More college students support post-birth abortion

Rate this post

The College Fix: A trend seen by prolife activists that frequently engage college students on campuses nationwide is the growing acceptance of post-birth abortion, or killing the infant after he or she is born, campus prolife outreach leaders tell The College Fix.
Anecdotal evidence by leaders of prolife groups such as Created Equal and Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust said in interviews that not only do they see more college students willing to say they support post-birth abortion, but some students even suggest children up to 4 or 5-years-old can also be killed, because they are not yet “self aware.”
“We encounter people who think it is morally acceptable to kill babies after birth on a regular basis at almost every campus we visit,” said Mark Harrington, director of Created Equal. “While this viewpoint is still seen as shocking by most people, it is becoming increasingly popular.”
Campuses where the high school, college students, local activists and staff members of Created Equal have encountered this opinion include Purdue, University of Minnesota, and University of Central Florida. And at Ohio State earlier this year, the group captured a debate on video between one of its members and an older woman on campus who defended infanticide.
“This is the whole problem with devaluing human life at any stage—it will naturally grow to include other groups of humans; in this case, born humans as well as preborn humans,” Harrington said. “[I] talked with one young man at the University of Minnesota who thought it was alright to kill children if they were under the age of 5 years old, as he did not consider them persons until that age.”
Kristina Garza, spokeswoman for Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, a prolife organization that often sets up anti-abortion displays on campuses along the West Coast, said her group also frequently encounters college students who accept infanticide.
“For those who are firmly for abortion, because they understand it kills a human being, it’s very easy for them to accept killing a human being after birth,” Garza said. “There is this notion that is common on campus, that it’s OK to kill babies because somehow we don’t become human until we are self aware.” “A common number that is going around is 4 years old,” she adds.
As for the trend, Garza said there’s an explanation for it. For one, the arguments put forth by Peter Singer and other philosophers who support infanticide are given as reading assignments to college students.
Singer wrote in 1979 that “human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons … [therefore] the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”
“He has been saying things like this since the 70s, but I think it has been more recently that this type of ideology is being promoted on college campuses,” Garza said. “When he said this stuff, there was a very select few who accepted it. But nowadays, we have become so desensitized, and college students lacking in a moral fiber easily accept this kind of strange ideology.”
But prolife advocacy and engagement on campuses has helped turn students away from pro-choice stances, she adds.
“While the number of students who believe it is OK with killing children after birth is growing, the number of students who accept that life beings at conception is also growing, and that is growing at a larger and faster rate than those who accept infanticide,” Garza said.
“The trends I am seeing is it’s not so much students are better grounded in morals, it’s that we as a prolife movement have done our job in presenting a better argument, and we are pushing people out of the middle,” she said. “We are seeing more students who see the logic and choose to be anti-abortion.”
Yet staunch opposition to the prolife philosphy remains.
Asked about the incident at Ohio State, at which a woman responded to a prolife display by defending infanticide, a pro-abortion activism group at the campus stated its views were similar to those of the woman in the clip.
“As for post-birth abortion, I would imagine that my colleagues would think the ‘post-birth’ part was largely irrelevant, as we believe very strongly in abortion on demand, without apology, and it’s plain and simple that we should look to the woman’s morals and not shove our opinions where they, frankly, don’t belong,” Devin Deitsch, leader of VOX: Voices for Planned Parenthood at Ohio State University, said in an email to The College Fix.
“Speaking as the primary leader of VOX, I assure you we are very pro-choice,” Deitsch also noted. “… We are not here to advocate for women to get abortions, we advocate for her ability to make that choice without fear, heckling, or barriers. Essentially, we ask for a woman (and her body) to be respected. Nothing more, nothing less.”

Respect the woman's body, the baby's, not so much...

Respect the woman’s body, the baby’s, not so much…


Please follow and like us:

14 responses to “More college students support post-birth abortion

  1. Liberals are convinced, in their smug arrogance, that they and they alone are the forward thinking ones, leading the world to a bright future that’s filled with unicorns, rainbows, and free Skittles for all…. funny thing, though, how they never seem to care how many people they kill to get there.
    Those who know history, those who can actually *think*, see a far different picture — the path the lefties have chosen doesn’t lead forward at all, it leads backward, back to a pre-Christian world of pagan barbarity.

  2. Ok, DCG, where is the duct tape warning????
    Good grief, is that woman retarded??? I am in seriously need of some duct tape now… seriously??? What freaking medical reason could exist, that justifies killing a baby outside the womb???

    • But that’s EXACTLY what Barack and Michelle Obama want — an end to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which is “post-birth abortion,” i.e.,infanticide.

      • Exactly Dr. E….Obama voted against the “Born Alive” bill (4 times) b/c …in his words, it would “deny a woman the choice of abortion” which he thought would be against the Federal law…..So, in other words, he ‘feared” that if an alive infant, who survived abortion, was officially called a “LIVE HUMAN BEING,” those rights of that LIVE baby would interfere with some future hypothetical woman from aborting a hypotetical baby b/c that hypothetical baby would be a REAL human being with REAL rights. So, let’s get this straight… alive human being baby who survived an abortion is NOT a human being with rights in this country, the most important of which is…the RIGHT TO LIFE….b/c their life endangers the “right” of some future woman to do the SAME thing to her baby as the “mother” of the abortion survivor did to the NOW ALIVE and SURVIVING baby. So, basically, when a baby survives an abortion, they can just put them in shoe box in a closet and let them die….and it is NOT a murder of a live human being…it’s JUST the outcome of legal abortion/killing and the end product is death, b/c, to Obama, it interfered with the right of the mother to abort/kill the infant according to law.
        You see–in Obama’s world..if you semantically tag it with something obtuse and different…then…it IS different….at least to HIM. Now, as to these young heathens….they worship at the alter of Obama…so what else can you expect of them? Apple/tree…etc….

  3. I’m so upset with this video… I guess Satan got jealous of God’s creation and decided to create life out of piles of excrement… that would explain!!!!

  4. Reblogged this on Know What You Think and commented:
    Pay attention. Right and wrong must be reestablished in the hearts of people. Christians must stop being cowards and start standing for truth.

  5. That woman is just flamin’ evil.

  6. I bet these “educated” idiots treat abortion like it’s a video game. Their brains have become so conditioned to living in denial about life that they don’t even care they are killing someone.

  7. I think the babies are more”self aware” then these brain dead students are. Totally appalling and predictable by now with these loons.

  8. As I understand this post-birth abortion issue,going by what she’s saying,I have just as much right to kill my neighbor as a mother has to kill an already-born baby. No? Tell me what’s “different”. And I can tell you,my neighbor would be a MUCH greater threat to me than that baby could EVER be to her. That’s not even the point though. Can ANYONE here come up with a “medical” threat (or any other threat) that a 2 minute old baby could pose to the mother that could even remotely justify murdering that baby? I can’t believe she was even making that statement. She belongs in the same rubber room as Pelosi,Feinstein and Killary.

  9. I was unaware there was such a thing, as I had thought once someone is born its “too late” for that “option” and that anything as such would construe murder in legal terms. Shouldn’t this technically be illegal at the very least?

    • one would think so…but, today, everything is backwards…murder used to mean murder, now, it’s called “choice”. I say, if those females hate having babies this much, then they should stop having sex (not likely since they consider sex to be a “right”) or get sterilized (not likely since they arrogantly associate fertility with youth). My prayers for these innocent lambs in evil wombs.

  10. Wow – you think it can’t go any lower and yikes, there’s yet another layer of evil! Come, Lord Jesus, Giver of Life and Love….

  11. Peter Singer should receive the Kermit Gosnell award for his efforts at exterminating the helpless and unborn, and now for his advocacy of abuse of the disabled.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.