Martin Luther King Jr's Niece: "Women Have Right to Choose What to Do With Their Body, Not the Baby’s Body"
Micaiah Bilger
Oct 8, 2019 | 7:48PM |
Washington, DC



When abortion activists talk about supporting women’s rights, they forget about the women who are not yet born, the niece of civil rights advocate Martin Luther King Jr. told students at Georgia Tech on Oct. 1.

Dr. Alveda King continues to champion the civil rights cause of her famous family by advocating for the most vulnerable people in the world today: unborn babies. Technique, a student newspaper at Georgia Tech, reported about her speech hosted by the college Students for Life club.

“I believe in women’s rights, but you know many of those little babies in the womb are women,” King told the crowd. “So you have to ask this question. A woman has the right to choose what she does with her body, but the baby’s not her body. So you have to ask next, where’s the lawyer for the baby?”

King said she knows a lot about abortion from personal experience because she aborted two of her own unborn babies. She said she was told her babies were just blobs of tissue, but she eventually learned the truth. Later, she said she found healing through her faith in Christ.

Her testimony reveals how abortions hurt women both in and outside the womb. Abortions kill unborn babies, and sometimes unborn baby girls are specifically targeted for sex selection abortions. The abortion industry also has been known to manipulate vulnerable women into aborting their unborn babies, rushing them through the abortion with little information or time to consider their decision. It downplays the physical and psychological risks as well, telling women that abortions are “safer than aspirin.”

Over the past several years, King has been a strong critic of the Women’s March and other supposedly pro-women organizations because of their abortion advocacy.

She said that by supporting abortion, the march organizers ignored how abortion has hurt and destroyed so many women’s lives, including their unborn children’s.

"I don’t understand why, if this is a sisterhood, how they can leave out the little babies in the womb, the mothers who have been hurt by abortion. I think that’s part of the message," King told Fox and Friends in 2017.

"The little baby girls in the womb, what about them? Who is going to represent those little girls who are being aborted?" she continued.

Today, King works with Priests for Life to protect unborn babies and their moms from abortion. Through the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, she also helps women like herself to heal from abortions in their past.



Source

Martin Luther King Jr's Niece: "Women Have Right to Choose What to Do With Their Body, Not the Baby’s Body."

Abortion is evil.
Abortion is murder

They should have sole right to keep or kill their baby if they want....but they should not also have the right to drag a man for child support.

Its your body...
Killing the baby is your responsibility alone.

Keeping it alive and caring should also be your responsibility alone if you never agreed to start a family with man innthe first place....

Stupid Argument.

The baby has no "body" because it CANNOT survive independently outside the womb of the woman. For this reason, the woman should always choose/decide.

DontBullshitMe:


Stupid Argument.

The baby has no "body" because it CANNOT survive independently outside the womb of the woman. For this reason, the woman should always choose/decide.

Maybe you need to educate yourself about the body of the baby with this diagram.

What is this one saying?

advanceDNA:
They should have sole right to keep or kill their baby if they want....but they should not also have the right to drag a man for child support.

Its your body...
Killing the baby is your responsibility alone.

Keeping it alive and caring should also be your responsibility alone if you never agreed to start a family with man innthe first place....

Na gender war your brain fit comprehend? Can't you read?

OLAADEGBU:


Maybe you need to educate yourself about the body of the baby with this diagram.

Your diagram doesn't make sense.

The baby is inside her body, is it not?

Jovialjune1:


Your diagram doesn't make sense.

The baby is inside her body, is it not?

Yes but don't forget that the baby has a body and therefore has a right to live, no?

OLAADEGBU:


Yes but don't forget that the baby has a body and therefore has a right to live, no?

1) No, it is a fetus when it is inside a woman/womb, it becomes a body when it is out of a woman/womb.

2) It doesn't have a right to live because it doesn't have the ability to decide right from wrong, only a woman can decide to keep or remove it because it grows in her body.

Jovialjune1:



1) No, it is a fetus when it is inside a woman/womb, it becomes a body when it is out of a woman/womb.

Does the foetus have a heartbeat? What difference does it make a few seconds before it is born. A foetus in the womb is simply an unborn baby.

Jovialjune1:


2) It doesn't have a right to live because it doesn't have the ability to decide right from wrong, only a woman can decide to keep or remove it because it grows in her body.

Did you say that the born baby has the ability to decide right from wrong the moment it is born? The fact that a woman has been given the custodian right to bear the baby doesn't give them the right to murder it. Abortion is murder.

OLAADEGBU:


Does the foetus have a heartbeat? What difference does it make a few seconds before it is born. A foetus in the womb is simply an unborn baby.

Yes it has a heartbeat, but it is still a foetus inside a woman's body, it is still her right, not the foetus. The word "baby" is a term generally used for infants, so whether it is a foetus/unborn or not, makes no difference.

Did you say that the born baby has the ability to decide right from wrong the moment it is born? The fact that a woman has been given the custodian right to bear the baby doesn't give them the right to murder it. Abortion is murder.

No I didn't say that, you said it has the right to live, and I said the decision lies solely on the mother not the foetus.

Yeah well you can't decide for a woman what stays or leave her body, only she can, and you can't, for example, force a woman to birth a baby conceived by rape, or a baby she knows she can't cater for, so your "abortion is murder" chant is relative.

Jovialjune1:


Yes it has a heartbeat, but it is still a foetus inside a woman's body, it is still her right, not the foetus. The word "baby" is a term generally used for infants, so whether it is a foetus/unborn or not, makes no difference.

If it has a heartbeat it is human and you have no right to take the life of another human being, the reason it is called murder. Whether you call it foetus or unborn baby we are still referring to a living human being. The difference is that it is inside the womb of the woman.

Jovialjune1:


No I didn't say that, you said it has the right to live, and I said the decision lies solely on the mother not the foetus.

The unborn baby is a gift from God it is not a choice. It has a body and is not a parasite. The mother does not have the right to take life because she is not God who put the life there, she is only given the right to be a custodian not the maker and taker of life.

Jovialjune1:


Yeah well you can't decide for a woman what stays or leave her body, only she can, and you can't, for example, force a woman to birth a baby conceived by rape, or a baby she knows she can't cater for, so your "abortion is murder" chant is relative.

Is it the baby's fault that the mother was raped, why punish another person for the crime of the rapist? And we know that this excuse is minimal when it comes to the case of abortions. Most cases are social not criminal. It is not by force for the mother to keep the baby after it is born, she can give it up for adoption because there are many women looking to take care of these babies. Watch the short video clip below and see why abortion is murder.

If My Father Raped My Mother...

Jovialjune1:
What is this one saying?



Na gender war your brain fit comprehend? Can't you read?

Clear off please if you have nothing to say...

This argument was started by democrat politicians in the US for sole purpose of using it to campaign for the mid-term elections coming up on November 8 and democrats are even lying so much about the whole thing.

The Supreme court did the right thing to overturn RoeVwade. The supreme court said RoeVwade judgement that stipulated abortion is human rights enshrined in the US constitution was a faulty decision, that no such rights exist in American constitution and any of its amendments. Therefore, any matter not in US constitution are decided by the state laws. Each state in the US has the authorities to make laws over such matters and not the federal government.

Based on this decision, democrats states that legalized abortion up to the last minute before birth can continue to have such laws while republican states are also free to limit abortions. However, democrats are lying about this to their base that the Supreme court decision has banned all abortions in the US. That is lie number 1 in democrats’ argument.

Lie number 2 in democrats’ argument is that Abortion rights is part of US constitution. US constitution is a public document. In fact, everyone can google the constitution and all its amendments to read. Abortion rights is not in US constitution.

Lie number 3 is that republican states banned all abortions without any exceptions. Most republican state laws allow abortion up to 6, 8 weeks, in case the mother’s life is in danger. So, the argument of rape and incest is killed here. If a woman is raped, she has up to 6 or 8 weeks to abort. The premise for this time frame is that a pregnancy has developed to a life by 6 to 8 weeks by having a child’s heartbeat. The democrats want to abort a child even up to 1 minute before birth at the delivery table but the republicans are saying that is radical, inhumane and lack all moral grounding on the rights of the child.

Democrats are saying a child should only have rights and be protected only 1 minutes after the child is born but they want to allow aborting the same child up to 1 minute before birth. It does not make sense. There is no difference between a child you abort 1 minute before birth and a child you protect after birth.

Once the pregnancy become a life inside the woman, breathing and kicking, that life has human rights and must be protected. We have numerous people in the world today that were born prematurely (6 month, 7month, 8 month) and living perfectly today.

My sincere advice to everyone on this abortion politics is that, please listen to both sides by watching both Foxnews (Republican controlled) and rest of American media (Democrats controlled) before you take sides so that you hear both arguments and not be fed only with one sided lies.

US babes now visit Canada freely to own their bodies in situations like that! You dont force anyone to carry a pregnancy! That's super wrong! If they really want to advocate for the unborn children, they could give alternatives that wont impair the right of the woman. Alternatives such as:

1. Transfer the pregnancy to the man! Let him raise the body in his pocket!
2. Transfering the child to some sort of artificial womb in hospitals such as tubes used for premature.
3. Transfer to surrogates interested in doing the honours.

They should not force a woman to carry pregnancy biko! That's so lame! Imagine tons of men having that effrontery! If they care so much for the unborn, then provide alternatives outside the women's bodies!

Democrats are even finding it very hard to defend this their abortion arguments at election debates. They always dodge around the question during debates.

And their arguments are not being bought by the American majority.

This is why they have started changing their campaign messages recently from abortion to "threats of democracy" if republican wins.

- Isn't the child a part of the woman's body?

The baby is literally growing in her body.

- And what "body" does an embryo and barely formed foetus has?

You can't defend abortion without sounding dumb. It is inevitable.


Those who support evil will always make statements that are ridiculous to back their support for such evil, no matter how educated they claim to be.

Abortion activists keep saying 'A woman has rights over her body'.

1. The baby in the womb is not part of the mother's body

2. Every human being has a DNA that is unique. Two people can't have the same DNA.

3. The DNA of the baby in the womb is completely different from the DNA of the mother.

advanceDNA:


Clear off please if you have nothing to say...

Dummy.

Jovialjune1:



Dummy.

Another frustrated feminist with no one to marry.....please leave me alone.... why u enter my mention?? I was having a great day till your pathetic, trouble-making, bítch asś entered by radar....... Its friday night dont u have a man to hang out with??
pleeeeeeeease....fvck the hell off !!!

advanceDNA:



Another frustrated feminist with no one to marry.....please leave me alone.... why u enter my mention?? I was having a great day till your pathetic, trouble-making, bítch asś entered by radar....... Its friday night dont u have a man to hang out with??
pleeeeeeeease....fvck the hell off !!!

And the spittle yapping is out

The dummy said I'm not married that's the only senseless imagination they can come with as insults to comfort their frustrated and worthless life

Eat dust, drink vomit, and off yourself....in pieces

Jovialjune1:



And the spittle yapping is out

The dummy said I'm not married that's the only senseless imagination they can come with as insults to comfort their frustrated and worthless life

Eat dust, drink vomit, and off yourself....in pieces

How are u still here....?? Please go away... dont u have a man to hang out with.....wtf ...since morning u just entered my mention and started insulting me... só yá wéré niiiiiiii

advanceDNA:


How are u still here....?? Please go away... dont u have a man to hang out with.....wtf ...since morning u just entered my mention and started insulting me... só yá wéré niiiiiiii

Baba e lo ya werey ewo asinwin mashanfani omo,

Next time don't be a dummy ok

Jovialjune1:


Baba e lo ya werey ewo asinwin mashanfani omo,

Next time don't be a dummy ok

Oh fvck....i ddnt know u are from the gutters.. i wouldnt have responded to you.....u are one of those that insult people's parents on this forum.??.... ..
.. i can catch normal cruise with people and throw few jabs....its all fun... but i dont drag peoples parents.....please stay the fvck away from me....i dont exchange words with dirty people that dont have regard for their parents

advanceDNA:


Oh fvck....i ddnt know u are from the gutters.. i wouldnt have responded to you.....u are one of those that insult people's parents on this forum.??.... ..
.. i can catch normal cruise with people and throw few jabs....its all fun... but i dont drag peoples parents.....please stay the fvck away from me....i dont exchange words with dirty people that dont have regard for their parents

Dummy

MasterJayJay:
You can't defend abortion without sounding dumb. It is inevitable.


Those who support evil will always make statements that are ridiculous to back their support for such evil, no matter how educated they claim to be.

Abortion activists keep saying 'A woman has rights over her body'.

1. The baby in the womb is not part of the mother's body

2. Every human being has a DNA that is unique. Two people can't have the same DNA.

3. The DNA of the baby in the womb is completely different from the DNA of the mother.


[img]https://img.ifunny.co/images/5766ef50e8d2b485773201b915e3846d8ca2bb17140824d6b587cd480fa0d1b8_1.jpg[/img]

Exactly. This is why democrats are finding it difficult to defend at debates.

Scientifically, morally etc. Their arguments to abort babies on delivery tables at 9 months are completely baseless.

Magnoliaa:
- Isn't the child a part of the woman's body?

The baby is literally growing in her body.

- And what "body" does an embryo and barely formed foetus has?

Every one agrees the embryo stage can be removed.

The argument is whether aborting after 6 or 8 weeks when it has passed embryo stage is killing someone else or not?

And whether we should make that a free for all up until 9 months and 1 second even before delivery when the life of the woman is not at risk?

Helpout12345:
And whether we should make that a free for all up until 9 months and 1 second even before delivery when the life of the woman is not at risk?

Please, keep your hypothetical situations to yourself because nobody removes a nine-month pregnancy for the fun of it.

Mtcheeeeeewwwwwwww.

advanceDNA:
They should have sole right to keep or kill their baby if they want....but they should not also have the right to drag a man for child support.

Because "dragging" a man for child support is dependent on KEEPING the child.

If she chooses to keep it, it is only right for you to help in raising or contributing to the upkeep of the child if you won't wed the mother nor tale custody of a child you both formed.

Its your body...
Killing the baby is your responsibility alone.

Keeping it alive and caring should also be your responsibility alone if you never agreed to start a family with man innthe first place....

And this makes sense to you? Flip it it other way round, and you're telling a man that he's basically free to abandon a woman he impregnated if he never agreed to start a family with her before?

If you impregnated a lady, and you're not ready to marry her, and she doesn't want to abort, you're saying you'll leave her alone to care for the child?

advanceDNA:
Another frustrated feminist with no one to marry.....please leave me alone.... why u enter my mention?? I was having a great day till your pathetic, trouble-making, bítch asś entered by radar....... Its friday night dont u have a man to hang out with??
pleeeeeeeease....fvck the hell off !!!

There are thousands of ways you could have attacked her, even as she insulted you, but no, you picked these particular ones.

Wow. 'I am balanced and objective in addressing both men and women' in the mud.

Magnoliaa:


Please, keep your hypothetical situations to yourself because nobody removes a nine-month pregnancy for the fun of it.

Mtcheeeeeewwwwwwww.

There is nothing hypothetical there. If you come to debate table with no single limit on abortion, it simply means you want to legalize abortion up unto time of birth.

And don't pass a general statement that no one is doing or will do it. If it's legal, it can be done. If you will not do it does not mean another person cannot do it.

Magnoliaa:


Because "dragging" a man for child support is dependent on KEEPING the child.

If she chooses to keep it, it is only right for you to help in raising or contributing to the upkeep of the child if you won't wed the mother nor tale custody of a child you both formed.



And this makes sense to you? Flip it it other way round, and you're telling a man that he's basically free to abandon a woman he impregnated if he never agreed to start a family with her before?

If you impregnated a lady, and you're not ready to marry her, and she doesn't want to abort, you're saying you'll leave her alone to care for the child?

Lol...so now when upkeep is needed the narrative that u formed it with someone becomes valid..

But you also want the right to keep or discard the life u formed with someone else to be your sole responsibility.... haba naaa....u shouldn't have it both ways...

Now i am not saying a man should leave a woman or shouldnt care for a child he formed if he wants to.......im just saying its only fair that u shouldnt legally have the right to drag of you have already legally kicked him out of the right to keep or kill it...


u shouldnt have it both ways....