Obama defunds ‘snowflake babies’: Program aids in embryo adoption

 

[Obama defunds ‘snowflake babies’: Program aids in embryo adoption] "The federal government’s only program aimed at preventing the discarding of “extra” frozen human embryos is itself in danger of being discarded.

In a move that pro-lifers are calling more evidence of the Obama administration’s “pro-abortion slant,” the White House has sought to defund the Embryo Adoption Awareness Campaign in its fiscal 2013 budget.

The Department of Health and Human Services “is not requesting funds for this program” because “the Embryo Adoption program will be discontinued in FY2013,” HHS officials said in a February funding report to Congress.

While some observers support this move as a way to free up funds for more urgent reproductive-health concerns, supporters of embryo adoption say this is the wrong time to abandon embryos that are sometimes called “snowflake babies.”

“I think that daily we talk to people about … embryo donation and adoption, and we hear the response, ‘Really? I didn’t know that was even possible,’” said Ron Stoddart, executive director of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, which in 1997 pioneered the process of infertile couples “adopting” the extra embryos that another couple’s in-vitro fertilization process inevitably produces..." Full text:
Obama defunds ‘snowflake babies’ Pr 8:36

 

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "The president has no influence on abortion policy. Our resident expert on the law here told me so."

 

Obama's on a roll. He's got to kill the rest of the kids (Jn 10:10).

People who adopt these children typically vote Republican. Their kids grow up and vote Republican.

 

Response to comment [from an atheist]: "You mean Obama's trying to kill Republican babies before they're even born!"

Come to think of it, he'd kill Dems, too. He calls his own grandchildren a "mistake".

"Oh man, that guy's insidious."

He's an equal opportunity child-killer.

Response to comment [from a Jew]: "Cells in a lab freezer are not children."

Jer 1:5

"I said they aren't children."

God said differently (Jer 1:5).

"Yeah..well, these cells weren't formed by God in the womb. They were put together by doctors in a dish. The verse you quote really has nothing to do with the reality of this particular situation. There are hundreds of other issues that are in greater need of our money and attention."

Doctors don't create life. God creates life (Gen. 2:7; Deut. 8:3; Deut. 30:20; Deut. 32:39, 40; 1 Sam. 2:6; Job 27:3; Job 34:14, 15; Psa. 22:29; Psa. 30:3; Psa. 68:20; Psa. 104:30; Eccl. 12:7; Isa. 38:16–20; Acts 17:25, 26, 28; Rom. 4:17; 1 Tim. 6:13; Jas. 4:15).

 

[The Left's War on Babies by Brent Bozell] "In the wake of the Obama administration dictate that private insurance companies cover contraceptives and abortifacients, supporters have defined anyone who would oppose this mandate as waging a "war against women." Obviously, no opponent of this policy is actually bombing, shooting or stabbing women to death.

The same cannot be said for what the cultural left favors -- a war against babies. The latest front of "advanced" leftist medical ethics has emerged from the experts at Oxford University. They don't just favor abortion, even partial-birth abortion. They favor "after-birth abortion."

It is stomach-turning stuff. Killing babies is no different than abortion, these academics argued in the Journal of Medical Ethics. Ironically, pro-lifers would agree and have long pointed to this logical progression in the face of laughter. The "ethicists" now explain it somewhat differently. Parents should be allowed to kill their newborn babies because they're still "morally irrelevant."

The article carries the chilling title "After-Birth abortion: Why should the baby live?" Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argue newborn babies aren't "actual persons" but "potential persons."

How this qualifies as "science" or "ethics" is anyone's guess. It qualifies as a quintessential example of the culture of death. Giubilini also gave a talk at Oxford in January titled "What is the problem with euthanasia?"

Team Oxford argued it was "not possible to damage a newborn by preventing her from developing the potentiality to become a person in the morally relevant sense." They explained that "what we call 'after-birth abortion' (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled."

These "ethicists" also argued that parents are somehow cheated when only "64 percent of Down syndrome cases" in Europe are diagnosed by prenatal testing. Once such children were born, there was "no choice for the parents but to keep the child," they complained.

All this should cause us to return to what Rick Santorum was trying to say -- and our pro-abortion media could only scorn as politically disastrous -- about amniocentesis being used as a death panel. The Santorum family's decision to have a disabled child -- as well as the Palin family's decision -- have been disdained by the liberal media as freakishly weird, dangerously religious. It's an "alternative lifestyle" that the "compassionate" liberals cannot comprehend." Story:
The Left's War on Babies

Baby Born From Record Breaking 24-Year-Old Frozen Embryo