Roe v Wade misunderstandings

  1. It’s always been a state matter. While good, this isn’t much without actions to tighten up the loopholes to let this happen again,

Or the Left will try to open this up again. I’ve spoken to them enough to know the following will destroy this topic and bury it forever.

  1. Set age of consent at 18 across America, no exceptions. It’s an oversight to protect pedo politicians. You don’t need cannon fodder for banker wars anymore, children cannot consent or you’re a Satanist. No child brides in America, no minors getting married. This increases divorce risk anyway.
  2. You can marry independently at 18 and join the military, this matches, so there’s no excuse to bring cases pleading exception.
  3. Minors are not considered to consent under any circumstances, again, or else you’re a pedo. No slippery slope, no questions.
  4. Seduction law is enforced when a married party is induced and coerced to adultery. Civil law unless there is also rape. The innocent married party can sue the seducer, unless there is evidence of cuckoldry.
  5. The maternal death rate is higher for teens for under-development reasons, this would not be difficult to bring into law.
  6. Dating apps to require legal verification of age, immigration status, criminal record AND marital status. Marital status is publicly available and free to reference, to avoid unwitting adultery. No excuses. Adultery is a common cause of abortion. This is relevant. Also, no deadbeats.
  7. Child support payment refusal becomes a crime, but self-sterilisation becomes free at 18. No excuses this way, again. Causing children to live in poverty induces the choice to abort.
  8. Life must legally still begin after birth for the specific reason of natural miscarriage, which is semi-common and genetic. Innocent mothers mustn’t be locked up as murderers for a wide range of reasons from trauma causing abortion to pollutants in the water.
  9. No more opt-out organ donation, it’s CCP policy. Oh wait, the UK has that. How Repo!
  10. You automatically have a right to your body, the government can’t just take your organs claiming Communist greatest need. This is Satanic, a kind of transhumanism, because it violates the Bible, it’s anti-Christian to coerce people into handing over their still-biologically alive (viable) but legally declared ‘dead’ relative to be carved up like a turkey, as happens in surgical abortion. See? Relevant*. Otherwise they’ll rule all fetuses to be dead legally (non-alive) and chop away. 3D print organs. No excuses, it’s a type of necromancy to body snatch. Christians need their body for Resurrection.
  11. Speaking of, ban minors from taking chemical abortions including the Pill, due to medical damage, permanent stunted development (from stoppered hormonal-genetic interactions) so young and unknown long-term side effects including cancer and water pollution. Make it widely known how the Pill works so both parents feel shame for reckless fornication (maybe make that a law? depends if you’re really conservative) and bring back the stigma again, its function is chemical abortifacient. It cannot work any other way to prevent pregnancy. Unless you’re also abstinent (true cause) and have an obscure proven medical reason to need it.
  12. Close all brothels, including strip clubs. Is America Christian or not? The Bible says these places are to be stopped entirely, there’s no little bit pregnant or little bit Sodom. This reduces trafficking and hence, aborted babies.
  13. Showing proof of age to view porn. According to UNICEF studies, children as young as 3-4 have viewed it, thanks to groomers evading this by saying “it isn’t illegal to let them see”. This way the pedos can claim the kids are sexually “active” (not MATURE) and thus can consent to child abuse. These children are attacked and the girls fall pregnant. Sensing a theme? Halt the chain of causation early on to stop the Satanic pedos. Also, make grooming an outright crime again to stop the SJWs who want to ‘just talk to your child about sexuality’. It isn’t education, it’s corruption. That used to carry the death penalty, make it do so again. They need to know how babies are made in biology, that’s all.
  14. Children can disavow their parents at 18 or upon earlier proof of abuse, violent or sexual. Stop giving pedos the “right” to access their victims because of blood, even when the child is an adult they can cause legal problems slanderously, claiming they have an alleged “right” to be seen/”visit”, as if the child is a concubine slave owned in perpetuity because of how they were made. Children do not choose their parents and sometimes a parent is your worst nemesis. Let them break free. The child receives no money from that parent going forward to prevent false claims. End the cycle of abuse. This will be considered a human right and there is no stigma for disavowing an abuser. No “But he’s your father/mother!” No, they’re a predator. Rapists don’t get to re-visit their victim for old time’s sake.
  15. AI on every phone (no server) to filter sexual pictures on the phones of minors and Christians can choose to apply this filter so they don’t see some creep’s dick pic. Make that a crime as digital flashing, they didn’t ask to see that. There’s a right not to see porn, it causes brain damage. Bring back the film code. Hollywood will hate it.
  16. When consensually made, both parents are legally responsible for the infanticide and justifying it in a public court, on record for both (in case they marry someone else). In surveys, women usually get abortions because the father made them, by refusing to marry them. So it’s either this or shotgun marriages. Mutual accountability would be great, right?
  17. Rapists have no parental rights, as a matter of human decency. The victim did not consent to babymaking (consent is a positive claim and must be proven). Women will be less likely to abort if they never have to see their abuser ever again. Nobody mentions this. It’s common sense. Nobody wants to see the person who ruined their life and most will do anything to reduce that risk. Make it clear that rape is also a theft of a woman’s fertility and allow her to sue for this, like medical bills. It deters rapists because rape is an extreme r sexual strategy! They don’t want to pay!
  18. No anchor babies. No double passports (Cabal sign). A house divided cannot stand. If you ruin this country you’re stuck here. Let them fear the Mob. No escape by plane and magic paper.
  19. The incestuous parent who conceived a rape baby with their child (or step-child) must be a death-penalty offence, no exceptions. Duty of care to a child (even adult child) is sacred. No “they’re an adult they consent” that’s grooming talk. End the cycle of abuse by the rope. This works.

This is all conservative and will increase birth rates. It won’t punish proper family formation.

If you fail to close these, completely, this will happen again.

*see tags

Pig brains revived hours post-mortem

But go ahead, be an organ donor!

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190417132805.htm

You won’t feel a thing!

“Circulation and cellular activity were restored in a pig’s brain four hours after its death, a finding that challenges long-held assumptions about the timing and irreversible nature of the cessation of some brain functions after death.”

Long-held?

These are the people you trust to know when you’re actually dead.

They might as well be informed by entrails.

Christians cannot support organ ‘donation’

They should push for organs to be lab-grown, which has no strings, but isn’t “free” for the hospitals.
At least in the 18th century, doctors waited until you’d been buried before cutting you up for the socialist “common good”.

Brain-dead doesn’t exist, it’s a guess, like brain “damage”.

It’s odd Americans will fuss about unborn babies but totally ignore ritual butchery of alive adults and children.

You are most vulnerable in hospitals, why did the oldest of the elderly avoid them so? How did they become so old?

The vultures even pressure parents of children with brain conditions with spiritualist New Age nonsense about “living on”. That’s abusive. You know the way they can live on? Not to murder them like yanking carrots out of a garden plot. Physicalism is a cancer, it flouts every religious system, which advises NOT to disjoint the body parts. It is anti-religion and threatens or shames people with religion (who believe in a soul).

The body can’t be “put out” if it’s “donating” and why would they waste pain relief on someone they claim cannot feel?

Bear in mind, neuroscience has proven alternate states of consciousness. Simple EEGs are not done.

Interestingly, if you ask to see the donor cards of a vulture saying what others should do, they don’t have one or it’s a convincing replica.

Then there’s memory transfer, some heart cells in particular have been known to act like neurons. They won’t research why because the families won’t give away the memories (Egyptian soul) of their relatives.

Yah…. cos THAT’s the point where it becomes evil, right?

Not that you’re betraying your relative or spouse to psychopaths too tight to pay laboratories for clean specimens with far higher success rates (more hospital trips and complications, they make even more money).

Two doctors can “declare” you brain-dead as you sit there reading this, grab the rib crackers (don’t look them up) and cut out your still-beating heart for someone THEY deem more worthy to live than you… and that’s legally kosher.

Legal, but not moral.

The SJWs willing to trust any shrink will probably meet that fate.

Declare =/= Prove

How to prove a negative?

The propaganda is heavily anecdotal, one-sided, emotional and vaguely fascist e.g. the government owns your organs.
https://www.kidneycareuk.org/news-and-campaigns/news/organ-donation-bill-passes-final-stage-house-lords/

Oh, openly fascist now apparently.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2019/march/royal-assent-organ-donation-deemed-consent-bill-signed-into-law/

This Bill, presented by Mr Geoffrey Robinson, will allow for consent to organ donation in England to be deemed to have been given by a potential adult organ donor before their death unless they have expressly stated that they did not wish to be an organ donor or an exception applies.

I’m sure “lost paperwork” won’t be a factor if your organs happen to be pristine.

Mistakes won’t be made.

You can’t sue to get the organs back, I presume?

And what about a surplus? They sell them. The family see no money.

This is often referred to as an “opt-out” system of consent as people may “opt-out” of becoming an organ donor on the premise that they do not consent.

Organ rape.

You cannot assume consent.

Libertarians are weak.

Objectification, humanity butchered to view us as meat. Everyone just lost their human rights, their property right to their body, and they’re so idiotic they celebrate?

At which age are you assumed to consent to being cut up like a hog?

The lamb praising the slaughter.

The Nazis weren’t this bad, how’s a baby to vouch non-consent? They ‘allow’ those donations. Placentas are stolen.

The NHS already promises you ‘first dibs’ on organs if you donate one yourself. This is evil.

You don’t need to go to Asia to be robbed of a kidney. Anyone thinking this is ‘nice’ can give their liver to the chavs down the road now.

Each according to his need, morons.

Old people aren’t informed, nobody got a letter about this. They’re just saying they can gut you.

The brain is the final organ to die. Hearing goes last.

Remember, the doctors are just following orders.

They brought this in because families kept saying No.

The Nazis were great humanitarians, they “harvested” so many organs.

“Fascism is capitalism in decay.” – Lenin

Missing babies

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-41122888

Not to be funny, but is she sure the child had actually passed or wasn’t simply “pronounced” dead so they could take it away and do whatever they wanted?

It’s a very big difference. The rush to take it away before she saw it suggests latter.

If it was only pronounced, it could’ve been sold.

You can give children drugs so the pulse becomes impossible to detect without machines.
This can convince relatives to be blackmailed into “organ donation” aka human butchery.

Children and especially young women go “missing” in morgues all the time.

Note the gaslighting as she asked questions – the State owns you all like cattle and your consent doesn’t really matter.

Study: Survival capacity after brain death

http://www.neurology.org/content/51/6/1538.short

Mentioned in

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161103-the-macabre-fate-of-beating-heart-corpses

Further along the life-death continuum, skin and brain stem cells are known to remain alive for several days after a person has died. Living muscle stem cells have been found in corpses which are two-and-a-half-weeks old.

Even our genes keep going long after we’ve taken our last breath. Earlier this year, scientists discovered thousands which spring to life days after death, including those involved in inflammation, counteracting stress and – mysteriously – embryonic development.

This feeds in to all of those lies organ donors or prospectives are told.

If the person is dead, their organs cannot be transplanted. They are useless, when ‘harvested’ from corpses, pre-programmed cell death reactions have already kicked in. They must be taken before death is complete. 

Today beating heart cadavers have spawned a strange new medical specialty, “cadaver donor management”, which aims to improve the success of transplants by tending to the health of the dead.

…they’re currently the only reliable source of hearts for transplant.

Do you know what this means?
Those organs feel pain. They still live and sense.

If human consciousness or any form of sentience is anywhere other than the brain or detectable at a level beneath current technology (now EEG) – they would feel themselves being eviscerated, in shock after hearing the surgeons planning the procedure verbally, unable to respond, and die in one of the most grisly, almost Satanic ways possible. Vivisection. 

How likely is any of that? The limits of current science?

If your organs are dead, why do they want you to donate them?

Short post, horror.
Atheists in particular need to bear this in mind. If there’s nothing but your body, guard it!

renegadetribune.com/organ-harvesting-ritual/

I have a distaste for the rhetoric but the medical points are true. BP rises in distress from the supposedly ‘dead’ donor, for example. That reaction test should be a standard for life, the body is reacting to the environment, they aren’t even locked-in. They say they don’t drug the victim because the chemicals would taint the organs. No really, that’s why, to keep it pure. It’s murder, they keep cutting until the person is dead, probably from shock.
There’s actually no such thing as brain death, it’s a philosophical term. It cannot be proven medically. You cannot prove a negative, they simply fail to detect, an issue of the technology. There are many alternate states of consciousness and you can still feel pain while completely unconscious, say, in a deep sleep with REM cycling. They carefully say “brain dead” instead of just ‘dead’ despite how, if there’s blood flow (cardiac standard) the brain is still biologically alive. We don’t die everytime we fall asleep, do we? We slip into another, hidden state of consciousness. And that’s why coma patients can wake up 30 years later and people can recover from real, huge brain damage that should’ve made them ‘a vegetable’.

All nerves are intact (pain) when organ donation is commenced, paralytics are given to keep the body still so the organs aren’t damaged and ‘patient’ doesn’t move and I pity the idiot who signs up for this. If they waited until you were actually dead, any atheist would logically call that organ death, at which point they don’t want them! We can 3D print organs or use pigs but they think that’s too expensive. There is ongoing discussion in neuroscience on full sentience in alternate states of consciousness, like how one is intact as the Self in a dream, with memories and motives intact, experiences, but these OD people say it’s either awake and blinking or dead to the world, despite how we all know this to be false e.g. you incorporate local sounds into your dreams without consciousness.

They often refuse to connect an EEG to measure brain activity to check, they just say it to the distraught next of kin hoping to manipulate them with grief. If the person is truly ‘brain dead’, yet they categorically refuse to check for activity, that should tell you EVERYTHING about their unethical, evil deception.

Here’s another, more neutral source:

http://www.wired.com/2013/04/consciousness-after-death/

““The evidence we have so far is that human consciousness does not become annihilated,” said Parnia, a doctor at Stony Brook University Hospital and director of the school’s resuscitation research program. “It continues for a few hours after death, albeit in a hibernated state we cannot see from the outside.”

Compare to: http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Organ-donation/Pages/Donationprocess.aspx

“A team of specialist surgeons is called to the donor’s hospital to remove and preserve the organs for transport to the transplant unit. Timing is crucial because certain organs need to be transplanted within four to six hours.”

aka While the cells are still alive.

Why aren’t the atheists onto this, seriously? Without a belief in spirit their concern for their physical being should be high.

Some doctors are valiantly trying to fight against this.

http://jme.bmj.com/content/31/7/406.full

Like the US “whole brain criteria,” the UK criteria—held to define death conceptualised as permanent loss of the capacity for consciousness and the capacity to breathe spontaneously23did not require the electroencephalogram (EEG) as a test for continuing life in the brain. If recorded, continuing EEG activity was to be disregarded—along with other evidence of persisting brain function—as lacking “significance.” It remains unclear, however, on what grounds such activity is disregarded, bearing in mind the present very limited understanding of brain physiology.

Typical Leftist reaction.

Although the term “brain death” is supposed to have gone out of use in the UK,22 comatose, ventilator/dependent patients are still being certified “dead” for transplant purposes using similar tests but on the basis of some idiosyncratic concept that remains far from clear.

Because ‘brain death’ doesn’t exist, medically. They are using the word ‘dead’ because…

The UDDA and the “dead donor rule” still govern transplantation practice. Truog and Robinson, like others before them,24,25 propose the abandonment of all obfuscation where requests for transplantable organs are concerned. They accept that “brain dead” individuals are alive. The issue then becomes: “Given that brain dead individuals are not dead, is it morally acceptable to remove their organs for transplantation?”

Hence the title:

Does it matter that organ donors are not dead?

Truog and Robinson answer “yes,”

shock horror wtf omg no denial signs

Remove their organs, the very things keeping them alive. Like taking out a rotten tooth. Remove…

For Truog and Robinson, the case for taking organs from still living donors depends upon “shifting the key ethical question from ‘Is the patient dead?’ to ‘Are the harms of removing life sustaining organs sufficiently small that patients or surrogates should be allowed to consent to donation?’”

They’re literally trying to change the ethical question to look less like murderers. Murdering to save lives is like, to quote Carlin, fucking for virginity.

Once we recognise that the dead donor rule is not morally necessary for organ procurement, the “concept of brain death will then disappear from textbooks, illustrating the degree to which the concept was never more than a social construction, developed to meet the needs of the transplantation enterprise during a crucial phase of its development”

To answer the charge that vital organ removal kills the living patient, ……the physician acts, and this act is the most proximate cause of the patient’s death……the physician is not morally responsible for the patient’s death—the morally relevant cause of death is the patient’s disease. In both cases, the physician is acting with the patient’s consent in ways that respect the wishes of the patient and that are in the pursuit of morally worthwhile ends.

“I was just following orders.”

What about the medically relevant COD? Cutting out their heart as the piece de la resistance, skinning them for grafts, the mental shock of chopping off the tip of the eyeball?
No. The patient’s consent is invalid if it isn’t fully informed.

“We welcome Truog and Robinson’s admission that “brain dead” individuals are not dead and that brain death criteria were developed to allow vital organ donation, rather than being on a firm scientific or philosophical basis.”

Philosophy isn’t a standard for medicine. If I firmly believed in the philosophical hypothesis that waterboarding causes no harm, does it?

Compare to: http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Brain-death/Pages/Introduction.aspx

After brain death, it’s not possible for someone to remain conscious. Combined with the inability to breathe or maintain bodily functions, this constitutes the death of a person.

Outright lie, they’re measuring the peripheral stem, not the central brain itself. Locked-in syndrome. Coma patients spontaneously awakening. Not possible either, but it happens.
Their heart is still-beating. Cardiac standard. There is blood flowing to and from the brain. fMRI of people in a deep coma? Reports of hearing and dreaming and feeling? People who feel during surgery under anesthesia?
Your brain naturally paralyses you in deep sleep, you can’t feel your body, are you still alive?
Ask anyone who’s had a case of sleep paralysis (many people, millions). Were they dead? Ask them. Look up the stories of horror and terror.

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Brain-death/Pages/Diagnosis.aspx

Brain death will be diagnosed if a person fails to respond to all of these tests.

Occasionally, a person’s limbs or torso (the upper part of the body) may move, even after brain stem death has been diagnosed.

These spinal reflex movements are generated by the spinal cord and don’t involve the brain at all. Therefore, they won’t affect the diagnosis of brain death.

err what wut wtf scared rdj

The cerebellum is part of the brain. It’s a motor control system.
http://neuroscience.uth.tmc.edu/s3/chapter05.html

Has brain stem death ever been incorrectly diagnosed?

From the available evidence, the answer is no.

Note the legal dodge there.
Comforting.
You can be moving, in BP distress, and you’ll be able to hear them calling you dead.

http://www.nursingtimes.net/communicating-with-unconscious-patients/200542.fullarticle

Studies of patients’ memories of their unconscious state indicate that they heard and understood conversations. Lawrence (1995) found that unconscious patients could hear and respond emotionally to verbal communication. One patient, when being neurologically assessed, understood the nurse’s request to squeeze her hand but was unable to move. Another stated: ‘I could think and I could hear, but I could not move and I could not talk or open my eyes.’

Medical ethicists are justifying this. Pretty sure I’ve posted this before but…

https://aeon.co/essays/should-we-harvest-organs-from-patients-who-are-not-dead-yet

From a “professor of philosophy” – brain death is a philosophical term, there is no neuroscientific evidence for it. No neuroscientist would feel comfort calling it, it cannot be proven, it is simply impossible to measure.

As the Doctor in the wired article says;

“Death is really a process.”

If your organs are dead, why do they want you to donate them? How can they live on in another if they didn’t work for you? It’s tautological, calling death, creating death, calling death while using the proof of original death to give life somehow.

I agree with the BMJ author.

“We believe that removing vital organs from a still living donor is the taking of innocent human life.”

Organ donation is murder.

As for ‘presumed consent’.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3363073/

Human rights stand clear against it, despite how it’s come in in Wales.
If we own anything in this life, we own our bodies. No means no. The state cannot make active medical decisions prior to the will of the patient (the opt-out system). There are numerous cases of NHS data fraud and data sales and data loss. What’s to stop someone adding you to the registry, for their own personal reasons? From the outside, no system is uncrackable, magically exempt from hacking.
They can no more say “you’re selfish for keeping your organs for burial” than to tell a rape victim “you’re selfish for not sharing your vagina.” Why is the stranger family of an unchosen donor (who might’ve brought their illness on themselves) more important than the potential donor’s? Why aren’t donors paid, if everyone else is? Plenty of religions state the body must remain intact for reception to Heaven, going back to the days of mummification. Who owns your organs? The people calling this selfish, have they donated a kidney while they’re still alive? Then they’re as selfish as everyone else who dare call their very cells their own.