Humza Yousaf To Introduce Abortion Up To Birth & Sex Selective Abortion… Risking God’s Wrath?editor
Humza Yousaf, who is running to be the next First Minister of Scotland, has committed to removing abortion from the criminal law, which would introduce abortion on demand, for any reason, up in birth in Scotland – along with legalising sex-selective abortion.
The three candidates for the next First Minister of Scotland were approached by campaign group, Back Off Scotland, asking them whether they supported three changes to abortion legislation. Back Off Scotland is the Scottish arm of the Back Off campaign, which is run by the UK’s largest abortion provider, the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS).
The third of the three proposed law changes is “removing abortion from the criminal law”.
Humza Yousaf then announced on Twitter that he would support all three changes, including “bringing forward decriminalisation proposals in current parliament term”.
Abortion on demand, for any reason, up to birth
Currently abortion is a crime under common law in Scotland. While abortion is technically a crime, the Abortion Act provides exemptions under which abortion can take place. This in practice allows abortion to be available on request through to the 24-week limit outlined in the Abortion Act.
The abortion provider, BPAS, is campaigning for abortion to be fully ‘decriminalised’ in Scotland, England and Wales. In England and Wales, this would involve repealing sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act along with the Infant Life Preservation Act. In Scotland, this would involve introducing a new law clarifying that abortion is not a crime.
As the Abortion Act 1967 was passed to create exemptions to criminal law in Scotland, ‘decriminalising’ abortion would involve introducing a new law clarifying that abortion is not a crime and this would make the Abortion Act 1967 redundant in Scotland.
This change in law would scrap the current 24-week time limit for abortion – and abortion would be available on demand, for any reason, up to birth. The upper time limit would be completely abolished. Click here to read more…
Can there be anything more barbaric than murdering a child even as it is being born? Let’s be clear, “abortion up to birth” means “infanticide” – killing an infant. Where is the outrage from priests and bishops in Scotland about this? Will their contrived shock-horror be restricted to a banal press release? Your thoughts…
Our Lady of Guadalupe, patroness of the unborn, pray for us!
Yousaf is either knowingly, or unknowingly, following in his master’s footsteps: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/02/01/satanic-temple-to-open-the-worlds-first-religious-abortion-clinic-offering-abortion-rituals
That is truly Satanic. The phrase “God’s wrath” comes to my mind all the time now when I read this sort of thing.
Never mind God, apparently we’re risking Jane Fonda’s wrath. I won’t be losing any sleep over that.
That is shocking. Jane Fonda wasn’t joking, as one of the Twitter people says, it’s what she thinks, and she should be charged with inciting violence IMO.
Jane Fonda has some nerve. If the shoe were on the other foot, and a pro-lifer suggested pro-abortionists were murdered, we’d be facing prison time. Outrageous.
I do believe that God’s wrath will be terrible when it strikes – in the not too far distant future.
No, editor, there isn’t anything more barbaric. This is straight from Hell.
I agree – it is the most barbaric thing anyone could do to murder a baby as it is being born.
Surely they know that there are people who would love to adopt a newborn baby? Are they so selfish that they don’t want to provide someone else with a baby to love and care for? This is horrifying and will bring nothing but bad to Scotland if it happens.
STRAIGHT from Hell. No question.
Your point about adoption is well made. That is what makes this whole barbaric practice so barbaric – just think of it: parents who would sooner murder their unwanted baby than think of it being happy with parents who do want it and will take care of it. Utterly evil.
To murder a new-born infant is barbaric, and it is unthinkable that this man could make it legal.
ED I was told by a Midwife about 15 Years ago that Sex Selective Abortions were taking place ( al not say where ) by the Religion of Peace Women. Now am not saying that they were the only ones doing Sex Selective Abortions. But I was told by this Midwife that Women would be ecstatic when they found out they were Pregnant.
Then when they had a Scan and found out that the Baby was a Girl they then wanted an Abortion. Diabolical then Diabolical now.
Without a shred of doubt. Diabolical disorientation as foretold at Fatima. God help us all.
I was interested to see what the Muslim teaching on abortion was, and found this article:
As you can see in this article, Islam does not reject birth control. On the subject of abortion, we have this:
“According to the Qur’anic teaching, abortion can take place at an early stage when the child is not given a real, genuine identity of its own and that happens at four and a half months, according to doctors. Almost at half time of pregnancy, suddenly the child gains a sort of inner consciousness and is granted an independent soul of its own. There are two periods, one of that stage and one of the previous stage. In the previous stage, if a woman – that is a would-be mother – feels that she cannot carry the load, and is disturbed by the inner symptoms of pregnancy, she is free to get her child aborted, which has not yet become a real child; it is a potential child, [it] could have become a child, but has not yet been given an independent identity. So, abortion at this early stage is less dubious.”
[Sidebar: it would seem that the pro-abortion arguments of feminists and Satanists have been derived from none other than this “teaching.”]
Despite this obvious and ridiculous equivocation, further into the article we are given this, under the heading of “God’s Fundamental Teaching About Birth Control and Abortion”:
“Kill not your children for fear of poverty. It is We Who provide for them and for you. Surely, the killing of them is a great sin.”
In other words, Islam provides a loophole to justify the commission of barbaric acts. In any case, this politician, if he is a practicing Muslim, should be facing the consequences of Islamic law for his public position. Therefore, one might ask, “Where are the Muslim clergy in denouncing this?” [Hah – I almost asked “Where are the Catholic clergy?” but we already know where they are…]
Victor I never knew that about The Religion of Peace it just shows how far from Our own Faith and Believes is this Sect.
Obviously they have never heard of ” Before I formed You in the Womb I knew You through and through ”
Of course they have now upped the Anti with these new Abortion Laws.
Am in know way saying again that The Religion of Peace are the only ones that Marry close relatives. But we do know that their is high % of the Islamic Cult where Children are Born disabled. This new Law in Scotland at least will solve that problem.
Millions of perfectly formed babies slaughtered by cowards since abortion was legalised in the UK and they complain now of the shortage of doctors, nurses, carers, lorry drivers, you name it, etc. Brexit gets the blame.
I saw a doctor on TV recently bemoaning the shortage of doctors in the NHS and he would probably have killed a few hundred potential workmates himself over the years in his line of duty.
I often wonder how many elderly/sick people who having had an abortion in their earlier years now complain about the shortage of carers.
Well said. People are not joining up the dots about anything these days, and this slaughter of the unborn and its consequences are one major example.
“Slaughter” is the word. It is just too beyond belief that this man would be so blatant about his plan to even slaughter a new-born. I can’t begin to fathom such a mind, and he claims to be religious!
It just shows how demonic the politicians have become to even think of legalising infanticide. Yes, they will suffer God’s wrath and it can’t be far off now, IMO.
A very pleasant lady approached me after Mass today to ask if it would not be possible to leave the blog open even though the newsletter is closing down.
Guess what I told her? The polite part, even? Go on… guess…
I watched the latest SNP Leadership debate on Sky this evening and none of the candidates came through it that well, Humza least of all. He is a really arrogant person. I sincerely hope he doesn’t win.
I watched the Sky debate as well – a waste of time. Humza Yousaf just can’t hide his slyness, which is why he’ll win, IMO.
I agree – Yousaf is a very crafty man, it shows in his eyes, the windows of the soul, they say. If he becomes First Minister, I think it will only be a matter of time before the whole edifice of the Scottish Parliament crumbles.
Well, if Yousaf wins this SNP election, we can look forward to King Humza – what an arrogant person. He already acts like a dictator so if he wins the leadership race, the country will be in even more of a right royal mess than it is currently under the SNP. God help us all – and especially the unborn.
This is a mystery to me – Nicola Sturgeon on the terrible “grief” of a miscarriage – loss of a “baby”.
This would be the miscarriage she says she had when she was in Italy at some point?
That is too bizarre for words. How about a certificate formally recognizing aborted babies too – a procedure that your former Head Fish certainly favors, along with signing on to every other barbaric criminality promoted by the globalists.
How in the world can you grieve over a miscarriage, yet not grieve over an aborted baby, and the promotion of aborting babies? Did I fall asleep and wake up in some parallel universe of insanity?
Along with most of the population, I have always thought Yousaf a fool. A political bag carrier and diversity candidate, who has “failed upwards” his entire career.
Now we know he is a deeply immoral fool too.
What a state Scottish Politics is in, where candidates seek to appeal to voters via what level of depravity they will permit.
Years ago, I almost voted for (Lib Dem) Jo Swinson, chiefly because I thought if she won it would keep an SNP MP out. But then Swinson started on the abortion extremism to try to “appeal” to people and so I did not vote for her. In the end she lost by a relative handful of votes.
Politicians in the main are sickening and the Scottish Family Party is the only party worth consideration.
Unfortunately, the Scottish Family Party are not entirely pro-life. They take the same view as other supposedly pro-life politicians, with the exceptions allowed. I can’t vote for a Party that permits abortion for some babies. They’re either for murdering the unborn or against it, not somewhere in between.
Respectfully, I think that is a short-sighted view which completely abandons the political field to pro-abortion parties. (Presumably you do note vote at all?).
No abortions is the goal, but less abortions is still good and worthwhile progress.
We should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. To do so is to guarantee no change.
Campaigners for abortion and “LGBT rights” did not achieve their goals in one fell swoop. They did so by gradualism, being content with small advances each time until here we are today in a deranged world with doesnt value human life and which cannot even tell the difference between a man and a woman.
If ever we manage to swing the barometer of our nation back to something resembing normality and decency it will likely be done in the same manner – via a series of “wins” rather than a sudden change like a light switch being activated.
Part of the problem is the low intelligence which abounds in society today and what are called “low information voters” who make decisions and take sides based on brief soundbites, rather than any research or deep understanding.
A vote for the SFP does not represent “voting for abortion” but “voting to gradually eliminate abortion”.
I understand the argument about gradually eliminating abortion but it doesn’t work. The media see through it and they present the SFP and anyone else who threatens a pro-life message, as demons. It is because the SFP take that view that they have to hold back on showing the truly barbaric action of killing the unborn. Only a Party which openly opposes this barbarism can get away with presenting the facts and research shows that most people who see the facts of a baby lying in a dish after an abortion, come to see that it is totally wrong.
Donald J Trump, when he converted to the pro-life message, did not hold back and it helped, not hindered, his progress into the highest office in the land, in the world, in fact.
It was pointed out on here last time we discussed it, and it stayed with me, that God will not bless the “gradual” approach but he will reward those who are fully trusting in Divine Providence. What if Hitler had promised to ease off his policy of gassing Jews and others, would that have been worth voting for? I hate using Hitler as an example but I can’t think of another one! We need a ground-breaking Party led by people who are not afraid of the media onslaught to come. Once the facts are out there, the mood in the country will change and so babies will be saved.
You are right – I don’t vote because there is no Party pledged to end this massacre of the unborn.
When I hear the argument about gradualism, I always wonder what those who advocate it for abortion would do if they were shown a line of young people from the very young to say their twenties, some with deformities, handicapped, some who were unwanted by their mothers and so on, and told to pick out the ones they would like to have killed.
It’s true what you say about the abortion campaigners and LGBT rights campaigners working over a period of time to get their way, doing it all bit by bit, but they already had people in their corner, in the media, in Parliament and so on. They were able to chip, chip away at the opposition. Also, they were working to have evil accepted in society. That’s very different from the pro-life cause.
The SFP are not making headway because they are being dishonest. Nobody who is truly shocked at the evil of abortion would pretend they think it is OK to allow it for any reason even if they can convince themselves it would only be short term. I’d prefer politicians to be honest about their beliefs, not lie about them, TBH.
Laura, you referred to “aborted baby lying in a dish” and you hit the nail on the head, for me anyway. As a very young and carefree student nurse I happened upon such a scenario. We were using a shared hospital sluice room and I was working in the surgical theatre, the gynae one being next door. I was sent to dispose of an appendix and there, in front of me, was a partially dismembered baby. I vomited.
That is terrible. I can’t believe nurses and doctors are engaged in this legalised slaughter of babies.
Crofterlady, like you, I was working as a staff nurse in theatres. I wasn’t at work when this incident occurred, a baby girl was born following a chemical abortion, ( which happens as the baby, not a foetus, is deemed too big to be aborted surgically). The baby was taken to the clean utility room and placed in a kidney dish, I don’t know if she was covered up until she died. She was baptised so for the last 35 years, has been a saint in heaven. As you can imagine it caused quite a rumpus in the hospital, the Catholic chaplain became involved, he came to see me at my home, to find out what I knew, and also if counselling was required. The staff nurse who cared for the baby was not a Catholic, but gave the little girl care and respect.
Lady Letitia & Crofterlady
I’ve just been watching Nicola Sturgeon’s almost tearful apology to the women and girls forced to give up children for adoption – this referring, apparently, to those decades before co-habitation became the acceptable context in which to raise children (albeit with one parent’s foot permanently pointed in the direction of the door) and I couldn’t help wondering about the apologies to come down the line as future generations express their horror at the legalised murder of unborn babies in our time…