A couple of weeks ago, a pregnant woman named Michelle Wilkins went to a home in Boulder, Colorado, looking to buy some baby clothes. The predator there, Dynal Lane, had placed an ad on Craigslist with the intent not of selling anything, but of stealing someone’s unborn child.
Lane accosted Mrs. Wilkins when she arrived at the house, cutting her uterus open with a knife, removing her baby and leaving her to bleed to death. Fortunately, the mother survived the attack, but sadly, her young daughter did not. Lane stowed the infant in an upstairs bathroom, where the little girl died alone in a cold bathtub.
Imagine the fear that beautiful child must have felt. Imagine the agony. Imagine the cruelty and selfishness of her slaughter. Imagine her light extinguished by the brutality and darkness of a cold, calculating killer.
Imagine justice for this innocent victim.
All you can do is imagine it, because in this life, there will be none.
The District Attorney in Boulder announced late last week that no murder charges will be filed in the case. Lane will stand accused of attempted murder for stabbing Mrs. Wilkins, along with a host of other crimes,but no matter how long she ultimately spends in prison, the fact remains that she will not have to answer for killing a child.
She will get away with murder.
The prosecutor says his hands are tied, and he’s right, only he neglects to mention that he helped tie them. The Boulder DA has open connections to the abortion industry, and publicly supported the law now preventing him from charging Lane with murder.
Unless it can be proven that the infant took a breath outside of the womb, the law does not consider her a person. Of course, the police report says the “fetus” gasped for breath, and emergency room personnel said she was “viable,” but none of this can be proven, so as far as Colorado is concerned, she wasn’t a person.
But why should her personhood be hinged on whether she took a breath outside of the womb in the first place? Are hospital patients who require ventilators not people? If I hold my breath, do I forfeit my humanity for those brief moments? And if breathing outside of the womb is the completely capricious standard for “personhood,” and if that made sense, which it emphatically doesn’t, then what was she if not a person?
A hologram? A hallucination? A phantom? A flamingo?
Nobody can answer these questions; it doesn’t matter to the pro-aborts, anyway. Colorado’s official legal position, regardless of its staggering idiocy and barbarity, is that unborn babies aren’t real people — a view shared by millions of Americans in every state across the nation.
But don’t worry. While the literal and actual dehumanization of infant children happens in Colorado, a protest movement gathers steam around the country.
Celebrities, politicians, businessmen and regular citizens are taking to the streets to lash out against the devastating violation of basic human dignity. The media is reporting about it breathlessly, demanding answers from all involved and stopping at nothing until the perpetrators are exposed and shamed.
Americans of all stripes are coming together, warriors for liberty and truth, bravely declaring their resolve. They will boycott an entire state just to make the point that the oppression inflicted by that state’s government on the weakest and most helpless among us cannot be tolerated or condoned.
Together they stand like rebels against the tyranny of evil men. Freedom fighters, struggling against all odds, screaming to the heavens so that God Himself might hear them: Justice will be done, they cry! Justice!
…But not in Colorado.
Don’t be silly, the national outrage has nothing to do with dead babies, instead it’s all targeted at Indiana. No, not because anyone’s life is in jeopardy, but because a few homosexuals might be inconvenienced when attempting to purchase consumer goods.
Indeed, as babies are explicitly excluded from basic legal protections and the most fundamental of human rights, the attention of the country focuses on a religious freedom bill, passed last week, which might, in some limited circumstances, interfere with a gay couple’s ability to procure baked goods. Liberals throughout the land are frantic over the prospect that homosexuals may possibly, in some potential situations, experience the moderate nuisance of a business owner declining to participate in their gay wedding.
Cakes for gay people, that’s the issue of the day. The widespread legalization of child murder? Well, why would anyone be upset about that?
You might think these two things are unrelated, and to liberals they are, and that’s the point.
The liberal philosophy of human rights is utterly random and disjointed, which is why their opinion can’t be believed or listened to or treated with respect. It’s an insane, rambling, mess of jumbled, moronic nonsense, where each right is severed and disconnected from the other with nothing tying it all together.
Just think about this for a minute.

Source: The Blaze