Less Than $688 To Go!!
Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 03/12/2019 3:16:30 PM PDT by detective
A Massachusetts bill would hide the truth about abortion by stripping the terms “mother” and “unborn child” from the legal definition of pregnancy.
The state Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Access Act (ROE Act) is similar to a radical new pro-abortion law in New York that legalized abortion for basically any reason up to birth. The Massachusetts bill would expand late-term abortions after 24 weeks for any loosely defined “health” reason, and repeal the state law requiring parental consent for minors. It also would end the state law that requires basic medical care for infants born alive from botched abortions.
Michael Forrest at the National Catholic Register found even more disturbing changes when he examined the language of the bill in comparison to current state law.
“… in the spirit of Orwell’s 1984, pro-abortion governmental forces in Massachusetts are rushing to redefine key words and concepts in order avoid the danger that people might actually think about what abortion really is, and what it does,” Forrest wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
Demonic-induced insanity.
The real war on women.
Another Democrat bill supporting infanticide.
Fumb Ducks
Legal Definition of Pregnancy
= = =
That state of evolution where a living body is found on the door step of a fire station.
At what point is this insanity going to be stopped by the outraged American people?
So legally speaking, there is no mother, there is no baby, there is no fetus, there is no embryo, there is no father, legally speaking.
What the heck? What is the legal status of the pregnancy? Are we allowed to say that “human being such as such” is pregnant, or is pregnancy itself no longer identified as such?
fascinating how these mass-murdering Nazis in Taxachusetts try to cover up their heinous crimes (with NewSpeak, non-violent vocabulary)
Just like their mentors the German Nazis did in WW2
The who?, The what? If there’s no who or what then there’s no need to fund planned parenthood now is there?
I’ve thought about this before. If it isn’t a BABY then there can’t be a mother. So women are now unviable tissue containers and all liberal women should be referred to as such.
George Orwell has to be loving this. He was right on the money.
I would say it is Orwellian, but it was Huxley who predicted that the word “mother” would be banned.
What are they going to call them? Host and spawn?
Disgusting. The left is attempting to dehumanize humans.
This ought to produce some interesting medical write ups for the insurance companies.
Shitholechusetts.
Host and parasite.
The good people of Massachusetts need a word for “someone or something that bears a child”. Wouldn’t that be useful? If only the English language would provide one!
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.