Women Who’ve Chosen Abortion Apparently Have More Right Not to Feel Bad About Their Decision Than Individuals With Down Syndrome Have to Display Happiness About Being Alive

I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

2016-11-23-women-whove-chosen-abortion-apparently-have-more-right-not-to-feel-bad-about-their-decision-than-individuals-with-down-syndrome-have-to-display-happiness-about-being-alive

France Bans Video Showing Happy Down Syndrome Children:
http://aleteia.org/blogs/deacon-greg-kandra/france-bans-video-of-happy-down-syndrome-children/

And the reason for the ban is, frankly, appalling:

On November 10th, the French ‘State Counsel’ rejected an appeal made by people with Down syndrome, their families and allies to lift the ban on broadcasting the award winning “Dear Future Mom” video on French television. The ban was previously imposed by the French Broadcasting Counsel. Kids who are unjustly described as a ‘risk’ before they are born, are now wrongfully portrayed as a ‘risk’ after birth too.

The video features a number of young people from around the globe telling about their lives. Their stories reflect today’s reality of living with Down syndrome and aims to reassure women who have received a prenatal diagnosis. Their message of hope takes away the fears and questions these women may have, often based on outdated stereotypes. The video was produced in 2014 to celebrate World Down Syndrome Day. A day created by Down Syndrome International and officially recognized by the United Nations for the promotion of the human rights of people with Down syndrome.

The State Counsel said that allowing people with Down syndrome to smile was “inappropriate” because people’s expression of happiness was “likely to disturb the conscience of women who had lawfully made different personal life choices.”

(Read entire article here..)

My Commentary: Sick sad world… Some in the world would sooner rewrite reality than to simply accept it… And, of course, the law is on *their* side, like usual.

To think, post-abortion mothers apparently have more right *not* to (possibly) feel bad about a single, personal decision than individuals with Down Syndrome have to show the happiness they feel in merely existing. Fuck eugenics!

Discussing the Claim that Donald Trump Mocked a Disabled New York Times Reporter

The following correspondence originally took place upon the Facebook wall of family, after she shared a Twitter screenshot from here

Sara:

"Damien Owens: As long as I live, I will never understand how this along wasn't the end of it. (Under Fire: Trump Mocks Reporter with Disability - CNN)"

“Damien Owens: ‘As long as I live, I will never understand how this along wasn’t the end of it.’ (Under Fire: Trump Mocks Reporter with Disability – CNN)”

Lisa M.: seriously

Terrence B.: Because he wasn’t mocking a reporter with a disability..

Sara: Although in retrospect, he denied he was making fun of the reporter after the fact, is it a coincidence that the reporter looks like this (see attached photo) and Trump is doing that mocking gesture with his arm in the video:

Trump Mocks Reporter with Disability:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/11/26/donald-trump-mocks-reporter-with-disability-berman-sot-ac.cnn

New York Times Reporter, Serge Kovaleski

New York Times Reporter, Serge Kovaleski

I wouldn’t give merit to his version of the truth, T. He’s a politician and a pig.

Terrence B.: I understand but the story I seen didn’t come from him but it was to dispell the Comercial of where we seen him making the gestures.. It was pieced together to show a negative when actually it was in response to the area reporter getting caught out that when asked a question about his meeting Trump… But I agree with you.. Don’t like the man but it is what it is now.

Rayn: Hillary Falsely Accuses Trump of Mocking Disabled Reporter:

While it is *technically* true that he wasn’t mocking this reporter’s disability, and that the mainstream media did a lot to help peddle the idea that he did, Trump isn’t totally innocent, either, as he *does* have a habit of mocking people by repeating their words, often in an exaggerated way, while spastically moving his arms, and continuously shaking his head – sometimes even leaving his mouth wide open when doing so. It is no accident that these happen to be classic symptoms of palsy, such as is presented in certain forms of cerebral palsy and in Parkinson’s disease.

Never Forget… Institutionalized Eugenics in America

I originally posted the following information and statement onto my Facebook wall…

"Buck v. Bell: In 1925, Virginia, like a majority of states then, enacted eugenic sterilization laws. Viriginia's law allowed state institutions to operate on individuals to prevent conception of what were believed to be 'genetically inferior' children. Charlottesville native, Carrie Buck (1906 - 1983), involuntarily committed to a state facility near Lynchburg, was chosen as the first person to be sterilized under the law. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell, on 2 May 1927, affirmed the Virginia law. After Buck, mor than 8,000 other Virginians were sterlized before the most relevant parts of the act were repealed in 1974. Later evidence eventually showed that Buck and many others had no 'hereditary defects.' She is buried south of here." (Department of Historic Resources, 2002)

“Buck v. Bell: In 1925, Virginia, like a majority of states then, enacted eugenic sterilization laws. Viriginia’s law allowed state institutions to operate on individuals to prevent conception of what were believed to be ‘genetically inferior’ children. Charlottesville native, Carrie Buck (1906 – 1983), involuntarily committed to a state facility near Lynchburg, was chosen as the first person to be sterilized under the law. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell, on 2 May 1927, affirmed the Virginia law. After Buck, mor than 8,000 other Virginians were sterlized before the most relevant parts of the act were repealed in 1974. Later evidence eventually showed that Buck and many others had no ‘hereditary defects.’ She is buried south of here.” (Department of Historic Resources, 2002)

Buck v. Bell:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell

Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, “for the protection and health of the state” did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The decision was largely seen as an endorsement of negative eugenics—the attempt to improve the human race by eliminating “defectives” from the gene pool. The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell.

(Read entire article here…)

Never forget…

State-Worshiping Eugenicist Responsible for Stabbing Murders in Japan

I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

2016-08-04-state-worshiping-eugenicist-responsible-for-stabbing-murders-in-japan

Why Nobody Gives a Damn About Last Week’s Mass Killing of 19 Disabled People:
http://theantimedia.org/nobody-gives-damn-mass-killing-disabled/

(Alice Salles) A deadly knife attack in Japan claimed the lives of 19 people and sent 26 others to the hospital a week ago, yet few major news outlets in the United States picked up the story. Instead of discussing the underlying issues that led to this mass killing or helping the public understand that weapons have little to do with the problem, U.S. outlets often prefer to cover attacks perpetrated by Islamic terrorists or gun-toting madmen, either to satisfy public demand or to perpetuate editorial preference.

(Read entire article here…)

My Commentary: State-worshiping eugenicist scumbag responsible for stabbing murders in Japan…

Discussing Hypocritical Western Victimhood Culture’s Positive Reaction to Mockumentary, “No Men Beyond This Point”

The following correspondence originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “Hypocritical Western Victimhood Culture Reacts Positively to Mockumentary, ‘No Men Beyond This Point’“…

Rayn“No Men Beyond This Point” Trailer:

Hmmm… How about some similarly-themed, and purportedly “wry-humored” films, like “No Women Beyond This Point,” “No Whites Beyond This Point,” “No Jews Beyond This Point,” “No Disabled Beyond This Point,” or “No Blacks Beyond This Point,” etc. Would such mockumentaries ever even be premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival, like this one was? Would audiences respond by thinking, “what a premise!,” as this trailer suggests? Would those who negative react be considered “oh-so-sensitive” and labelled as having “fragile egos,” like this trailer also suggests?

Social Justice Warriors and feminist, alike, who just so happen to be prominent members of victimhood culture, and appear perpetually “triggered” by anything that can even remotely be seen as “offensive,” including comedy and satire, are, of course… eagerly embracing this film, and it’s premise? Hypocritical much? Doublethink much? *facepalm* Ironically, they fail to realize that this mockumentary is actually critical of the concept that female-dominated society will lead to utopia…

Matthew A.: Fragile male egos! Coming from an SJW, that is one of the most formidable acts of projection I have ever witnessed.

A film like this could be quite interesting, but of course this is just going to be progressive nonsense.

Let’s see a world without men and find out whether the women left have any electricity, running water, machine repair, etc….

I agree that there wouldn’t be any war, principally because there wouldn’t be a large enough population to warrant it.

Some people! 😉