for all, if he was DS, and if so, how severe. He appeared to not be DS at birth, and no amount of requesting/cajoling/begging/demanding would get us that test. It was almost as if once the option to kill him was gone, then there was no need to test. BTW, he’s a happy, healthy five-year old now.

      • Glenn, amnio is soon to be a thing of the past. Last October, Sequenom introduced Materni T21 a non invasive maternal blood test given the the first ten weeks of pregnancy. It will insure that ALL women get a diagnosis, since the ACOG is recommending such tests for all women and Obamacare is going to cover prenatal testing. http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/is-the-hhs-taking-aim-at-babies-with-down-syndrome/
        So parents will get the news whether they ask for it or not. Then the high rate of abortion will spread from the 2% that get amni or CVS to the other 98%. We will see the virtual disappearance of these beautiful loving individuals like my daughter Christina from our world. That’s the plan, Denmark is looking forward to seeing no more births of children with Down syndrome by 2030. Can you say eugenics?
        So the Dems can brag about supporting higher levels of benefits for those with Down syndrome while they quietly work behind the scenes to insure that such babies never see the light of day.

        • Margaret

          Leticia, just reading that makes me want to throw up. Poor babies.

        • Ted Seeber

          One need only look at what happened with pituitary dwarfism after the advent of Human Growth Hormone Therapy, to realize exactly how anti-diverse American culture is.

          The 1939 version of The Wizard of Oz could not be filmed today. No actors that would fit the bill for Munchkinland (they wanted *ONLY* pituitary dwarfs because other forms of dwarfism include noticeable dysmorphic bone structure, where pituitary dwarfism is to scale).

        • That’s not the fault of the tests, though, which are simply conveying information. I had the amnio with Beadboy1, because it would have been absolute torture for me to go through the rest of the pregnancy wondering. And I’m really glad I did — the diagnosis of D.S. meant we monitored the pregnancy much more closely than we would have, which meant we discovered his heart condition early enough to take precautions, and which also meant that we figured out a lot sooner that he was in distress at the end of the pregnancy. Had I proceeded as if it were a normal pregnancy, there is a very good chance he would have been stillborn.

          Then there was the peace of mind it brought, and the chance it gave us and our families to process our feelings so that when he was born, we could be happy and joyful, not stunned and shocked.

          The solution to problem of aborting D.S. children isn’t in refusing information, it is in information and education.

    • Rosemarie


      >>>If 92% of babies suspected to have a higher risk of having Downs Syndrome are aborted then less than 10% of Americans are actually pro-life.

      That would arguably be the case if every woman of childbearing years conceived a DS baby. Yet not all do; I didn’t, for instance. Statistics are tricky.

      • JMJ, only 2% of moms go on to get a diagnosis, via amnio or CVS. That is, its 92% of the 2%. Go up to my other comment to see that this is about to change dramatically.

        • Ted Seeber

          I hope it does. And I hope it changes more in line with 50% of the population being REALLY pro-life rather than 2% of the population even caring to know.

      • jolly

        As stated above, the 92% is likely due to selection bias. The vast majority of pro-life parents will refuse the amniocentesis test (unless the physician doesn’t explain the test well- which unfortunately does happen). Therefore the vast majority of parents who elect to have an amniocentesis test performed have already decided that they may kill their child if the test comes back positive.

        • Rosemarie


          During my last pregnancy, the doctor suggested I get amnio since I was almost 35. I refused, since I didn’t think the possibility of DS was great enough to justify the risk of amnio and I knew I’d keep whatever baby God gave me anyway. So yeah, I’m one pro-life parent who refused the test. (My son doesn’t have DS, btw.)

  • Jenny

    It’s not just diagnosed cases. There has been a huge decline in the number of people with Downs Syndrome being born since the testing started.

    • ivan_the_mad

      “There has been a huge decline in the number of people with Downs Syndrome being born since the testing started.” Is that correlation or causation? We probably need to look at the data more carefully. Percentages are less than helpful without the context.

    • Rose

      Let us all pray to Bl. Jerome Lejeune, for these couples to change their minds regarding aborting these children. Look up Jerome Lejeune on Wikipedia: he was the biologist who figured out the genetics of Downs Syndrome and fought without ceasing the horror his scientific advance caused…Blessed Jerome, pray for us.

      • EBS

        My doctor named his surgery after Bl Lejeune. He has 8 kids with one Downs adult boy. Thanks for the info. Now I know.
        I understand Bead girl wanted to know and the test helped her monitor her baby till it was born. That’s the beauty of this test in the right hands with the right intentions. I’m pregnant with Baby 3 and haven’t had test for any of my children. I don’t want to know if my child has Downs (touch wood), whatever God gives me He gives me. I don’t want to be upset during the pregnancy. It’s personal choice.
        As my dad says, even though Romney “won” the first debate, Americans will still go to the polls with their eyes shut and stars in their eyes for Obama. Stupids.

  • This is the type of action that many, if not most, politicians do. They bring up some vulnerable person in an attempt to skew public opinion. Brittany, Joe the Plumber, Tim Tebow, and many others areexamples of this.
    However, using the example of Brittany to bring abortiuon nto the debate is just a dishonest.

    • Hezekiah Garrett

      Brittany has a disorder treated in this culture by death in the womb, with a 92% “success” rate. Joe is a plumber who objects to higher marginal tax rates. Tim Tebow has a rough time getting a leather ball in the appropriate hands from any distance. Acknowledging ANY of those facts isn’t dishonest. And therefore it isn’t comparable to exploiting the girl for political gain.

      (I assume that the opposite was your point. I really couldn’t parse out a reasonably objective message from your syntax.)

      • Quite simply, theya re all people trotted out for political gain. Tebow is the poster child of the anti-choice campaigners, Joe of the anti-tax crowd. They are all creations of the mass media.

        • Andy, Bad Person

          Tebow and Joe the Plumber chose to get involved politically. This woman is being used.

          Please take your “anti-choice” crap out with the rest of the rubbish.

    • Andy, Bad Person

      In what way is it dishonest? If abortion advocates had their way Brittany would not be here to “write” her endorsement. Brittany is being used by Mark as an example of a person vulnerable to the Abortion Machine, because she is vulnerable to the Abortion Machine.

      It’s exactly the opposite of dishonest.

  • M

    Here are the statistics for abortion and Down syndrome, from another patheos blogger who has a daughter with Down syndrome. Basically, about 50% of babies with Down syndrome are aborted. Some families decline prenatal testing; some families know their child has Down syndrome and continue the pregnancy, and for many families, early prnatal testing turns out fine and the baby has DS anyway, or especially for young mothers, they were never offered prenantal testing because the chances of a baby with DS were so low.


    I say this a a mother who did plenty of research after choosing not to do an amniocentesis after receiving blood test results that had a very high chance of DS. We prepared for a baby with DS and went about our lives. Now I have a child who does not have DS, but has several other highly unusal medical issues that have no name.

    Yes, I think the statistics show that many pro-lifers, especially those who are not Catholic, believe in exceptions for the health and life of the mother and child. When faced with a diagnosis of DS, many people who call themselves pro-life believe they are one of the exceptions. I don’t have a link in front of me, but I have read in several places that only about 10%-20% of Americans believe in no abortion with no exceptions.

    This is more controversial, but although I am not voting for Obama, I have seen that Democratic policies often help the disabled more. On the open market, three of my four family members would be totally uninsurable, for any amount of money, for instance. So yes, while there are real problems with the Democrats, Brittanie makes some good points. Everyone I know who is disabled or the parent of a disabled child is happy to take advantage of the programs and services offered, and while the budget deficits can’t continue forever, the Republicans, at least around here, seem to want to cut programs to kids like mine first.

    • Confederate Papist

      If I read the Ryan plan correctly there would be no cuts for elderly/disabled and the demonising by the current administration of this plan brought that into light.

      • Will

        In the past few weeks, I saw a video on tv of someone asking Mr. Ryan what in the budget would be cut. He said the details would be worked out with Congress next year.

    • Rose

      As a person with an unusual (and expensive) genetic defect myself, I can testify to the near-impossibility of getting insurance for myself and the two dear boys I managed to deliver in spite of my condition. I was told they would never be insurable after they were born 25 and 22 years ago respectively. Now, they turn out to be “treatable”, but the nun in pants at the Catholic hospital where they were born urged me to “be fixed” so another “mistake” would not be born. They are normal, and productive members of society now. Medical treatment “caught up” with them when they were under the age of 12. So much for your burden on society. No, I won’t turn to the government if they or I need help later. The kind of help the government usually offers comes at too great a moral cost. No thanks…There is already an obvious “conspiracy of silence” out there. When my (former) doctors see me, they keep mum about what would help me. Now I seek out Catholic medical personnel. Better chance of survival.

  • Sorry. My last post was supposed to be a reply to Andy.

  • RuthAnne

    Many of you think the Republicans are your friends, that they care about the issues you care about. Back in the Reagan/Moral Majority era the Republicans made a very cynical decision to go after the fundamentalist and evangelical vote of those who were part of Falwell’s demographic. So they picked the biggest hot-button issue they could think of, that of abortion. And they inserted an anti-abortion plank in their platform. There were many Republicans who were pro-choice back then but flipped when they thought they’d get your votes.

    When will you see that they don’t really care? Abortion will never be illegal in this country because there are just too many people who morally disagree with you. And while you’re giving your votes to the Republican candidates thinking that someday your big issue will be solved your way

  • RuthAnne

    continued from other posting — (I accidently cut off this last part)

    And while you’re trading your votes to the Republicans for their promise to end abortion I hope you’ll at least think about the damage done to actual living children in the name of right-wing social Darwinism by those who’d rather consider WWARD? instead of WWJD? (clue: Who is John Galt?)

    • Alma Peregrina


      I am willing to support measures that make it easier to be a mother and hold a job.

      I am willing to support measures to make health care available to everyone.

      I am willing to support measures to make college cheap.

      So… are YOU willing to support measures that will reduce abortions through law?

      If you are not, then all your words were void and deceptive (to put it kindly).

      • Karen

        That depends entirely on the restrictions and how they are implemented. I will never support fetal personhood laws, because I don’t see how it’s possible to make a blastocyst a person without drastically restricting women’s rights. For one easy example, legal persons all have the right to file lawsuits, and so do their estates. How could you prevent a miscarried fetus from suing its mother for negligence? Under such regimes, all miscarriages would have to be investigated as possible assaults. (No, really, they would. Any death of a “person” if there is no attending physician to establish cause immediately has to be investigated, at least by having an autopsy.) Breastfeeding thins the uterine lining so that a zygote can’t implant. Should breastfeeding be banned because it might cause miscarriage?

        Finally, why is it deceptive of me to fail to support abortion restrictions when I support all those other things you list? Exactly zero anti-abortion organizations support the Pregnant Worker’s Fairness Act, which protects pregnant women from workplace discrimination. Exactly zero anti-abortion organizations support Obamacare; exactly zero antiabortion organizations supported the Lily Ledbetter Act. The Democrats support all the things I’ve listed and the Republicans none of them. I conclude from observation, therefore, that while a few pro-lifers support policies that make life easier for women, their leaders do not, and in fact most of their leaders really wish women would get out of the public world altogether.

        • Alma Peregrina

          Yeah, because we investigate all deaths as possible murders. And because we ban every medication because it can lead to poisoning. Oh, and how could you prevent a miscarried fetus from suing its mother for negligence? Don’t be afraid of a miscarried fetus suing you… it won’t happen.

          As for your deception, I am sad that your comment was removed. Basically because you tried to paint pro-lifers all in one brush, saying that we were all “white man who just want to feel good about themselves”. That’s prejudice. A cheap shot… I’m sorry that it is not here for everyone to see.

          And you also said something to the effect that pro-lifers only care for “some vulnerable” and don’t care about “other vulnerable” (the women) even if “our vulnerable” (the fetus) made “life hell” (your words) of “your vulnerable”.

          By pointing out that I favour all those things, while you do NOT support personhood laws, I proved that it is the other way around. It is YOU that don’t care for “our vulnerable” (the fetus) even if “your vulnerable” (the woman) is making the hell out of his/her life.

          In short, you don’t care about the vulnerable fetuses. You want us to submit to YOUR values and standards. You said that we would only limit abortions by doing what YOU whant, even if you’ve shown that you do NOT care if abortions are limited. So, yeah, your words were void and deceptive.

        • Alma Peregrina

          To make my point absolutely clear, tell me something.

          Imagine that there is no poverty, no unemployment, no unequality.
          Imagine that medical access is universal and free. That maternal mortality rate is nil.
          Imagine that school access is universal and free as well.
          In short, let’s imagine a utopian world.

          IF you lived in that world, would you then support a legal ban on abortion on demand?

        • EBS

          A fetus seeking its mothers estate? What an utterly ridiculous example of why we shouldn’t acknowledge a growing baby inside it’s mothers womb as a life. Looks like common sense fails itself amongst lawmakers and pro-choicers.
          Firstly, as a woman, I am deeply offended by your presumption that abortion is equal to Women’s Rights. Stop being dishonest and spurting slogans from the 1970’s. The more technology we have to show you its human, the more stupid and stubborn you get, digging your heals in INSISTING that its a blob of cells. Why how could it sue its mum, if it a blob of cells? Can you see the stupidity of the so-called “pro-choice” lobby. Its living and growing so rapidly that by the time you get to 3months (thats a third of the way), its nearly fully formed! Fully formed! What to you want it to do- sing and dance for you to show you it’s another life?
          Stop telling a woman to “control” her body through chemicals and surgical procedures so she can advance her career, then turning around to her when she is 40 with old eggs and telling her she can fork out thousands and thousands of dollars and grow her “non-human” lump of cells in a test tube, and buy a baby. You call that empowering women? Denying their womanhood and their biology is not empowering them-it is telling them to be dishonest about who they are- A WOMAN. How is that liberating?
          Where is the woman’s right when she undergoes an abortion with NO counseling Prior to the abortion, and NO counseling after the abortion? How are you benefiting a woman’s rights when you lie to her telling her that abortion on this “non-human” INSIDE her will not affect her physically, mentally or emotionally? You see, I counsel women who have had abortions, some who have suffered from PAS for 15 years, with these so-called progressive pro-choicer taking their blood money and telling them to “get over it”. The Abortion Industry is one of the scummiest organizations that exists. It has blood on its hands and destroys a woman’s life. Its purpose is to destroy a woman, not empower her. And a pro-choicer is just an unpaid spokesperson for this crummy industry.
          Yes, I’m angry and sick of the lies. Who cares if a politician is a liar, who is rich. So long as he doesn’t put policies in place, like Obama is blatantly and obnoxiously doing, to promote and advocate for this industry. And you are telling me on one hand Obama is giving bail outs to Planned Parenthood, supporting late term abortions, and spreading his ideology all the way to the developing world, all the while he advocating for pregnant women in workplace? What utter and blatant lunacy.
          Besides the above, he can’t even run an economy decently.

        • Ted Seeber

          True woman’s rights are in support of pregnancy. Anything less is a REJECTION of women’s rights, and an attack on the very genius that women possess that men do not. It is an attempt to turn women into objects for sexual pleasure and it is something EVERY woman should be against.

  • Hezekiah Garrett


    There is no abortion machine only if you take the term as literally as possible. But machine is commonly understood to also mean a group of people efficiently dedicated to a goal. Like Planned Barrenhood and their supporters.

    If you honestly believe people are just pro or anti-choice, I have a challenge…

    Go engage a room full of pro-choice women, and without revealing your own position on “choice” argue vociferously against the act being chosen.

    There are only 2 ways to walk out of that room spouting the same line you had before entering: extreme self-deception or astounding stupidity.

    For now, let’s just assume you are naive.

    • Chris M

      so pro-abortionists are also anti-choice. They’re against the child having a choice over HER (or his) body. Sauce for the goose.

  • Hezekiah Garrett


    Do you think you could shill for the Democrat death machine any more obviously?


    A notorious anti-GOPer