Here are questions for all those elites who support abortion on demand

If a woman who is three, six, or nine months pregnant is shot and survives, but the baby dies, did the shooter make a reproductive choice, or is it the murder of a human?

Does the mother who was carrying the baby believe it was murder of her baby, or does she believe that it was just a reproductive choice?

Will the mother be soothed by people who tell her that killing the child was good for the economy and lowered inflation?  After all, it saved her money and didn't change her lifestyle.  It also supposedly helped save the climate. 

At what point in a pregnancy do a mother, a father, a grandparent, friends, and siblings consider that the baby being carried in the precious mother's womb is a human?  Doesn't that occur very early in a pregnancy, or is it only when the baby is out of the womb?

At 14 weeks into a pregnancy, people can find out what sex their baby is, yet people who support abortion on demand treat babies at 40 or 42 weeks as if they were not at all different from a rock or a lump of coal.

And the sex is between a boy and a girl.  There is not a menu of genders to choose from. 

How Soon Can You Find Out the Sex of Your Baby?

Do mothers and others believe that the baby deserves health care when it is born, or do they agree with most Democrats that, if it is born in an abortion mill, it is OK to just let it lie there and die because it was just a reproductive choice? 

Is it OK for the mother who is pregnant to drink, smoke, and do drugs throughout her pregnancy because, after all, it is her body and her choice, or does she have any responsibility at all to the baby she was blessed with? Or was it just a glob of tissue? 

California, which is for abortion on demand, charged a woman with murder for doing drugs during her pregnancy.  This woman could have gone to Planned Parenthood up until the day of birth and chosen to have the baby killed, and it would have been called reproductive choice, yet when the baby died before birth, the mother was charged with murder.  Is there anything reasonable, or fair, about that distinction?  Isn't that unequal treatment?

As the opioid epidemic surges, states have been cracking down on pregnant addicted women.

In November, a California woman who gave birth to a stillborn baby and admitted to using methamphetamine while she was pregnant was charged with murder. The case touched a nerve, igniting a debate over whether mothers should be held accountable for their drug use or treated with compassion for their addictions.

California is one of the dozens of states with laws on the books that criminalize drug use during pregnancy, some of which have been passed in recent years in response to growing concerns about the opioid epidemic. Studies have found that the rate of children born with neonatal abstinence syndrome, a form of withdrawal, increased by more than 500% between 2004 and 2014, and opioid overdoses have become a significant contributor to maternal deaths in some states.

Is it OK for politicians and CEOs to require women to get vaccines or lose their jobs, or do they actually believe that it is their body, their choice?

Is it OK that the same Democrats who say women have the right to do with their body whatever they want, with regard to pregnancy, will dictate, with Obamacare, not only that they are required to buy health insurance, but exactly what has to be covered?

It appears that the only time Democrats truly believe in choice is with abortion on demand.  Otherwise, they have all sorts of dictates women and others must follow in their daily lives. 

The question Democrats refuse to answer is "when does human life begin?"  There is only one answer that is based on science.  They should stop pretending they are the party of science. 

A significant percentage of people who are for abortion on demand understand that a bald eagle's egg and nest are extremely important to the survival of the species.  Shouldn't they be as protective of human babies as they are of animals?

Both bald and golden eagles (and their nests) are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act).  Both laws prohibit "take" and possession of eagles, their parts, nests, and eggs.  Both acts prohibit intentional injury, harassment, and death.

I am very sorry if I offended any snowflakes by using the term "mother" instead of "birthing person," but as far as I can tell, only females were blessed by God with all the parts necessary to nurture a child from conception until birth.

God gave women the breasts that have milk and the nutrients needed to feed babies, not men or some other pronoun.

Image: Pixabay, Pixabay License.

If you experience technical problems, please write to