Skip to comments.Would Feinstein oppose abortion if they used guns to kill babies?
Posted on 03/19/2013 3:27:18 PM PDT by Morgana
Last week Republican U.S. Senator Ted Cruz got Democrat colleague Dianne Feinsteins dander up, as she later described her temper tantrum, when during a Judiciary Committee meeting he questioned the constitutionality of an assault weapons ban she had introduced. Feinstein snapped:
Im not a sixth grader. Senator, Ive been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. Ive looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. Ive seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons. Im not a lawyer, but after 20 years Ive been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it.
Feinstein claimed one reason to outlaw assault weapons is they more than kill children, they dismember them in the process, which apparently is worse in her mind, since, as she said, there are other weapons. Meaning what? Cleaner kills are acceptable?
Whatever, this is the same Dianne Feinstein who as U.S. senator voted against partial birth abortion bans in 1995, 1997, 2000, and 2003.
As we all know, to commit pbas the abortionist delivers a baby up to the head in a breech position, punctures the nape of her neck with either fingers or scalpel, inserts tubing through the hole into her brain, suctions her brain, collapse her skull with forceps, and deliver the dead baby. Gruesome. Yet Feinstein said she was truly shocked [about this] major strike against a womans right to choose when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban in 2007.
As a supporter of the unfettered right to abort, Feinstein also supports late-term dilatation and evacuation abortions, wherein the abortionist dismembers the baby to kill him.
Feinstein and her ilk would load the guns.
She has never made any effort to limit gun use by criminals.
I’m reminded of a political cartoon I saw back in 1989 where it depicted Patrick Purdy (the 1989 Cleveland School massacre in Stockton, Cali) shooting a pregnant woman with an AK-47. The caption read something like, “I’m just helping this woman exercising her right to choice,” IIRC.
Feinstein, you are an ignorant sl...er...liberal.
I hope to give you the much practiced a finger salute in person someday.
And, by the way, I could hold your position, but you are far too stupid and uneducated to hold mine.
Shove it up your smelly Obama, wench.
Morgana, just wanted to say that while we may disagree on ecclesiology, etc., we are strong allies on the life issue. My wife too. In fact I mentioned a debate I was having with a progun proabort (I’ll explain in a moment), and she piped up wither the exact question posed in your headline. GMTA, eh?
Anyway, this debate I was in was ínteresting, because it gives a bit of a window into how some folks think about life and the Constitution. I was berated for wanting to “impose” my morality on women, and counted anticonstitutional because I would dare to seek the overturning of bad law like Roe. They had a terrible time recognizing that the right to live is the only logical basis for a right to use weapons, to defend either oneself or one’s family or country. It was a learning experience for me. I had uncritically been assuming most in the progun ranks would tend to be prolife. Perhaps a hasty assumption.
Meaning? Absolutely nothing. A resume of any significance does not rely solely on longevity in a position.
I walked in, I saw people shot. Ive looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. Ive seen the bullets that implode [sic; and so completely clueless ].
Meaning? One suspects in the strongest terms that Mrs. Feinstein has real, actual, bona fide PTSD; and as such, has no business writing (or voting on) legislation on anything, much less firearms.
Look, there are other weapons. Im not a lawyer, but after 20 years Ive been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it.
Note the disconnect between the two thoughts? Apparently, the connection of the sentences made perfect sense to Mrs. Feinstein, and it is scary that such an addled human holds a seat the Senate of the United States, and votes.
Thanks for the ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.