When 12-year-old Lia wanted to speak out against abortion for her school’s speech competition a few years ago, her pro-choice teacher disqualified her, claiming that the topic was too controversial. However, once she heard the speech and realized Lia’s amazing command of the topic, she changed her mind. Lia went on to win the entire competition.
If you’re opposed to abortion for Biblical reasons, that’s fine. But as Lia points out, there are also scientific and philosophical cases to be made. If you’re pro-choice, that’s fine as well; just hear this little girl out, and decide what you think is the right choice.
The Collective will always choose responsibility-free orgasms over the lives of unborn children.
For the children, of course.
Child-as-video-sock-puppet. A 12-year-old, turned into a tool of anti-choice fanatics. Indoctrination on a topic that no 12-year-old child—a real child, not a fetus—should be forced to think about.
This verges on child abuse.
I notice on YouTube comments have been blocked, most likely because they don’t want anyone to make the observation that I’ve just made.
Greggie, always pimping for the slaughter of unborn babies. Not satisfied with building a huge abortion center in Sheila Jackson Lee’s almost totally black district, PP is now going to build a huge one in an ALL Hispanic neighborhood in San Antonio.
Progressives; killing off minorities one baby at a time.
You’ll get frothing-at-the-mouth angry over the fate of the unborn and unconscious, which you imagine to be children, but you’ll cheerfully support cutting nutrition, health, and education programs that provide assistance to entirely real children whose parents can’t meet their basic needs.
Do you not see an obvious inconsistency here?
@Greg:
If the responsibility of determining whether a child is allowed to be born falls under the purview of the mother, then why doesn’t the responsibility for caring for that child once it is born also fall under the purview of the mother?
Odd the stand you take, Greggie, when the push for legal abortion by the left was based on reducing the number of children parents couldn’t afford to care for. That didn’t happen, did it? Oh, that’s right, you leftists don’t believe in responsibility.
While the left supports removing free choice from people when it comes to what they eat, what they drive, how many gallons of water their toilets can have, it is clear that the only free choice you believe in is abortion and same sex marriage. There are no bigger control freaks than you on the left.
Greggie’s hero; Kermit Gosnell.
@retire05, #5:
Because in the case of a living, breathing child, any arguments about who is responsible for this or that become entirely secondary to the well-being of the living, breathing child. We feed the kids first. Then we can discuss how unfair it is that this might necessitate an increase your taxes, my taxes, or the Koch brother’s taxes.
@Greg:
You are utterly deranged to equate a 12 year old being informed enough on the topic of abortion to win a speech competition with child abuse….while making your rabid leftwing histrionic propaganda speeches in favor of terminating human life.
You reveal your lack of morality with the tired and false stupidity of claiming prolife people do not care about children simply because we oppose socialist policies of forced theft masquerading as charity, as if that justifies your bloodlust for killing at the stage of human life within the womb. It is evident from the previous thread that your selfishness is your most important motivation, such that you belittle the 12 year old who clearly demonstrates greater clarity of thought and morality than you.
@Pete, #7:
A 12-year-old child does not self-inform on the topic of abortion. Some adult or adults have intentionally turned this child into a tool to further an anti-choice agenda.
Children who aren’t getting enough to eat should be fed. There’s a moral position for you. It’s very simple and straightforward. If charity were covering the problem, there wouldn’t be so many children who aren’t getting enough to eat, would there?
@Greg:
Typical leftist dishonesty, assuming that people who oppose the government forcibly taking money from people means we don’t want children to be fed. Yet you rail rabidly against anyone “forcing morality” on the abortion question as you insist on forcing your vision of morality on everyone else.
How many hungry children are you personally feeding?
@Pete, #9:
I’m not assuming. I’ve followed the people your lot sent to Congress as they’ve repeatedly attempted to cut funding for food stamps, for school lunch programs, for the WIC program, etc. Was this only my imagination?
I don’t personally know any hungry children. I contribute regularly to the regional food bank, and I’m pretty sure they’re aware of a few.
YOU WOUlD FREAK UP TO LEARN THAT OBAMA HAD A FIT TO GET THE NUCLEOR EXPLODE IN ATHMOSPHERE OVER AMERICA HE COULD HAVE KILLED 300 MILLION PEOPLES
IF HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STOP BY 3 COMMANDER HIGH RANK YOU CANNOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG ON THEM EXCEPT THEY PREVENT OBAMA FROM DOING IT, BY REFUSING TO APPLY THE ORDER,
THOSE WHERE OUT OF COMMAND AFTER THIS,,
FINES AMERICAN GENERALS WHO ARE HEROES OF AMERICA,
IT MAKE ONE FEEL PROTECTED BY MILITARY LOOKING AFTER AMERICA, BECAUSE THEY LOVE HER,AND THEIR ALLEGIANCE IS SOLY FOR AMERICA, AT 100/CENT
@Greg: I’m a little frightened by the fact that your views haven’t evolved beyond that of a naive college freshmen.
You also fail to understand the idea of consensus, and that one extreme view of abortion — you can have one for any reason whatsoever, and someone else (gov/gov-subsidies) will pay for it — is the law of the land and has been for decades. The laws need to shift towards a more conscientious view of children and childbearing, rather than relying of government handouts to “solve” the problem. Your own “frothing at the mouth” about food is laughable. Glad you contribute, true, but people are free to give or not give as they see fit. Forcing them to is wrong (by guilt or culture: former associated with the fundamentalist Christian Right but outdone by the rabid, undereducated Left as they mirror what they hate).
Once again, since you seem to miss it, forced charity is not charity at all. While people should care about the orphan, care about the widow, they get to choose when and how. Fostering better culture, opportunities, and responsibility is what it is: a choice. You are advocating anti-choice and you don’t seem to know it.
Your way engenders this:
Your way engenders anti-choice.
Your way promotes behavior that either kills kids before they are born, or destines them to a cycle of poverty and reliance on government.
“Someone has to pay!”
That’s an old lie each of must reject on a daily basis.
@Greg:
Yes, Greg, you are most certainly assuming that because we oppose idiotic and wasteful programs like WIC and school lunch programs that we want children to go hungry. Every year my kids come home from their schools with the forms for “free school lunch” which they insist their teachers are telling them to turn in the forms even though we don’t need such government welfare, because “that way the school gets more government money” – a clear sign of wastefulness and economic stupidity, as the government only has money to spend by taking it from those who work enough to pay taxes.
I can feed my own children a more nutritious menu at far better cost to the taxpayer (meaning ZERO) than the government “free lunch” program.
You donate to your local food bank. Good for you for engaging in true charity. Such action, however, does not give you and your socialist ilk the right to force anyone else to pay for food nor anything else for other people. That is what you don’t get. Your leftist programs do nothing to help people get out of poverty, but in fact instill a totally undeserved sense of entitlement that has now permeated generations of lazy people who figured out long ago how to game the WIC and foodstamp systems to purchase things like booze and cigarettes that the rest of us pay for via ridiculously high tax rates. Your desire to feel good about yourself manifests in an extremely immature and entirely fascist idea that you have the right to force other people to assuage your misplaced feelings of guilt over not personally being poor.
Your ilk did away with the requirement for foodstamp recipients to demonstrate active efforts to find employment as one of Obama’s first round of administrative acts – designed to buy the votes of the lazy and envious. Your ilk thinks you can tax everyone who has an extra dollar and that everntually government welfare will lift people out of poverty. Your ilk has been behind the disasterous welfare state that since the LBJ era has led to skyrocketing child illegitimacy rates for all races – but highest among blacks – and no improvement in actual poverty rates despite dumping over $5 trillion into these totally wasteful and completely ineffective programs. Look up illegitimacy rates in the 1950s versus now. Look up poverty rates. Look beyond the overemotional nonsense that your leftwing ideology is based upon and see the evidence showing how poverty statistics have worsened while politicians pissed away trillions of taxpayer dollars.
Or you can focus more on navel-gazing leftist erroneous ‘feel-goodism’ until the system collapses because there are not enough people actually working for the leftists to steal from to keep buying the votes of the lazy and uninformed. That’s been doing SOOOOO well over the last few decades….
I always think of the first arrived AMERICANS, THEY HAD TO SETTLE AFTER A LONG ROAD
FROM STATE TO STATES TO REACH THEIR SETTLEMENT,
NOTHING IN THEIR POCKETS BUT A WILL POWER UNIMAGINE TODAY,
THEY HAD AROUND 10 CHILDREN ON THE COURSE OF THEIR YEARS, HOW DID THEY MANAGE TO FEED ALL?
AND CARE FOR THEM, INSTILL VALUES IN THEM?
THEY DID IT, THEY TOOK CARE OF THE LESS FORTUNATES,
THEY TOOK CARE OF THE SICK ONES, WITH A GENEROUS HEART, WHY DO ONE THINK THEY WHERE HAVING SLAVES?
THEY DID NOT AFFORD,
WELL IT’S OBVIOUS BECAUSE THEY WHERE COMPASSIONATE,
AND TO LOOK AT THE ARABS COMMING TO SELL THOSE SLAVES AS IF THEY WHERE OF NO VALUE, IT TOUCH THE NEW IMMIGRANTS ABLE OR NOT TO PAY FOR SOME, THEY TOOK THEM AND GAVE THEM A ROOF AND FOOD AND PRIDE TO BE EARNING IT,
NOBODY INVENTED KINDNESS, IT WAS THERE ALL THE TIME,
AND NO ONE CAN SAY THE CONTRARY, TODAY,
THAT IS THE ROOTS THE REAL ONE OF AMERICA,
THEY ARE ALIVE TODAY BECAUSE OF THE FIRST NEW COMERS,
TO THE LAND OF HOPE AND FREEDOM,
MORE FREE THAN TODAY, IT HAS REGRESS FROM THOSE BEGININGS
HOW ONE COULD JUST THINK OF IT TODAY IF SHE BECOME PREGNANT OF ONE, SHE CAN JUST DISCARD IT AS THEY DID
WHEN THOSE ARABS SOLD SLAVES TO THE NEW IMMIGRANTS,
WHICH TOOK THEM GAVE THEM A LIFE,
TODAY THEY REJECT A FUTUR AMERICAN,
IN THOSE TIME THEY WANTED A FUTURE AMERICAN IN THEIR WOMB,THEY CALLED IT A BLESSING, TODAY THEY MAKE FERTILLIZER WITH THE DISCARD AMERICAN TO BE,
THERE WAS CHORE TO DO THEN , PREGNANT OR NOT , YOU HAD TO DO GARDEN AND FEED ANIMALS
PROGRESS IN YOUR ASSETS SO TO GAIN A BIT AT THE TIME, NO CAR, NO PHONE TO CALL THE DOCTOR,
WHAT KIND OF AMERICANS DO WE HAVE TODAY COMPARE TO THOSE BEGININGS OF THIS NATION, MANY ARE WEAKLINGS,
REFUSING RESPONSIBILITY, OF THE BLESSING TO CARRY A CHILD TO BE READY TO BE BORN,
BEFORE, THEY HAD RESOLVE AND FAITH IN GOD WHAT IS MISSING TODAY, AND THE AMERICANS OF TODAY WHO HAVE A ROOT SO DEEP IN THE GROUND ARE NOT OF THE SAME RESOLVE, AS THEM,
AND THE OTHER COULDN’T CARE LESS OF THE COUNTRY THEY LIVE IN NO ALLEGIANCES NO ATTACH TO IT
BUT THEN IT WAS, HOW SHE START, HOW SHE FOUGHT TO WIN AND GET HER BABY TO TERM, FREE TO SEE HIS HER FUTUR,
THE DEAR FREEDOM, GONE TODAY, IN THE GROWND WITH ASHES OF FUTURE AMERICANS WHO WILL NEVER BE.
@Nathan Blue, #12:
At the time I graduated from college, I was a supporter of Ronald Reagan. That would be the beginning of the end of my period of political naïveté.
I don’t care about charity. I’m not hoping to win points for being a charitable person. I’m hoping to see unnecessary human suffering lessened. I consider some forms of suffering to be far worse than annoyance over a perception of unfair tax rates. Particularly when that annoyance is among people who have accumulated such enormous shares of income and wealth that the extent of their holdings and gains is actually part of the problem. Few things piss me off more than billionaires complaining about the unethical nature of food stamps and other redistributive social mechanisms on the one hand, and then whining about the inherent unfairness of minimum wage laws on the other.
This strikes me as being every bit as hypocritical as claiming to be a proponent of small, non-intrusive government and personal freedom, and then demanding that the government intervene by any means necessary to force women to continue unwanted pregnancies.
@Greg: Do you find it even a little hypocritical that if a father deliberately causes a woman to abort killing the fetus in CA, then he can be prosecuted for murder, but the mother can not for doing the same thing?
@Greg:
You really are incapable of seeing the degree of self-parody you exhibit, aren’t you?
You smugly paint yourself as the arbiter of what is classifiable as human suffering, then breathlessly push fascist tactics to impose what you arbitrarily consider “fair” methods to ameliorate what you consider to be human suffering and unfairness – with no acknowledgment whatsoever of the suffering and unfairness you are actually causing with your leftist schemes, both to those you believe deserve to be punished, as well as the “victims’ you purport to be helping.
And despite your absolutely false portrayal of what is actually going on with abortion – nobody is forcing women to get pregnant, nor has abortion been made illegal. But you have no right whatsoever to force those of us who know abortion is terminating – murdering – a human being to have to pay for a woman to kill her baby. Your arrogance on this subject is matched only by your self-delusion and mental gymnastics performed to rationalize away any guilt for your ultimately selfish position.
@Randy, #16:
Not in the least. Authority to decide whether to continue a pregnancy or not belongs entirely to her, not to her husband. He has no right either to force her to continue it, or to force her to end it. Sovereign control over her own body and its reproductive function is her own and no one else’s.
@Greg: #15 A Viet Nam Vet Reaganite you were. How bout that.
@Pete, #17:
You’re conflating at least 3 separate issues, each of which must be considered by itself, in addition to making an assertion that abortion is murder, which is a position not even clearly supported by biblical text, let alone scientific evidence.
@RICH WHEELER, #15:
I sometimes find it hard to believe myself. Actually, though, I think I’ve only moved from the right to a place that’s a little left of center. It’s all a matter of perspective. Tea Party people generally don’t seem to realize that they’ve moved far to the right of Reagan. He was nowhere near as extreme on social issues and tax policy as those on the right are today.
GREG
ONCE she have a fetus made with her and her husband;
her sovereignty for her body stop at her body,
her husband has a genetic right to want that fetus to grow into his child his half future AMERICAN,
regardless of her soereignty over her body, she has no sovereign right on that living human,
she ad her fun, she pay by making that baby to TERM,
live until he is ready to leave her,
damn be her sovereignty, SHE LOST IT WHEN THE FETUS ENTER, HE HAS A SOVEREIGNTY AND A DAMN RIGHT TO SURVIVE THAT TIME HE IS THERE, SHE PUT HIM THERE AND SHE IS NO MORE ALONE IN HER BODY, ANOTHER IN HER BODY IS CLAIMING IT THAT SPACE IS HIS TEMPLE, UNTIL HE CAN LEAVE, AND WHILE IT DOES HAPPEN, SHE DOESN’T HAVE A BODY TO BE CLAIMING SOVEREIGNTY, SHE IS SHARING WITH A HUMAN WHAT EVER ON THE FIRST DAY OR ANY DAY, UNTIL HE IS READY, TO BE ON HIS OWN,
SHE CANNOT CLAIM HER RIGHT TO HER BODY, BECAUSE SHE MADE HER BODY BECOME OUR BODY,
THE ONLY THING FOR HER IS TO WAIT UNTIL HER BODY IS HER BODY AGAIN AND DO WHATEVER SHE WANT KILL IT OR ABUSE IT OR DRUG IT, IT’S HER SOVEREIGN RIGHT TO DO ALL OF THIS,
OTHERWISE SHE IS A MURDERER, BY ABORTING HIS HALF, ALSO WHERE THERE IS NO RIGHT FOR HER ON THIS HALF, UNLESS SHE CAN FIND THE GENES OF HIM AND GET RID OF IT SO TO KEEP ONLY HER HALF IN THAT BABY’s genes, which
HE COULDN’T SURVIVED WITH ONLY HER GENES, SO NO SOVEREINTY IS POSSIBLE FOR HER,
UNTIL THE HUMAN IN HER BODY LEAVE TO FIND HIS FUTUR LIFE ON THIS EARTH WHICH IS HIS SOVEREIGN RIGHT,
she just have to wait and make sure of his wellbeing,
so you thought it was so eazy, not only black and white,
there are many shades in between heaven and hell,
Greg
THE TEA- PARTY DID NOT MOVE ANY RIGHT EXTREME YOU ,
ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE MADE IT SO TO TELL THE PEOPLE AND PUSH THE HATE OF THE TEA-PARTY TO AMERICANS,
because yo are freahing scare of them, because they tell the truth and you cannot stand the truth, it hurt your party,
WHAT HAPPEN IS THE TEA-PARTY ACQUIRE MORE PEOPLE WHO JOINED AND DISCOVERED THEM TO BE THE FAMILY CONCERNED OF WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE USA,
THE TEA-PARTY DON’T WANT THEIR CHILDREN TO LIVE IN THAT DEFEATIST ATMOSPHERE,
WHERE PEOPLE ARE SO DOWN THEY CAN’T FIND A JOB BECAUSE THEIR MIND IS TO SCREWW BY THIS ADMINISTRATION MINDSET, THE PEOPLE ARE DEPRESS SO MUCH THEY HATE EACH OTHER
BECAUSE THEY WHERE UNDER INDOCTRINATION FROM THE OBAMA REGIME,
YOU DON’T HAVE TO FIND A JOB, I’LL GIVE YOU MONEY TO STAY HOME AND CHEW WHATEVER YOU FEEL LIKE IT UNTIL YOU AMERICAN KILL SOMEONE OR KILL YOURSELF OF BOREDOM EXAUSTION.
THE TEA-PARTY DON’T WANT THEIR CHILDREN TO LIVE IN THAT MENTAL FILTH DESTROYING THE SPIRIT OF AMERICA,FROM THE SOUL OUT,TO THE BODY AFTER,
THERE WAS A GLOBAL DECISION TELLING THE WORLD THAT THERE IS TOO MANY HUMAN, 6OOMILLIONS TO ELIMINATE,
OBAMA ALMOST ELIMINATE 300 MILLIONS OF IT,
IN THE FLICK OF A BIC, GOOD THAT THOSE REFUSE HIS ORDER,
@Greg:
Come see the scientific evidence.of the 23 weekers in my NICU that according to your position are not human, and tell me abortion is not murder. Your position is the one rooted in unscientific malarky, no matter how much pro-aborts falsely claim otherwise.
@ilovebeeswarzone, #23:
Here’s an article that serves to remind us of where Ronald Reagan actually stood on a number issues that are still very important today: Why Ronald Reagan Would Not Lead Today’s GOP. The positions he took in practice clearly demonstrate that was far more moderate on every point than today’s Tea Party “conservatives.” Unfortunately, the political right’s revised history includes a revised version of Ronald Reagan.
Greg
first of all the THE RONALD REAGEN WOULD SURLY BE WITH THE GOP TODAY MORE THAN EVER,
HE WOULD LEAD AGAIN BUT HE WOULD HAVE EVOLVE TO TODAY BECAUSE HE HAD THE GIFT OF PERCEPTION, AND WOULD BE SO DISAPOINTED OF THE DEMOCRATS WHO EVOLVE DOWNWARD WHERE LIES ARE THE EVERYDAY JOKES,
WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE BEING MADE DEAF AND DUM BY AN ADMINISTRATION OF IGNORANT
HATER OF AMERICA, HE WOULD HAVE BROUGHT THEM TO JUSTICE LONG TIME AGO, AND HE WOULD REALIZE THE EVIL CURRANT WHICH CAME DOWN ON AMERICA, HE WOULD FIGHT THE DEVIL
WITH HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS PLEADING GOD TO GET HIS WISDOM
BACK AS IT WAS GIVEN TO HIM BEFORE, AND THE GOPS ALSO POSESS THAT RARE PERCEPTING THE CONSEQUENCES ON ACTIONS, ALWAYS NECESSARY TO PERCIEVE FROM A LEADER OF A GREAT COUNTRY BUT MISERABLY MISSING NOW TAKING THE PEOPLE TO LOOSE THE BEST THEY HAD BEFORE, WHEN RONALD REAGAN WAS HERE,
AND HE WOULD GATHER THE FOLLOWERS TO SCRUB EVERY CRACKS AND CRANY
ON ALL THE GOVERNMENT MULTIPLE AGENCY FALSE BY NAME AND COVERING ANYONE EXCEPT
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE, HE WOULD NOT STOP UNTIL THE CLEAN UP WOULD BE DONE,
UNTIL THE DEBRIEFING ON THE PROPAGANDA INDOCTRINATION, WOULD BE FINISH AND THE HEART AND SOUL OF AMERICA WOULD RELIVE BRIGHT AND SHINE AGAIN,, UNTIL THE BORDER WOULD BE CLOSE,
UNTIL THE IMPOSTER WOULD BE SECURE IN PRISON FOR LIFE FOR HAVING TAKEN THE POWER BY RUSE LIKE THE DEVIL DID
WITH THE SOULS HE CAPTURE ,PROMISSING WHAT ONLY GOD CAN GIVE TO HUMAN,
LIKE A THIEF ROBBING THE GOOD AMERICAN WHO LOVE THEIR COUNTRY TO TAKE THAT DESERVED LEADERSHIP, RONALD REAGAN MUST BE TURNING ON HIS GIVEN STAR AS HE SEE THE DECADENCE OF HIS BELOVED AMERICA, BUT WHERE HE IS TIME IS NO MORE A DANGER, SO HE SEE THE FUTURE WITH THE GOPS IN FULL CONTROL WORKING THEIR ASS ON THE CLEANING UP OF ALL CORNER
AND HE CAN SEE THE FUTURE LEADER BRIGHT AND DRIVEN TO THE GOOD OF AMERICAIN CHANGE THE DESPERATION OF THE PEOPLE AND REPLACING IT BY HIGHEST SPIRIT OF CREATIVITY
AND THANKING GOD FOR SAVING HIS AMERICA,
AND ACTIVITY BENEFICIAL FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL,
WHILE THE IMPOSTORS ARE FEEDING ON THEIR OWN WORMS COMING OUT OF THEIR BODY
TO SEEK THE POISON THEY WHERE FED BEFORE,
yes RONALD REAGAN would join in happy to find his
CONSERVATIVES
untouch by time OR GREED OR ENVY OF THE DEMOCRATS,
and as intelligent as they always been,
@Greg: Way to distort the topic, claiming that illegalizing abortion (or at least making it a little harder to do) is suddenly “forcing” someone to have baby they don’t want.
Did they have sex?
The natural outcome of sex is a child. That’s its ultimate purpose. Killing kids so you can pursue an irresponsible lifestyle is not the place of the government to engender.
Government has “forced” culture in this country for far too long.
I simply can’t believe your level of ignorance, and I’m glad the mature and rational are here to…temper your opinions a bit.
@Nathan Blue, #27:
Believe it or not, intelligent, adult human being sometimes engage in sexual activity for reasons other than to create another human being.
In this case, government has been preventing people such as yourself from forcing their religion-based views on those who don’t happen to share them.
Pro-choice advocates acknowledge your right to make your own personal decisions in accordance with your own beliefs and the dictates of your own conscience. Unfortunately there’s no reciprocity. You seem to want everyone to believe and behave only as you deem proper. It doesn’t seem to matter that others have different religious or non-religious perspectives.
GREG
BELIEVE ME THAT SHE DID NOT PUT THE PLUG IN,
SO SHE IS RESPONSIBLE OF HER PREGNANCY,
YES PEOPLE HAVE SEX, ANIMAL HAVE SEX BUT,
THEY GET TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR OFSPRING ,
AND PUT THEIR LIVES ON PROTECTING THEIR YOUNG,
DO YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT THE HUMAN ARE REGRESSING LOWER THAN THE ANIMAL?
Not everyone considers sex to be an inherently base, immoral thing, which requires some sort of religious sanctification and/or reproductive justification to elevate it above the level of mindless animal behavior. It is pretty much what people make of it.
GREG
THE TARGET IS NOT SEX WE ARE TOUCHING HERE,
IT’S PREGNANT BECAUSE OF SEX, AND WANTING TO GET RID OF A LIFE
OF A FUTUR AMERICAN, NEEDED BY THE FUTURE OF AMERICA,
YOU CANNOT DEPEND ALL THE TIME ON REPLACING AMERICANS BY ILLEGALS YOU KNOW NOTHING OF, THEY DON’T ALL COME HERE FOR THE RIGHT DEMAND WHICH WOULD BENEFIT THE AMERICANS,
ON THE CONTRARY, IT’S HELL SINCE THEY ARE COMING BY MILLIONS, TAKING THE LAND FROM AMERICANS WHICH NOW THEY ARE BEING SHRUNK IN TOWN OF CIMENT AND POLE TOWER KILLING THE FEW AND FEWER BIRDS TRYING TO SURVIVE AND SING FOR THE DELIGHT OF THE PEOPLE,
WHICH IS ALL WHAT IS LEFT FOR THE PEOPLE, BESIDE THE FERTILIZERS MADE UP WHITH
ABORTED BABY ASHES, LIGHT AS THE WIND TAKE THEM INTO ANY GARDEN OF SOME WHO LIKE TO PLANT THEIR YUMY FRUITS AND TOMATOES, NOT KNOWING WHERE THE ASHES LANDED,
How very progressive.