SEX SELECTIVE ABORTION: New Zealand Prime Minister Used Wuhan Virus Pandemic to Sneak World’s Most Radical Abortion Legislation Under Kiwis’ Noses

Yes the murderous Jacinda Ardern is nothing more than a globalist eugenisist like those monsters Bill Gates, Drs Fauci and Birx, the demonrats and their media etc. Doubtless nutjobs Cloudy and Bob BLOB vote for this far left marxist globalist.

Let the howls of protest begin from crazy leftist loons.

Now if you don't believe me read the following:

Last month, New Zealand passed one of the most broad-based abortion laws in the country. 

The bill was quickly passed by a 68 to 51 vote a margin after three readings in the Parliament.(Thank goodness oaks for the 51 as it means there is some hope they will become a majority and reverse this murderous change in laws.)

According to RightoLife.org, New Zealand will have one of the most extreme abortion laws on the planet.

It noted the following provisions in the law:

• Abortion will now be available on-demand, for any reason, up to birth
• Sex-selective abortion will be legalised
• The current 20 week limit for disability-selective abortion will be scrapped and abortion will be available up to birth for disabilities including cleft lip, club foot and Down syndrome
• There will be no requirement that a doctor must be involved with providing an abortion
• There will be no legal requirement that babies born alive after a ‘failed’ abortion are given medical support
• There will be no legal requirement that pain relief be given to babies being aborted between 20 weeks and birth
• There will be no legal restrictions on controversial methods of abortion such as intact dilation and extraction abortions (also knows as partial-birth abortions)

According to polls in New Zealand,  Kiwis strongly opposed the law. Curiously, women were in strong opposition to abortion and only 2 percent of women support abortion on-demand up to birth. Additionally, 93 percent of women oppose sex-selective abortion being legal and 94 percent of women support the current legal standards that abortion providers and premises are subject to.

Due to the low public support for changing abortion laws, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government took advantage of the Wuhan virus pandemic to rush this legislation through while everyone’s attention was focused on the virus.

The pro-abortion legislation received considerable backlash from people in the disabled community. Over 1,200 people with Down syndrome and their families urged Ardern to keep her promise to not introduce “abortion up to birth for Down syndrome.”

The New Zealand-based pro-life organization Voice for Life made the following comments about the legislation:

“In passing Labour’s extreme abortion Bill our MPs have ushered in a new law that will liberalise abortion up to birth, allow for sex-selective abortions, and remove current freedom of conscience rights from New Zealand medical professionals.

Over the last few Parliamentary sessions our MPs had the opportunity to pass amendments that would have corrected some of the worst extremes of this Bill but instead they chose to reject such moderate measures…

Our Parliament has a duty of care to consider the wellbeing and protection of all New Zealanders including the vulnerable.

Tonight they failed in that basic duty of care by passing this extreme Bill, but the hundreds of thousands of voters who opposed this Bill will not forget this failure when it is time to vote in the General Election in a few short months.”

Under New Zealand’s current law, abortion is allowed after 20 weeks, albeit with strong restrictions. In these cases, abortion is allowed only in cases when it is “necessary to save the life of the woman or girl or to prevent serious permanent injury to her physical or mental health.”

New Zealand is decisively turning leftward on issues such as civilian disarmament, which BLP previously covered.

With it legalizing radical abortion laws, New Zealand is further cementing its descent into leftward politics.

Guys and dolls as you already know globalist eugenici sts like Bill Gates want the population of the world reduced to 500 million. Hence they are full on supporters of LGBT. Hence they support abortion. Now they are getting bolder and support infanticide.

Old Bill thinks he can use his vaccines to both make a fortune and reduce the world's population. Drs Fauci and Birx are his allies.

When has gates who vs ostensibly so keen on saving lives spoken out against abortions and infanticide? Well of course he doesn't. What a fake!

So where do the board's kiwi's stand on all thi s?

They are working on a time machine to go back and abort you before you entered this world. 

...Bean Brain fell out of the bucket

Well seems if this bill had been enacted sooner you may not have been burdened with Ardern!

Will you vote for Ardern again Brycy? 

...Bean Brain Jacinda will get in easily especially after beating Corvid 19.... i know women scare the hell outa you but you'll just have to harden up a bit mate...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1250495258825314304

Do you agree with the new abortion laws Brycy.

Man up oak you seem scared stiff to give your opinion! Jacinda probably has no idea you post on this board so you are safe!!

Poor brycy is terrified of the Horse woman!!!! Well well well!!!!!!!!!! Thought he had more to him than that. Poor Brycy!

How is this not murder?

“ Then consider these below:

While I agree that there are severe disabilities where survival is probably way worse than death, none of those that you have mentioned is anything to be even remotely a consideration for abortion IMO. 

I  have a cousin who had a cleft lip and part of her palate was also affected. It was fixed with a number of surgeries and just before you go off on a tantrum she is turning 66 this year. This means that the surgeries were performed way back in the early 50s. Despite that she turned into a brilliant attractive women who excelled in sport as well. She played provincial hockey for Eastern Transvaal. 

Club foot as an excuse for abortion? Are you kidding me? With modern surgery?

Down syndrome? Really?

If any of my kids were diagnosed with any of those conditions, there would have been no way that me or my wife would have considered abortion, and we were young parents. My eldest were born just more than a month before I turned 22. 

Having said all of the above, I fully agree that there may be circumstances that justify abortion but by no means should abortion be a matter of convenience or birth control. No f’ing way. 

A teenage girl who gets pregnant after rape will not be mentally well, whether she carry the child to birth, or not. I have heard and read about too many women who never really fully recover mentally after an abortion following rape. She will need just as much mental health due to the rape

Hall Of Fame

8675 posts

Having said all of the above, I fully agree that there may be circumstances that justify abortion but by no means should abortion be a matter of convenience or birth control. No f’ing way. 

----------

So you believe men should "not" use condoms, and that women should "not" use Birth Control? (or rather you somehow know this as a fact....)

Have you seen Africa and other third-world populations? If there are too many humans, other life on Earth will go extinct. But hey that is fine?  The Pope said it, so it must be true. Or the Arabs in the Old Testament made some type of reference to this-  so it must be true? I think it was the ancient Egyptians who first used some type of condom contraption. 

------------------------------

So you agree there are "circumstances" that justify abortion, you just do not know what they are? 

------------------------

“ So you believe men should "not" use condoms, and that women should "not" use Birth Control? (or rather you somehow know this as a fact....)“

FFS but you are a one-track mind. I did not say that. That was your assumption and you know what they say about assumption. 

“ So you agree there are "circumstances" that justify abortion, you just do not know what they are?  “

Yet another assumption. I was just not interested in running down a list just for your convenience. Anybody with half a brain cell could work out what kind of circumstances would warrant an abortion. One being where the lives of both the mother and the baby are in danger. Another, IMO, would be if, for example, there are clear evidence that the baby would be alive but would be in a vegetative state. You can figure out others for yourself, if you are so inclined. 

Then again, given your arguments till now would suggest that you may even consider killing a baby for having the wrong hair colour. 

Hall Of Fame

8676 posts

“ So you believe men should "not" use condoms, and that women should "not" use Birth Control? (or rather you somehow know this as a fact....)“

FFS but you are a one-track mind. I did not say that. That was your assumption and you know what they say about assumption. 

------------------------

That was a question where I asked you to confirm it. Yes, I did assume you meant what you said. However, I did consider the possibility that your definition of contraceptive was less broad- 

Can you clarify what you meant, if you did not mean this? 

There certainly are grounds for abortion - such as he mothers health being jeopardized by giving birth, pregnancy stemming from rape, severe deformities that would cause death of the baby anyway,  

The problem is that in some respects abortion is so widespread that the black population in the USA has stagnated and that is simply unacceptable.   Abortion should not be a convenience, 

In the final analysis the issue should be left to medical experts to decide upon and executed,.   Politicians should exercise restrictions based on medical expertise - not authorize things like a child surviving after abortion should not be given pain relieve after birth - that really is inhuman and should not be left as an option.  A baby being alive and not granted enforced medical assistance amounts to my mind to murder.        

@SB

Are you high or something? How the hell do you read an assertion that people should not practice birth control in this sentence, huhh?

“  ....but by no means should abortion be a matter of convenience or birth control.“

Since you are suggesting that you are so shortsighted that you do not grasp what I was saying, I’ll explain in any case. 

What I am suggesting is that people should not neglect to practice birth control and then, if the women consequently do get pregnant, run to the nearest abortion clinic. In other words, prevent pregnancy by practicing birth control rather than be irresponsible, conceive a child and then just “get rid of it”. 

I cannot for the life of me believe that you are too thick to not have understood that that was what I have suggested. Then again, I have been wrong before. 

1. do you believe Birth control Pills should be allowed? 
2. Do you believe that the morning after pill should be allowed? 
3. Do you believe that condoms should be allowed

How can you equate avoiding a pregnancy to abortion? Abortion happens after conception. Birth control prevents conception you barking mad idiot. 

In order for abortion to take place there need to be a fetus. There can be no fetus if you have prevented conception. Shit, how much clearer can I make it for it to get into that empty cavity between your ears?

SA law stipulates that abortion should occur within the first 20 weeks of gestation, right?

My guess is that the baby, if removed within those 20 weeks, would not be able to survive outside the mother's body.

And that's probably where the line is. 

If it can survive outside of the mother, even though it may require life support and respirators, then aborting it should classed as murder.

I've always supported a women's right to choose but this is just another instance where the line is being shifted from what is arguably reasonable to a place where even those that previously supported it are way beyond what they'll accept.

And again, Shark batting for his tribe like the unthinking twit that he has recently revealed himself to be.

Don't worry StinkVis, deepthroating CNNs exhaust pipe won't get you knocked up.

"f it can survive outside of the mother, even though it may require life support and respirators, then aborting it should classed as murder.

I've always supported a women's right to choose but this is just another instance where the line is being shifted from what is arguably reasonably to a place where even those that previously supported it are way beyond what they'll accept. (You and everyone else with a conscience)

And again, Shark batting for his tribe like the unthinking twit that he has recently revealed himself to be."

If his "tribe" wins, it's over for the rest of us...no dissent will be tolerated .

First the morning after pill. That honestly, to me in any case, is a bit of a grey area. It is impossible to know, at that stage, whether or not the woman is indeed pregnant or not. She could potentially be pregnant. The morning after pill is always taken for in case. So, how do you determine whether there has been an abortion or not?

@Plum,

“ My guess is that the baby, if removed within those 20 weeks, would not be able to survive outside the mother's body. “

This may look as though I’m attacking you. I’m not. I’m mainly with you on this.

I think you have unknowingly actually  answered the conundrum. You say “My guess is that the baby....”. See what you did there? You called it a baby. A human being. Then you go further and you say that the baby would not survive if taken from the mother’s womb. By implication you are saying that, if left intact inside the mother’s womb the baby will most probably survive. In other words, it is the human intervention that causes the death of the baby, which brings me back to my question that got Shark’s knickers in a knot, in the first place. How is this not murder? Same thing that Draad is saying.   

SB is covering his own arse with his petulant silly little technicalities and he knows that all of us are crushing his stupid ideas on abortion.

Then, the other issue that Draad touched on. The old Pro-Choice v Pro-Life issue. The Americans, more specific the lefties, have their favourite term for it, ie Roe v Wade. The clowns cannot even decide whether the baby/fetus is part of the woman’s body or not, yet they are constantly screaming “Roe v Wade” at the top of their voices. When it suits them, it is part of the body but when it doesn’t it is not part of the body. What they conveniently choose to ignore is that technically that baby is as much part of the dad as well and he has no say at all. Nothing. 

Look, I know what my personal views are and where I derive it from, but I also believe that it's wrong to force these views unto others....but society needs rules to be able to exist and those rules and laws should be in accordance with some sort of ethics and norms.

If you discard religion...and God by extension, on what authority do you decide what is wrong and what is right? What would make abortion and murder wrong from a pure humanistic POV? Or right? Cannibalism? Incest? Any kind of so called "morals"? Can the majority of mankind decide what is right and what is wrong for everybody else. What would that process be? Under who's authority?

From my perspective: I can tell you that killing babies is wrong....not because the Bible says so, but because my conscience tells me so...and in my opinion my consciences is my connection to God. There are a lot of distortions in the world, and we can argue about it for hundreds of years, but there are a couple of undeniable truths and to me the fact that it's wrong to kill babies is one of them. Choices...

Not much, if anything, in there that I disagree with, Draad. Especially on religion and conscience. My views on abortion has absolutely nothing to do with religion. 

The trouble Draad says there are those with seared

1 Timothy 4:2 

Now the Spirit expressly states that in later times some will abandon the faith to follow deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons, 2influenced by the hypocrisy of liars, whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. 

They in other words, have destroyed their own consciences and are capable of anything. Even ordering Wuhan infected people to be allowed back into a Nursing Home. Note how outraged ou sharkvirus was on the issue!

Poor sharktwit is one such case.

There are so many ways today to prevent conception but once conception takes place leave it be. The exception mentioned by Windpom where a mother lvfe is at stake is acceptable. A mother may lay down her life for her child but cant be forced to do so.

We have not even touched on infanticide advocated by demonrats.

This engineered Wuhan virus tacks the old and vulnerable. Get rid of those useless people was the PLAN. Personally i take the word of a Nobel Prize winner opening himself up to vicious leftist attack with no personal benefit over the lying globalist media every time. He stated very defi nitely this was a engineered bio weapon - designed to do what it does - Kill the old and vulnerable - pre existing conditions.

“ Posted by: sharkbok (11372 posts)

@Ceradynce, you could have answered these questions with yes or no answers much faster. I think on your part you were confusing contraceptive with birth control. “

Ag FFS, stop digging. What next? Are you going to lecture me on the differences between petrol and gasoline as well. 

Your world is crumbling. People are more and more horrified by your Satanic world. That includes unbelievers.

Show me where Globalism is not collapsing.

You are a freak show!

"@Plum It is clear that Ceradynce and Draad do not agree with you on this. I rarely consider anything you say to be anything more than a joke, like an alien conspiracy. However, do continue to post for entertainment value. It seems your thoughts are in line with Zuma and co. "

I can live with Plum's POV, but full time abortion is pure evil.

“ @Plum It is clear that Ceradynce and Draad do not agree with you on this. “

Yet another fuckup. I do not disagree with Plum. In fact, I actually supported some his arguments. Careful with that shit you’re smoking mate. It’s dangerous. 

“ Posted by: sharkbok (11373 posts)

@Ceradyne you have made your arguments clear. You do not believe in abortion - where as Plum said it is ok up to 20 weeks. So are you now changing your opinion?  “

No. 

Furthermore, I cannot understand why you have such a big problem with comprehension of the English language. Aren’t you a mother tongue English speaker?  I, as an Afrikaans mother tongue speaker, am the one who should be the one suffering when it comes to this, not you. 

Is this why you have now dropped the contraception/birth control issue as well? 

Hall Of Fame

8675 posts

Having said all of the above, I fully agree that there may be circumstances that justify abortion but by no means should abortion be a matter of convenience or birth control. No f’ing way. 

English is not your strong point is it?   The 20 week issue and in fact all abortions contained in legislation are based on  prescribed conditions where abortions may be made - it was not and never intended to be a free-for-all.  

English is not your strong point is it?   The 20 week issue and in fact all abortions contained in legislation are based on  prescribed conditions where abortions may be made - it was not and never intended to be a free-for-all.  

Cera

It didn't appear as an attack an would not have done even in the absence of your disclaimer.

I see what you're saying. I suppose that, technically speaking, the moment the female egg is fertilised, there is cause for the debate as to whether it is in fact already a person or not. Have they ever figured out what qualifies as baseline consciousness in terms of brain development as that'd probably factor into the discussion at some level?

I've always drawn the line at being able to survive without the mother.  Yet that doesn't mean I don't entertain the idea that one could decrease the window for abortion down further, potentially to zero if the justification is reasonable.  

I 100% agree that the male should have much more say in that regard but I half think both part of why we don't have much of a say is because of the relative ease with we experience conception & pregnancy. I'm guessing the perception is that we'll disproportionately land on the side of aborting, as compared to mothers .

Where I do absolutely draw the line is when the child can be removed from the mother and can live on it's own. There is no leeway there as far as I'm concerned. It's murder.

Shark...yes, growns up can disagree. What a crazy thought huh? Now isn't there a coloring book you should be getting back to?

FFS, Shark. Stop making an utter fool of yourself. How many more times do you want to hear the same thing. I said that abortion should not be used as a form of birth control. When I told you that for the second fucking time, you changed direction and tried to school me on the non-existing difference between birth control and contraception. When you realised your balls up you swung to me disagreeing with Plum. Then you changed direction again and now you are back to the issue of “abortion instead of contraception”. 

If there is anybody on this thread who is disingenuous, it is you. Do you really think that nobody has noticed your pathetic MO? 

You start off your discussion on this thread by throwing in a number of assertions in the form of questions. Questions you, yourself, did not even have the balls to take a clear stand on. Then you sat back to see which way the discussion goes so that you can try and gather some ammo to attack the person with, and not the arguments. Every time you get a counter argument, you start obfuscating with obnoxious “questions and assertions”. I wasn’t born yesterday, mate. 

“ I 100% agree that the male should have much more say in that regard but I half think both that part of why we don't have much of a say is because the relative ease with we experience conception & pregnancy. I'm guessing the perception is that we'll disproportionately land on the side of aborting, as compared to the mother. “

Yes and that is so wrong. This is why I am so dead set against all this #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen shit that has popped up. The guy is always the pig in the story. Watch how the guys always draw the fucking short straw in a divorce case.