Archive

Posts Tagged ‘ethics’

“The After Birth Abortion” – The Slippery Slope of the Pro-Aborts

March 2nd, 2012 1 comment

A group of “experts” have created quite a stir by publishing an article in which they conclude that there is no difference between aborting a fetus and killing a newborn for any reason.  The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, can be read here.

Is it not ironic that these immoral academics, who champion the killing of a whole group of individuals based upon their age and/or disability, protest the death threats they themselves have received since the publication of  their article? 

I will say that they inadvertantly got one thing right:  There is no difference between killing a fetus and killing a newborn.   Bravo, you evil people.

 

A group of ethicists has argued that killing young babies is no different from abortion Photo: Alamy

From the Telegraph.co.uk

By Stephen Adams

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are   “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a   group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.

The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn   babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The   academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed   if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro   Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article’s authors had received death   threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and   threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values  of a liberal society”.

read more at the Telegraph.co.uk

The Romney Machine

January 29th, 2012 1 comment


 

Face it, Mitt Romney comes across as a nice, honest, good-looking, down-to-earth guy.  The kind of guy you might appreciate as  a neighbor or enjoy a round of golf with.  Surely, he would not lob falsehoods  at his political opponent, but looks can be deceiving and in the case of Romney they are.  This editorial from the Wall Street Journal informs that the Romney campaign continues to keep alive the bogus ethics charges against Newt Gingrich, despite being well aware that they are not true.  The Morning Spew previously posted a CNN video about those false ethics charges here.

The ethics charges and Gingrich’s resignation, the editorial goes on to say,  were all part of a Democrat vendetta designed to destroy the GOP.  In an effort to minimize damage to his own party, Gingrich paid a fine and resigned.  

Isn’t it amazing to learn that Romney, who claims to carry the GOP conservative banner, is the one to continue the attack?  Isn’t is astounding that the old guard RINOs, who experienced first hand the damage inflicted by  Democrats as they played their dirty tricks,  have come out in support of Romney?  The Romney who continues to damage the GOP for political gain.  It’s a dirty play right out of the Democrat attack handbook, if ever there was one. 

Let’s not replace the Chicago Machine with the Romney Machine. 

From The Wall Street Journal

Professor Gingrich’s Ethics

The facts that Romney omits in his 1990s history lesson.

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are having a spirited debate about whose record is worse, and the pity is that usually they both make good points. One notable exception is Mr. Romney’s misleading attack on the former speaker’s House ethics case in the 1990s.

Mr. Romney often invokes the episode, which turned on the financing for a history course Mr. Gingrich taught at Kennesaw State College and Reinhardt College, and then implies that his eventual House reprimand and $300,000 fine led him to “resign in disgrace.” This week Mr. Romney has been calling on Mr. Gingrich to release “all of the records” from the investigation. This is strange, since the 1997 document “In the Matter of Representative Newt Gingrich” is online—all 1,280 pages of it, including exhibits.

Even casual readers will learn a lot about Mr. Gingrich’s political method, but what they won’t find is evidence of impropriety because the accusations were a partisan vendetta. Democrats saw Mr. Gingrich’s low approval ratings and wanted to force the GOP to make an embarrassing floor defense. The pettifogging was also meant to counterbalance the Clinton White House’s own ethical woes.

On the merits, the claim was that Mr. Gingrich diverted funds from a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization for political activity. The Progress and Freedom Foundation sponsored his seminar “Renewing American Civilization,” and Democrats charged its real purpose was advancing Professor Gingrich’s career.

In 1997, the speaker basically copped a plea and accepted the House rebuke to avoid further political damage. Yet a formal IRS investigation in 1999 exonerated Mr. Gingrich and found that the course was intended to educate students about American government and society.

The quality of the education they received in l’affaire Gingrich is another matter. The curriculum and lectures detailed in the ethics report are laden with Mr. Gingrich’s pop theories on the five pillars of this, the 14 ideas for that, “the Triangle of American Success.” The conservative scholar James Q. Wilson called it “bland, vague, hortatory and lacking in substance.” But Mr. Gingrich wasn’t running for academic tenure.

Read the rest at the Wall Street Journal

Categories: News Tags: , , , ,

CNN Video Shows Gingrich Cleared By IRS of Ethics Charges

January 24th, 2012 No comments

You know what’s doubly disgusting about this?  The morons on the left and the right, who refuse to acknowledge that Newt was cleared of those charges.  They continue to  spread lies about Gingrich.  And then they scratch their smug little heads and  wonder why Americans are angry?

via The Right Scoop:

CNN reported back in 1999 that Newt’s college course that the Democrats tried to make hay out of in saying it was a major ethics violation was vindicated and proved legitimate by the IRS:

Categories: News Tags: , , , , ,