Feminist Group Apparently Believes The Reality Of A Baby’s Beating Heart Is ‘Junk Science’
#MarchForScience Goons Don’t Want To Talk About Actual Science
April 14, 2018Boston Marathon Says Men Who Identify As Women Can Compete Against Biological Women
April 14, 2018Today is the #MarchForScience. It’s quite the load. It’s nothing more than another way for uninformed liberals to feel good about being uninformed liberals.
How do I know this, you ask? Because they’re blatantly ignoring scientific truths that interrupt their political objectives.
The anti-choice movement pushes junk science and debunked myths to try to force their extremist agenda. https://t.co/5sc8JJl9GL #MarchForScience
— NARAL (@NARAL) April 14, 2018
That link goes to an old blog post titled, “Exposing the Junk Science of the Anti-Choice Movement.”
If you read the article, you’ll quickly find that it doesn’t address the ACTUAL SCIENCE behind the functions and capabilities of an unborn child. It goes on and on about how “anti-choicers” are just a bunch of LIARS because “having an abortion or a miscarriage in no way increases one’s breast cancer risk” and nonsense like that.
Um…OK. That’s not the science we’re talking about. We’re talking about the reality of the being you’re choosing to kill.
Go ahead. Read it. I’ll wait. There’s nothing in there. Nothing at all.
Notice that it didn’t refute any of the scientific claims consistently offered by pro-lifers. Like the fact that babies in the womb have separate heartbeats, a unique set of DNA and distinct brain activity. Heck, sometimes these babies are a different gender than their mother. That’s not “my body, my choice.” That’s someone else’s life we’re talking about.
Pro-life isn’t anti-choice. There are several options that don’t include abortion. The focus of your argument is in fact a propaganda based myth.
— Samuel Freeman (@Thetrusamu) April 14, 2018
Talk about transference! My goodness. I have never heard more invalid arguments about abortion than I have heard from the pro death community (of which NARAL is a chief member). Junk science? You are the experts in junk science.
— Appy (@joelapp) April 14, 2018
This is a straw man argument. You’ve debunked myths that no PRO-LIFE advocates use! Our argument is simple: Life begins at conception, and it should not be ended because someone refuses to accept responsibility for the life they CHOSE to create. #MarchForScience #ProLife
— Jason W. (@cobalt5050) April 14, 2018
The separate DNA?
The separate heartbeat?
The separate body?
Baby’s ability to feel pain?
And the term is Pro Life not Anti Choice and you are the Anti Life
What is the junk science huh? answer it you imbeciles!— Dowon Lee (@DetectiveSpidey) April 14, 2018
The junk science where it’s indesputable that a genetically distinct human being exists from the moment of conception? Or the junk science where this genetically distinct human being is alive under any scientific definiton of the word? Or do you just mean “inconvenient science?”
— Amy Swearer (@AmySwearer) April 14, 2018
Do clarify, NARAL. It would be greatly appreciated.
That you choose not to believe actual, proven science but instead believe in a position based on emotion and selfishness doesn’t make the science junk. It just makes you a fool.
— Scott A Whisenant (@swhiscpa) April 14, 2018
Bingo.
