moonbattery logo

Feb 09 2012

Barbara Walters Weeps for Aborting Mothers Subjected to Guilt

Even moonbat apparatchiks in the liberal media establishment can show compassion when it comes to abortion. However, it isn’t the children dismembered in their mothers’ wombs folks like Barbara Walters feel sorry for. This is what she has to say about a Texas law requiring mothers to look at ultrasounds of their inconvenient children before killing them:

“…to have to go and be forced to hear, to see the fetus, to hear the heartbeat, to put more guilt on you, I think is heartbreaking.”

Here I was thinking that aborting a child was just like having a cyst removed. What’s to feel guilty about if it isn’t murder?

Barbara Walters
Morally insane.

On a tip from G. Fox.


  • StanInTexas

    Any attempt to show the child as being alive and human cannot be allowed if abortion is to survive.

    Once the woman has the abortion, it is OK for her to then realize that she killed her child. But beforehand, they MUST be kept ignorant. Otherwise, how will Planned Parenthood get their money?

  • “Here I was thinking that aborting a child was just like having a cyst removed. What’s to feel guilty about if it isn’t murder?”

    I’m sure some prog will be along soon to rationalize away the cognitive dissonance…

  • Robert S. Pierre

    Stan, planned parenthood gets their money by extortion.

  • b-dob

    These pro-abortionists truly believe that women who abort their children have no ill effects after the child is killed? There would be no guilt whatsoever if women weren’t exposed to the reality that it IS a human child growing inside them? Abortion is shown to lead to infertility and increased risk of cervical and breast cancers, not to mention the psychological effects felt by the vast majority of women who abort their children. These people are detestable in every fathomable way.

  • SgtZim

    Baba and all of her pro-death pals should worry more about their souls. Get off the express train to hell.

  • StanInTexas

    Robert, PP charges for abortions. It is at least 15% of their income. They are the largest FOR PROFIT Abortion provider in America!

  • Jodie

    I used to watch Barbara Walters on The View – partly because it boggled my mind how someone so evil could have such a holier than thou attitude.

  • Jeff

    b_dob, fully agree those people are destestable in every fathomable way. If they will not protect the unborn child in the mother’s womb, then who is going to protect them when THEY are deemed to be “too old” and too costly to keep them alive. There will be plenty of justifcations to kill them. It will all be about money.

  • StanInTexas

    Jodie, every liberal I have ever met, debated, talked to, or read about have one thing in common: They all believe that they are the mainstream, perfectly in the center of American politics. It does not matter if their views are 1000 miles to the left of Michael Moore, They all consider themsleves in the center. That is why they refuse to call themselves Liberals. They think they are moderates, or whatever they are calling themselves today.

    People on the Right know they are on the Right and are proud of what they believe and will stand up for it. In order to be a Liberal, the person must first lie to themself, then they lie to everyone else about what they beleive. That is why Liberals often live lives different or completely opposite of that which they espouse.

  • Fergurg

    There is a term to describe people who don’t feel guilt about murdering their own children – monsters.

  • 762×51

    Baba Wawa feels bad because, as with most lib-filth, she cannot face personal responsibility on any level. In this case she cannot bear the sight of it third person. This is why these vile progressive vomitus cannot be reasoned with, bargained with or trusted to do the right thing. They are the ones who need to be killed.

    Fergurg says:
    February 9, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    There is a term to describe people who don’t feel guilt about murdering their own children – monsters.

    Fergurg – the term is sociopath, not monster.

  • son of a preacher man

    “I would not have gotten that abortion if someone would have showed my that picture and said this is what your child looks like right now.”

    That is a quote from my girlfriend at the time while pointing to a picture of a 3 month old developing child in a book about the stages of pregnancy that I was looking thru at a Borders book store. She had had an abortion from a previous relationship.

    I certainly can attest to the emotional trauma that it causes.

  • Pete

    The Texas judge is very clever, he knows that primal instincts can overcome brainwashing. The top-moonbats know it too.

  • bobdog

    It’s the moral quandary of the century, isn’t it?

    At what point does a viable baby become unpleasant medical waste? When the mother looks up the phone number of the local Planned Parenthood office?

  • Jay B.

    This is typical prog thinking. How dare you show me any consequences to my actions?

  • AC

    This is a tough one.

    In the end, I have to say if it’s legal then it’s legal, whatever that may be, and hopefully we’ll be allowed to go about our legal business without some nanny state politician trying to “nudge” us towards the bureaucratically-approved lifestyle choice.

    I reserve my right to complain when they start putting graphical cigarette-style warning labels on any food or beverage deemed to be too tasty or refreshing for the masses. I’d hate to be forced to watch a film showing plugged up arteries when I’m out at a steakhouse trying to order some beef.

  • Jodie

    Another thing that bothers me about this woman, she goes overboard to explain that her daughter is adopted. I don’t think I’ve ever heard her mention her daughter, without making it clear that she was adopted. I don’t recall hearing other adoptive parents doing that.

  • AC

    She probably adopted the daughter as a lifestyle fashion accessory. You know how these Hollywood types do – get a kid because everyone else has one, let the nannies and maids on payroll raise it, so mommy can spend all her time smoking grass, starring in moonbat movies, and marching in solidarity with the 99% (who all surely have their children raised by nannies, too).

  • Sam Adams

    Barbara WaWa apparently doesn’t feel guilt about the fact that she was sleeping with the same guys that she was supposed to be covering as a reported in Washington DC.

    Sad that so many women don’t understand the consequences of their actions until it is too late. There has been a lot of local coverage about Josh Powell in Washington blowing up his house, killing his 7 and 5 year old kids. Everyone knows that he was a monster. Too bad that we have sacrificed 50 million potential US citizens because their births would have been inconvenient.

  • Bob Roberts

    Wow – a law that makes sure that a mother sees the child they’re about to murder is bad?

    If they really believe that nonsense about it being about “choice” instead of “life”, what would it matter?

    And if they’ve really made up their mind in a state of fully informed consent, how will seeing their little baby make any difference?

    The fact is many women who are pushed by the liberal horde into quickly aborting their baby before really thinking it through wind up with deep, life long psychological scars that basically ruin the rest of their lives.

    If seeing your baby before you murder it can avoid this outcome, I’m all for it!

  • Bob Roberts

    Note that it’s always the ugly, or the post-menopausal (or both) women who screech the most about how unfair any attempt to make women think before they murder their unborn child is?

    I suspect Baba Wawa falls into the “both” category at this point.

  • Hail The Amberlamps!

    When the woman comes into her thirties and wakes up to the fact she killed her own child, many of the unlibtarded (those with a conscience) fall into a deep depression.

    It’s very sad.

    Walters is a soulless member of the feminazi ghouls who could give a shit, who lives to advance their malignant ideology across a battlefield of baby corpses.

    Wonder why so many women take SSRI’s these days? Yeah, this is why.

  • kiplingsburdens

    This is too much on both sides. Abortion is a horrible alternative. It should never be taken lightly, but further complicating a heartbreaking decision is not the way.

    If you are against abortion, don’t have one. On the other side, people who are morally against abortion should never be forced to pay for others to have them.

  • Sinister66

    kiplingsburdens says:

    you can say that again.

  • GoY

    If you are against abortion, don’t have one.

    And if you’re against murder, don’t kill anyone.
    And if you’re against robbery, don’t rob anyone.
    And if you’re against drunk driving, don’t drink and drive.

    And so on…

  • F.D.R. in Hell

    This woman was born one month before the Stock Market Crash of ’29. I’d say she was a foreshadowing of things to come.

    On that big TV salawy, you’d wheely think she would go to a speech thewapist to get wid of that rhotacism.

  • AlphaMail

    StaninTexas @ 2:42 pm

    IHO – It’s slightly misleading to say it’s 15% of their income. Your statement puts you in close agreement with Sinister666. That in itself should cause some lower abdominal stress.

    Mine isn’t a bean counter explanation, but I like to think of it as being closer to the truth.

    Planned Parenthood claimed $1.1 billion in total assets in 2009 – 2010.

    Here’s how that $1.1B breaks down (approx): They received $487 million from taxpayers (46%), $233 million from contributors (21%), $17 million grants/misc. (2%), and $320 million from medical services, i.e., what they took in from their clinics (31%).

    At those clinics there were over 11,000,000 individual medical services – let’s call them “doctor appointments” – which provided the influx of the $320 million.

    Focusing on numbers only, of those 11,000,000 “appointments,” 330,000 were for abortions, around 3%. The magical Planned Parenthood 3%! So in truth we can say, abortions account for 3% of the “number” of PP’s services.

    However, when we consider the $320 million brought in by the clinics, we see it comes from a variety of areas (procedures): 3% abortion, 35% contraception, 35% STD’s, 16% cancer screenings, and 11% other.

    So far the 3% holds up as a nasty marketing tool.

    Until we figure there were about 330,000 abortions at nearly $475 each, which generated well over $155 million of that $320 million – a percentage closing in on 50% of clinic generated income.

    The way I explain it is, almost half of the money those clinics take in is through abortions. If they only gave breast and cervical exams, STD testing, and cancer screenings, I’d give them some of my money – I believe most people would – but unfortunately that’s not their goal.

    You have to infer other services are routinely added during an abortion procedure to overlap and pad the numbers (an STD test, cervical check) just to torque the percentages. So all the numbers are probably skewed, just like their morality.

  • Sam Adams

    “kiplingsburdens says:
    February 9, 2012 at 8:00 pm

    This is too much on both sides. Abortion is a horrible alternative. It should never be taken lightly, but further complicating a heartbreaking decision is not the way.

    If you are against abortion, don’t have one. On the other side, people who are morally against abortion should never be forced to pay for others to have them.”

    It really depends on how you view a genetically unique individual that, given time and nurture, will become a productive member of society. That little unique individual has a heart beat and brain activity at six weeks of life. If you believe that the government’s responsibilities include protecting life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then the government is obligated to include its unborn citizens as those who need protection of their rights.

    It isn’t a choice; it is a baby.

  • Ghost of FA Hayek

    kiplingsburdens
    If you worry about society imposing morality, don’t.
    Society imposes morality when it bans partial birth abortions.
    It also imposed it’s morality when it finally shut down Kermit Goswell’s butcher shop (why should we be concerned over someone Else’s fatal infection) ?
    Murder itself is a moral law.

  • Stephan the Original

    February 9, 2012 at 8:16 pm

    Pretty much what I would’ve written, GoY. But the death lovers don’t see their double standards one little bit.

  • JamesJ

    If you abort a twee, what kind of twee would that be?

  • kiplingsburdens

    Reading the comments on this subject by those who for the most I am in agreement with aside from this subject makes me realize just how bad each side can be.

    Just to point out a strange irony: Most, aside form Lao, who post on this site are Conservative/Libertarians who believe strongly that the government should remain out our lives. That we should remain free to do what we choose as long as we are willing to bear the consequences.

    Why does that argument go out the window on this matter with a majority of you on this subject? As adults who decry the nanny state and its desire to impose its will and “protect” everyone from themselves, why is it that you seek to do exactly what the nanny state would seemingly seek to do?

    Abortion is a terrible thing, I see no other way to describe it, but Life is full of terrible things that we cannot control nor should we seek to.

    In an age with multiple forms of contraception, I cannot understand why so many abortions are still needed, but I would not seek to stop them. I understand the passionate arguments against abortion, you are entitled to feel as you do, I would just argue that the decision is not yours nor should you interfere with an adult’s decision that is against your belief.

    Disagree with me if you wish, call me what you want…

  • lvb-rocks

    @ GoY —

    “And so on…”

    If you’re against shooting an abortionist, don’t shoot one. — Ann Coulter

    A bumper sticker you’ll never see on a Prius, Volvo or Subaru: “Equal Rights for Unborn Women”

  • lvb-rocks

    @ kipling —

    “In an age with multiple forms of contraception, I cannot understand why so many abortions are still needed…”

    Do you see a possible link there? Abortion is a natural consequence of a contraceptive mentality, just as a certain, single religious organization wisely predicted.

    On Libertarianism: Moral virtue is a necessity for a flourishing society. Freedom separated from virtue is an illusion. Real freedom requires limits or it becomes license which then becomes enslavement. Women who act on their “freedom” to abort their children become enslaved to a life a grief, remorse, regret and sorrow, once the delusion and denial wear off. Where is the liberation? Individuals and society suffer when we get the basic, fundamental things wrong. The protection and defense of innocent life has always been regarded as fundamentally important for a thriving society. When that is dropped, there are costs. Those costs inevitably result in less and less real freedom. Look at the party that explicitly promotes a woman’s “right” to abortion — are they not the same party imposing restrictions on everything else in sight, including, now, denying freedom of conscience and religious liberty?

  • Sinister66

    AlphaMail says:

    If you would have payed half attention to what I was respnding too you would see 15% is correct. The claim was almost 1/2 of PPs TOTAL revenue comes from abortion.
    I also linked to my source. Please link to yours.

  • Jodie

    kiplingersburden,

    Like King Herod and the Egyptian Pharoah of Moses’ day, Obama has set out to murder as many babies as possible. Like them, he may fear that someone will be born who will overthrow him. Or maybe he just wants to kill as many infidels as possible.

    I have been concerned about Obama’s laser focus on killing babies since day one. And I’m not the only one:

    “One of many Bush Administration policies being immediately overturned by the new Obama cabal is the existing ban on the use of federal tax dollars to promote and fund abortions here and abroad.

    Obama planned to sign an executive order pouring US taxpayer funds into abortion practices all over the world on his first day in office. But as the March for Life [1] on Washington DC was scheduled for January 21st, he decided to delay the signing of this peculiar executive order for a couple of days.

    The March for Life has now passed and Obama is scheduled to sign the order today, January 23, 2009. [2]

    As my dear friend Marie Jon chronicles in her Right Side News column, Obama – the Master of Infanticide [3], Obama has a long and distinguished history of supporting infanticide without condition or reservations of any kind.

    On the issue of a mother’s right to kill, no human being on earth is more liberal-minded than Barack Obama, supporting even the most brutal forms of late-term abortion, and even the death of children who somehow survived all attempts to abort and must now be deprived of life outside of the womb – a fully developed, living, breathing human being.

    Now as president, Obama will sign an executive order allowing the use of federal tax revenue to fund and promote unrestrained infanticide around the globe. Most telling about Mr. Obama is the fact that a lion’s share of these funds will be used to murder the young in his homeland of Africa. [4] And clearly, it is a high priority for him on this, his third day in office.

    In Obama’s inaugural speech, he said “America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We The People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.”

    Obama has never made a truer statement. Sadly, like all of his patriotic sounding statements, he did not mean a single word of it.”

    http://www.conservativecrusader.com/articles/taxpayer-funds-for-international-abortion-obama-priority-one

  • Sinister66

    lvb-rocks says:

    So your saying we need to have someones view of moral virtue imposed or made law that everyone must follow? And Who is to decide what is and what isnt virtuous? The federal government?

    “Real freedom requires limits or it becomes license which then becomes enslavement.”

    Forcing someone to live under another persons vision of virtue is by deinition enslavement.

  • Sinister66

    Jodie says:
    He was also saying he would hold back the US funding from Kenya if they didnt add “the right to an abortion” to their constitution. That is pretty despicable if you ask me.

  • lvb-rocks

    @ Jodie —

    It might be time for you to read Humanae Vitae. Guess who predicted that very thing (Gov’t enforced population control policies, exports of contraceptives, abortion, sterilization, and cultural re-engineering by the developed world into developing countries — as a prerequisite for aid dollars) decades ago? Not everyone is surprised by these developments.

  • lvb-rocks

    @ Sinister —

    There are Universal Principles that do not presuppose agreement on religious grounds or common religious commitments. These Principles have successfully guided the thoughts and actions, laws and policies of societies for centuries — the protection of life being THE foundational principle. We have broken from these principles, and the negative results are obvious.

  • RKae

    Sinister:

    Forcing someone to live under another persons vision of virtue is by deinition enslavement.

    (Just your name says it all. Sinister means “on the Left side.”)

    When you libertarians complain about “being forced to live under someone else’s morality,” are you saying America was enslaved before Roe v. Wade? Really?

    There have always been laws concerning public decency. It’s not a “nanny state”; it’s not “enslavement.” It’s civilization.

    There WILL be a culture – yours or somebody else’s. No society can exist without a culture. And in ANY culture someone somewhere is going to be told “no you may not do that.” And he’s going to whine about his “enslavement.”

    Seems to me that you, like most libertarians want an America that has never existed. So it really isn’t America you want then, is it? Go ahead and give us the line about how you want to go back to the Founding Fathers; but it’s just more libertarian fantasy. They had PLENTY of moral laws on the books back then; far more than the meager few we have left that you can’t abide.

  • 5kidsnadog

    I am a mother of five. At age 38, with no plans to have any more children, I found myself pregnant, and not at all pleased. The turning point in the pregnancy came for me in the wee hours of the morning as I lay on a gurney in a hospital undergoing an ultrasound due to uncontrolled bleeding. As the ultrasound tech realized that my baby was still alive, she turned the monitor to face toward me and showed me my son. At twelve weeks pregnancy, I don’t think he was probably an inch tall, but I will never forget the sight of that boy’s profile — a profile that was as familiar to me as anything in my life. He had the face of all of my other children and I knew him then as my own family.

    If only one in every two women was able to have that moment of realization BEFORE she aborted her baby it would be worth it. I don’t understand anyone who wouldn’t want women to at the very least UNDERSTAND what they were doing when they abort their babies. It’s as though they are invested not in CHOICE but in the choice that they want them to make – death.

  • kiplingsburdens

    The anti-abortion zealotry seems to indicate that everyone should have families of 15 children as “contraception mentality” is wrong.

    By that argument, any type of sexual contact that doesn’t produce offspring is wrong and should be banned. As I see it, this is a straw-man argument. This is the lunacy of the what the Liberals feeds its attacks on. There is something called RESPONSIBILITY. Taking precautions against unwanted outcomes. You even are against contraception – methods and means you are not funding for others.. I don’t believe anyone should be forced to pay for someone else’s contraception and the argument of people being too embarrassed to purchase it on their own is ridiculous – anyone too embarrassed has no business having sex…

    This society is doomed when even those who rational people mostly agree with- see “their side” as being irrational zealots with whom they will never agree.

  • Tatersalad

    Barack Obama did not “cave in” to pressures to undue the mandate of providing the contraception requirement. He has just “shifted” the mandate from the federal government to the insurance companies and then mandating the insurance companies to provide contraception.

    The underlying issue here is “still” the mandate requirement by government, thereby breaking down the United States Constitution, Barack Obama’s goal. It has always been his goal. There is no other goal. It is the same with government’s intervention and control of the Commerce Clause, thereby demanding that YOU buy insurance or be taxed/fined. Religious Freedom, guaranteed under the Constitution………out the door.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/02/10/report-obama-to-announce-accommodation-for-religious-organizations-on-contraception-mandate/

  • Sinister66

    lvb-rocks says:

    My personal opinion on abortion. I could care less. I am not a woman and I would never have one. And you should change that to ” protection of newborn life” after someone is born both sides pretty much say “your on your own”.

    RKae says:

    You missed the whole point.

    I said,”Forcing someone to live under another persons vision of virtue is by deinition enslavement.”

    And you took exception to that. So if our leaders found it virtuous for women to stop wearing pants and only dresses down to their ankles you would find that ok while I would find the government dictating virtue as enslavement.

    “(Just your name says it all. Sinister means “on the Left side.”)”

    If I was religious that may mean something but I’m not.

    “There WILL be a culture – yours or somebody else’s. No society can exist without a culture. And in ANY culture someone somewhere is going to be told “no you may not do that.” And he’s going to whine about his “enslavement.”

    Culture inst dictated by law and the way you are using the word “culture” i dont think you know what it means.
    Christmas is apart of our culture but I dont have to celebrate it. If the government passed a law saying I did then that would be enslavement.

  • FrankW

    Why is it that killing a 20 year old is not referred to as a 63rd trimester abortion?

  • Josee

    Why would anyone have guilt for a piece of tissue?!

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy