From ‘image of God’ to ‘disposable units’: Forced vaccinations re-energize ‘Culture of Death’

Special to WorldTribune, November 30, 2021

Analysis by Joe Schaeffer, 247 Real News

This will not be a pleasant read. It concerns compartmentalized killing and the continuing coarsening of humanity with regard to individual life in the West today.

We are in full disposable mode now. The expanding, if discredited, “Culture of Death” in the age of forced vaccination has lifted the veil on a murderously utilitarian vision of individual human life that is keenly supported by major media publications such as The New York Times and high-ranking university officials from the Ivy League, Stanford and other top-shelf American institutions of learning.

Item: Abortion doctor publishes first-person account in prestigious Boston intellectual publication, discusses killing “baby-like” second-trimester fetus and explains how the act was similar to performing lab tests on an earthworm for her.

From a Nov. 29 article in The Boston Review penned by Christine Henneberg, who “practices women’s health and family planning in California.” The earthworm and the baby (bold added throughout this piece):

When I was a pre-med biology student, our professor gave us a lab assignment that involved pinning an earthworm to a small piece of wood, then probing it with an electrode to observe its response. The lab was intended to show us a primitive nervous system at work. (The question of whether earthworms feel pain is a gray area in invertebrate physiology — or it was at the time.)

I followed the instructions and flicked at one end of my earthworm. It writhed and squirmed; I drew my hand back. Whatever the earthworm was experiencing, it looked like pain to me. After a few more tries, I asked the professor to excuse me from the rest of the assignment, explaining that I couldn’t bear to torture a living creature.

[…]

The woman is lying on the table, awake but sedated by medications. I dilate her cervix and place a small plastic tube inside her uterus. I watch the ultrasound screen. I flip a switch; a humming noise fills the room. At this instant, the fetus seems to jump as though startled; then it squirms in the tight, already shrinking space of the uterus. It continues to move in this very human, baby-like way until the last instant, when it is overpowered by the force of the vacuum and sucked through a plastic tube, whisked out of the uterus and into a glass jar in in a rush of blood. Gone.

Then all I see on the ultrasound is the fluffy, whitish-gray lining of the uterine walls; after a few more seconds, even that disappears. All that is left is the empty uterus, and the memory — mine and Jenny’s alone — of what was there before.

Henneberg is facing up to stark realities most abortion advocates prefer to conceal in banalities about “choice” and “simple procedures.” But there is nothing commendable about it. She is crafting her justification for ending what she clearly realizes is human life:

Seeing everything I see, knowing all the details of what happens in that procedure room, what exactly does an abortion doctor believe? What are the principles upon which I base my beliefs and actions?

To start with, let’s make one thing clear: my answer has nothing to do with “viability.”

 As she continues to elaborate on this sickening mindset, Henneberg is opening a door to pretty much killing anyone, as long as the person doing so has a reason they consider valid:

For abortion opponents and advocates alike, this is another way of stating the truth I face every day: when it comes to the definition, and even the value of life, context matters….

Viability is not, and never has been, a sound or sustainable premise for protections or prohibitions on abortion….

If fetal viability — or, for that matter, a fetal heartbeat — isn’t an acceptable standard for thinking about abortion, then what is? For me the standard is what I call the woman’s contextualized autonomy.

Suffice to say, the article goes on in this horrific vein for far too long. Henneberg eventually circles back to her earthworm story, and in doing so fully accepts the murder she commits on a regular basis:

I wish I could go back to that day in pre-med biology and tell my classmate what I now understand. Causing pain, lasting harm, or even death to another living being is not in itself intolerable to me. I have learned what any good doctor (and any woman who has had an abortion) knows: there is a difference between timidity and compassion. Context matters.

Christine Henneberg is clearly an attention seeker and is happy to write provocative essays about being an abortionist to get the notice she craves. In fact, she has a “memoir” coming out soon. But what is even more telling about the state of our society today than her grotesque personal philosophy is that The New York Times chose to provide a very public platform for it.

In 2019, Henneberg penned a piece titled “When an Abortion Doctor Becomes a Mother” that further makes a mockery of the baby killing she commits:

I’ve always been good at compartmentalizing, drawing boundaries between work and the rest of my life. A lot of doctors will tell you this about themselves — if compartmentalization doesn’t come naturally, it’s beaten into you in training. Every time you duck into a hospital closet to cry, someone will tell you some version of: You have to maintain some boundaries. You can’t let it bleed over, you’ll never survive….

I do not mean it’s an easy job. Of course it’s not. There is the protester on the sidewalk. There is the fetus in the dish, the perfect curl of its fingers and toes. Sometimes it reminds me of my daughter — how could it not? But that is precisely the point.

As a doctor, I can draw a distinction, a boundary, between a fetus and a baby. When I became a mother, I learned that there are no boundaries, really. The moment you become a mother, the moment another heartbeat flickers inside of you, all boundaries fall away.

You know who else is really good at compartmentalizing? Serial killers.

Promoting the properness of intentionally taking innocent human life in order to serve a higher purpose has been one of the more frightening undertones being projected by the coronavirus jab coercion machine. “The common good” demands that individual human beings must risk and possibly forfeit their lives via experimental gene therapy. When it comes to your human worth, as Henneberg put it, “context matters.”

This is why we are seeing more and more public assertions of the importance of human killings when necessary – whether it be via abortion, euthanasia or a vaccine.

It is no surprise that The Boston Review’s advisory board is made up almost entirely of leading university figures. Richard M. Locke, Provost of Brown University, is a member of the board.

As is Rob Reich, professor of political science at Stanford University, and Archon Fung, who is shockingly labeled as the “Ford Foundation Professor of Democracy and Citizenship at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government” in his Boston Review bio.

Yes, the radical Ford Foundation endows professorships at Harvard today. Isn’t that lovely?

Utilitarianism is the endgame. Human beings are to accept their role as disposable units rather than being the valuable individuals formed in the image of God that they have long seen themselves as.


INFORMATION WORLD WAR: . . . . How We Win . . . . Executive Intelligence Brief

You must be logged in to post a comment Login