the abortion video game...?

So, I came across an article on lifenews.come titled: How to illegally abort your child at home…the video game! by Dave Andrusko (December 4th,2012)

This all came rushing back this morning with an article posted on the pro-abortion site rhrealitycheck.org headlined, “Missed Your Period? Don’t Want to be Pregnant? There is an App for That.”
Written by Karen Gardiner, the article is an attempt to put a very dangerous abortion technique in a lighthearted, almost comic light. Here is the opening:

“’To avoid judgement and fear, it is always useful step into the shoes of another person. I invite you into mine.’

“So begins the journey of a 19-year-old Mexican named Claudia, protagonist of an inventive computer game.
 

You have to read this carefully to see how cavalierly Gardiner treats women’s lives. She argues that Misopoprostol (used to treat ulcers) is widely used to abort babies in Mexico and—joy—Gardiner claims, there is no prescription required, unlike the United States.

What’s the problem? “Pharmacy workers often lack the knowledge of how the drug should correctly be administered.” Solution?
Users of No Te Baja, through the actions of Claudia and her boyfriend, go through each detailed step of the process of self-administering a medication abortion: from the initial pregnancy test to the decision whether or not to involve the partner; the signs and symptoms of an ectopic pregnancy to calculating gestational age to indicate whether or not use of Misoprostol will be effective—and if it will be safe to self-administer

Think I'm making this up?

Yahoo voices article: RapeLay -- Rape and Forced Abortion Sim "Game" -- Ban Sought byCarol Bengle Gilbert

 Although the PC "game" RapeLay has never been offered for sale by its manufacturer in the United States, it has caused such an uproar that on Monday, the Speaker of the New York City Council called upon U.S. video distributors to refuse its distribution or sale. Councilwoman Christine C. Quinn in conjunction with the New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault reported that RapeLay is now for sale in the US - apparently referring to its being offered on Amazon a little more than a week ago- and described it as a "teenage video game."

Made by an erotica company in Japan, Illusion, RapeLay does not limit its horrors to encouraging players to engage in virtual rapes, including gang rapes. After raping women, RapeLay players must force the women to have abortions; if they fail at this mission, they will be thrown in front of a train upon the baby's birth.

This just gets stranger... doesn't it?

On the Jezebel website the article byKatie J.M. Baker,
Computer Game Teaches Mexican Women How to Safely Give Themselves a Medical Abortion

 

Safely???

This article is one big advertisement for this simms game from apple. Many of the articles readers applaud this cheap pill version without hesitation. Any side effects are tedeous compared to the horror of going through an actual abortion... Users receive detailed information on how to administer Misoprostol through the mouth or the vagina, noting that, in the event of having to seek medical attention, medical personnel would likely be able to detect the remnants of the pills inside the vagina- important information for women living in areas where they can be prosecuted for inducing an abortion.

 

remember, you can't buy this game in the USA... but its coming.

What really scares me is just how big of an advertisement this is for the drug Misopoprostol. How they are creeping, abortionists, into the lives of young girls and boys minds.

It's as easy as taking a pill....

....and years ago, they used a COATHANGER before it became legal to abort...

The Coat Hanger Abortion: Fact or Fiction?

Posted by Eric Scheidler (January 26, 2011 at 3:42 pm)

The scandal of Philadeplia abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” brings to mind images of the “back alley” and “coat hanger” abortions that Roe v Wade was supposed to bring to an end.
The pro-life movement has been decrying the unsafe conditions at abortion clinics for decades. If we’d been heeded by the authorities in Philadelphia, Kermit Gosnell would have been put out of business in the 90s. We wouldn’t be hearing today about the woman he killed in a botched abortion, or the babies he and his staff stabbed in the spine with scissors after they survived failed abortion attempts.
That Roe made abortion safe is a myth, but that’s not the only myth being spread by the pro-abortion camp. There is also the issue of the “coat hanger” abortion.

The Coat Hanger: A Pro-Choice Symbol

We are told that, before Roe, desperate women used coat hangers in dangerous self-administered abortions. The coat hanger—often with the slash-circle “no” symbol—has become the premier symbol for the pro-choice movement.

Signs at pro-abortion protests typically feature this coat hanger symbol, and you’ll find it in miniature on the profile pictures of abortion advocates on Facebook and Twitter.
One of the most creative uses of the symbol I’ve seen was at a protest in August 2005 of the nomination of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court: a gigantic red coat hanger with a banner reading “We won’t go back!”
On the stranger side of the spectrum was a package delivered to the League’s Chicago office in May 2008 containing two red plastic coat hangers, along with a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union of Mount Holyoke College urging us to support legal abortion.
The pro-choice movement has rallied around this symbol. But is there any truth to the coat hanger abortion story?

Was There Ever a Coat Hanger Abortion?

While preparing the League’s handbook, Sharing the Pro-Life Message, my staff and I searched high and low for evidence of an abortion ever having been performed with a coat hanger. We found none.
That isn’t to say it never happened. We know that women did attempt to do abortions on themselves, using all manner of objects. But I never found any specific evidence of a coat hanger abortion—until now.

Who Gave Her the Idea of Aborting Herself with an Coat Hanger?

What’s unusual about this case of a confirmed coat hanger abortion is that it isn’t one from the archives. It happened in 2009.
I came across the story in an article in Slate on women who decide to perform their own (illegal) abortions, despite the ready availability of legal abortion.

An account of the case says a 19-year-old woman pregnant with twins attempted to abort herself with a coat hanger and ended up in the emergency room. The babies died and the woman required a hysterectomy; she will never bear children.
The study authors suggest that factors like the decreasing number of abortion providers, the number of counties without abortion facilities and laws like parental involvement may be responsible for women choosing to attempt their own abortions.
But in this case, I have to wonder of some of the blame should be laid at the feet of the abortion lobby. After all, where did this woman get the idea of doing an abortion with a coat hanger?
It would be a tragic irony if the only recorded case of a coat hanger abortion was actually inspired by all the hype about coat hanger abortions coming from the pro-choice side.
Meanwhile, as the Gosnell case illustrates in gory technicolor, abortion remains unsafe for women. It’s time the abortion lobby were held accountable for that.

***In the 1970s, there was a little self published book called “The Abortion Handbook” which basically described how to self induce an abortion. It was published by the same folks who put together “The Marijuana Handbook”. One of the techniques they described was to put a urinary catheter into the cervix and leave it there….they also described (but discouraged) the use of knitting needles and wire coat hangers…..

these photos say it all...

No, it's not your body. It's someone elses.

Prochoice keeps saying its their body.








Their choice.

Wrong.


You are cutting, snipping, sucking, suffocating, poisoning (whatever abortion method is needed for the growing baby size) the infant.

Not "the womans" body.

Not "her" body.

It's the defenseless 100% human being inside her uterus.

Because "she" can't see "it" and decides "she" doesn't want "it"
prochoice turns a blind ear and eye.

Prochoice is lying to themselves and they have to keep lying because the lies give them comfort and acceptance.

It's "my" body is a flat out lie.

How much proof does prochoice need before they realise what they are doing is wrong?

We have ultra sounds that can id the baby. Ultra sounds that show a human being living and growing and yawning...

Prochoice has no right to be angry when they see pictures and photos of baby parts on protest signs. Those photos are results of an abortion. ...and before prochoice denies that fact. They need to visit an abortion clinic and ask who takes care of the aborted fetus and how they know they "got it all out".