Feminazi Professor and Resistance to Defense

I just listened to an interview on NPR with a feminazi professor who was discussing what went on that was wrong when congress was holding hearings on the dangers of high-dose birth control pills in the 70s. I was very sympathetic throughout the interview until the discussion turned to modern politics. The gist of that portion of the interview is that everything done by Trump and his appointees is vile and will kill women.

An example the professor gave was a ruling by Judge Gorsuch that if an employer has a religious conviction that abortion is wrong, they don’t have to pay for insurance coverage of that procedure. In order to drum up greater support from people who oppose abortion, but not necessarily forms of birth control that don’t entail murdering an unborn child, the interviewer and the professor both used the term contraception in place of abortion. This is not only fraud, it is inaccurate to claim abortion is contraception; you cannot abort a child that has not been conceived.

Why do these feminazis claim that unless a woman has an absolute and inviable right to sacrifice her unborn children on the altar of Moloch all women will become enslaved by evil males? I can understand the struggle for equal pay, equal opportunity in employment and housing, etc. But what I don’t get is the push to kill, kill, kill unborn babies. Statistics show that the number of abortions per thousand women in the United States is steadily declining for the past thirty years. Abortion is nearly passe in our society. This makes no sense to me. Can someone explain why it is essential, with all the ways we have today to avoid conception when we use sex for recreation, abortion is the sacred cow of feminism?

Just to rant in a different direction, Homeland Security announced that people traveling from ten airports in the Middle East will be required to check any electronic device larger than a smartphone because bomb makers in the area with access to those airports are building explosive devices into laptops and tablet computers. The United Kingdom followed suit a few hours later. Now there are people declaring it to be discrimination against Muslims because the airports are all in countries with a Muslim majority. They vow to take it to court, but only in the United States. They don’t mind the UK rules because May never campaigned with outrageous suggestions of banning Muslims.

Are the bomb makers paying these people to fight for their right to kill Americans? If not they’re fools to aid and abet the bomb makers and other terrorists in the midst of a declared war on terror. That’s right, the treason stuff again. Take it to the logical conclusion. If these anti-Trump litigants are successful in shutting down any and all defensive measures against radical Islamic terrorists, the terrorists will have no trouble coming to the United States and killing American civilians. This is what the terrorists want, and I bet they’re willing to pay some of those big oil bucks that finance them to ensure it gets done. Tell me what you think.