“Slick Hillary” Has No Credibility On Baby-Murder In Red China When She Favors Abortion In America
By John Lofton, Editor
HILLARY IN BEIJING in 1995: Now, she needs to push for ‘human rights’ of the unborn in AmericaConcerning President Bush’s recent trip to Red China, Hillary issued a press release headlined: “Senator Clinton Calls on President Bush to Raise Human Rights Issues with Chinese Government During Visit to China.” The first paragraph of this release reads: “During a keynote address at the American Bar Association International Rule of Law Symposium, Senator Clinton announced that she is sending a letter to President Bush urging him to raise critical human rights issues in his upcoming meetings with the Chinese government during his visit to the People’s Republic of China.”
This release says Hillary encouraged the President to do several things including: “Make clear that the United States strongly opposes human rights abuses that have occurred as a result of China’s one-child policy; supports non-coercive family planning programs; and wants China to end any population policies that violate human rights.”
In the text of her letter to the President, Hillary specifically denounced Red China’s one-child policy which has resulted in “human rights abuses” such as “forced abortion.” She called on Mr. Bush “to make clear the United States strongly opposes these abuses, supports non-coercive family planning programs, and wants China to end any population policies that violate human rights.”
In her remarks to the American Bar Association (ABA) International Rule of Law Symposium, Hillary said: “We must prevent and punish violence against women. One of the great advances we made after [the U.N. Fourth World Conference of Women in 1995 in] Beijing was to underscore the point that domestic violence was not cultural, it was criminal. And there needed to be laws in every society against domestic violence.”
In this same address, she said: “At this point, in American history and international history, it is more important than ever that [men and women all over the world] be joined by lawyers and judges across the world who are committed to furthering the rule of law and making it possible for every boy and girl to believe that they have the right to grow up and live up to their own God-given potential.”
In her 1995 address to that U.N. conference on women in Beijing, Hillary said that one of the issues that matter most in the lives of women and their families is “the chance to enjoy basic legal and human rights and participate fully in the political life of their countries.” She said: “Every woman deserves the chance to realize her own God-given potential.”
Hillary said, regarding Red China’s pro-male, anti-female population-control policies: “It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls” (emphasis mine). She called for the creation of a world where “every boy and girl is loved and cared for equally, and every family has the hope of a strong and stable future.”
OK. So, Hillary says a lot of good things here. But, as I say, she has gone in a direction and used phraseology which makes her continued support for abortion indefensible. And make no mistake about it, she does support abortion. In an address earlier this year in late January to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters, she said that the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision “is in more jeopardy than ever.” She called this license to “legally” slaughter the unborn “a blow for freedom and equality for women.” She told her audience she looked forward to working with all of them “to fight and defend” Roe v. Wade.
But, how can Hillary say “forced abortion” is an “abuse” of “human rights” and be for Roe v. Wade? Aren’t all those who have been aborted since Roe human beings? And don’t all abortions “force” the human, innocent, unborn baby to be dead?
If Hillary truly wants to “prevent and punish violence against women,” how can she be for Roe v. Wade since millions of those innocent, unborn human beings murdered violently by abortion since 1973 have been female? Why isn’t she for “preventing” and/or “punishing” abortion violence against these unborn females?
Why doesn’t Hillary consider abortion the kind of “domestic violence” she says is “criminal” and needs to be outlawed? And if she wants a world “making it possible for every boy and girl to believe that they have the right to grow up and live up to their own God-given potential,” why is she for Roe v. Wade which has made it impossible for millions of innocent, unborn babies to enjoy any rights because they have been murdered by abortion?
Finally, Hillary says: “It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls.”
Well, amen! But, all these things, and more, happen to innocent, unborn baby girls and boys when they are murdered by abortion!Why is it “a violation of human rights” to do the things Hillary denounces to girls that have already been born but OK to do these same things to girls and boys, by abortion, when they are in the womb?!
Hillary Clinton is right to call for a world where “every boy and girl is loved and cared for equally, and every family has the hope of a strong and stable future.” But, until she opposes Roe v. Wade, and all abortions for any reason, she is not for such a world, she is not for the things she says she wants for “every” boy and girl.
Discuss this article