The Insidiously Nefarious Hydra Entity That Is The Abortion Industry

As a Moderate, I am a Pro-Life Women's Rights advocate who is supportive of any and all decisions a woman chooses to make regarding her own body. I also believe she should have all the facts ...

The Insidiously Nefarious Hydra Entity That Is The Abortion Industry

Written By Marvin Thomas Cox-Flynn de Graham

Copyright © 2015 Marvin Thomas Cox

DBA: Marvin Thomas Cox-Flynn de Graham

All Rights Reserved

Senomyx Bio-Tech Corporation

“This article is dedicated to those brave women who rightfully

choose to exercise their right to bring new life into this world ...”

-- Marvin Thomas Cox-Flynn de Graham

Where is the humanity to be found in human thinking that sets values far greater upon the lives of animals -- dogs, cats, horses, etc. -- than is placed upon the lives of human beings, both present in this world, and those as yet unborn -- though, the fact of the matter is, the unborn are truly present in this world, hidden from prying eyes within the wombs of their mothers -- wombs that God and nature intended to be developing rooms of safety and security …?

For quite some time during a woman's pregnancy there is no obvious visible evidence to be witnessed of the unborn's existence at all, much like that of the very existence of God (The Ultimate Source Point Of Origin Of All Existence), yet, over a period of months, evidence of things that do exist within the womb begin to reveal and show themselves as the mother's tummy begins to grow in size -- logic dictates from this point that there is surely a bun in the oven, regardless of how it came to be there. Such revelation, in a better time than we witness today, used to bring joy to the hearts of mothers -- inspiring proud smiles upon the faces of dads -- but that was then, and this is now … And then was truly a far better time …

____________

For the record I am not a male chauvinist, nor am I anti-women or in opposition to a woman's God given rights. We are all born with rights, however I personally believe that there is a difference in possessing rights and doing what is right … A difference between the right to choose and choosing to do what is right ...

In speaking of a woman's rights, allow me to share that I, personally, view the Women's Rights Movement as a nefariously clever and ingeniously devious contrivance orchestrated by the hand of man -- yes, I'm talking men in power here (in high governmental positions around the world) -- to deceive women into believing that they now possess rights and freedoms which they never had in the past, while in reality women are now exploited -- most especially sexually -- more than at any time in the history of the world, and this now, willingly and often voluntarily so, all in the name of a woman's rights gained in a modern technological world that is built around and geared to the tune of the Almighty Dollar, which the poor man never sees, but those unseen orchestrators do see in their unquenchable thirst for more money and power -- and that endlessly and insatiably …

So, do I desire to deprive women -- a woman (any woman) -- of their rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as so aptly stated in our nation's own Declaration Of Independence -- rights which men are willing to fight and die for? Most certainly not. I simply wish to point out, in the spirit of logic and sensible reason, that possessing rights -- whether endowed by God or government granted -- has nothing whatsoever to do with (is certainly not the same thing as) simply doing what is right. On the contrary, whenever the implementation and exercising of our rights (man or woman) denies the rights of others -- most especially the right to life, which if denied automatically denies those others the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness -- then we have chosen to not do the right thing.

Most any person could easily point out a time or place in the history of every nation, culture, or religion, when women were not treated well or fairly. Who would waste their time denying these facts? Grave injustices have historically been waged against women. I would never seek to reinstate those injustices, nor the times during which they took place. I simply seek to make my readers aware that, in correcting some injustices to women, new injustices have crept in, unawares, cloaked beneath the garments of the Women's Rights Movement. Times have changed, so they say, but what we fail to see is that not all change is good change.

There was a time -- right here in America -- when, if a man engaged in a sexual relationship with a woman (most especially a relationship that resulted in pregnancy), the couple had best be married beforehand, or else the wrath of the woman's father and family would surely come to visit that man, resulting in the possible loss of his life, or his testicles, and this, only, after he had received a sound beating for having disrespected a father's daughter. If spared such punishment, the man would promptly marry the woman on the spot, with shotgun escort if necessary, and he would wear a smile whether he was happy or not … And divorce was a word not to be spoken, much less carried out. Marriage, in those better times, was an institution entered into for life -- and that by a woman and a man.

____________

God forbid, did I just speak against Gay marriage? So, what are my thoughts and feelings on Gay Marriage?. Honesty requires that I answer in this humble manner: There is no such thing as a Gay marriage. Marriage is, and always has been, an institution clearly defined as being a union between a woman and a man (not a woman and a woman, nor a man and a man), and this for the express purpose of mating in such a fashion that holds forth the potential for procreation (if the couple so chooses) without which there would, and will, be no American populace in the future. The very fact that Gay Couples desire to adopt children expresses their own understanding that the continued birth and nurturing of children assures the very survival of mankind, whether they grow up to be Gay or Straight. Am I Anti-Gay? No, I am not. I fully recognize the right of folks with different sexual strokes to live together in whatever relationship suits them best. If they wish to enter into a contract with one another that reassures them both of a lifelong commitment and allows them both access to government benefits, I wish them all the best, for that is their right granted by our government, but such a contractual commitment is not, by historical and biological definition, a marriage and never will be.

A few have suggested that, perhaps, I use the topic of Gay rights to inappropriately address the issue of Abortion, as though, somehow, Gay Rights have nothing to do with the Abortion issue -- subtly hinting that Gay Rights should take precedence over the issue of Abortion.

I disagree wholeheartedly. I firmly believe that the issue of Abortion is -- a Gay Rights, as well as a Straight Rights -- issue which must be addressed. Each and every child needlessly aborted in our nation each year has, thus, been deprived of, not only the right to life itself but, the very rights set forth within our own Declaration of Independence which declare that each of us has the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and those rights would seemingly include the right of an unborn child to live and see life upon this earth, and to choose for him/herself to be Straight, or to be Gay.

This said, every unnecessary abortion carried out in our nation and across the world, is destroying the lives of potentially future Straight and -- for the purposes of this discussion -- Gay citizens and so I state, and believe, that the Abortion issue applies most meaningfully to the Gay Rights issue, as well as to Straight relationships … Clearly, the majority of Gay Couples who seek avenues of adoption would not seek to adopt children to raise as their own if they truly supported unnecessary abortion … Such a stance, I think, would appear more than just a little bit illogical.

As for the controversial topic of our government's legalizing of Gay Marriage, the Declaration of Independence seems to make it clear that all Americans possess the God given right to seek after, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This shared, I would like to reiterate that I am not Anti-Gay, nor against Gay Rights in basic principle, as clearly in choosing to be Gay, Gay Americans are simply utilizing their right to seek after, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” as defined by our own Declaration of Independence in the choosing of their own lifestyle … I, simply, do not consider such a union to be a marriage.

____________

There was a time when society fully expected men to treat a woman like a lady.

There was a time when society expected a man to shoulder up and accept responsibility for his actions and relationship with a woman.

What happened to that time? The Women's Rights Movement is what happened. Sadly, when women won their rights and freedom, men also gained the right to act and behave irresponsibly, no longer expected or required to shoulder up responsibility for their actions, actions such as getting a woman pregnant out of wedlock and leaving the burden of child bearing and rearing to her alone -- the woman now left to stand with nothing but her hard fought for rights, rights that simply do not provide financial, physical, or emotional assistance and support. In a world that now fully expects women to work alongside men, shouldering the same work load as a man -- in offering forth the sugar-to-a-horse-promise and opportunity of a career -- the woman, all too often, chooses to further exercise her rights in choosing not to do right, but to do what her heart knows clearly is wrong in aborting her own child, all in the name of maintaining a firm body, freedom from parental responsibilities, and the alluring promise of a successful career.

At the end of the day, despite what may appear as allusions -- allusions that are in reality deceptive illusions -- to improved treatment of women, women today are worse treated than at any time in history, having become slaves to the illusive allusion of freedoms attained via the, so called, Women's Rights Movement.

Shame on us men for using the Women's Rights Movement to, exploit women sexually and, free ourselves of shouldering up the responsibilities that have historically made us honorable men of character and integrity in the eyes of women around the world … Women are not the only ones who now suffer from allusions that are in reality illusions, allusive illusions that we are men in a modern technological world, when in truth we have forfeited (via Hydra Entity sacrificial abortions) our manhood; a true man defined as a male who accepts responsibility, possesses character and integrity, and conducts himself honorably -- qualities rarely exhibited by today's men, who proclaim themselves to be a man while women suffer for the lack of men who demonstrate the true principles of manhood …

____________

Why have I chosen to shoulder up the Pro-Life Banner? Why do I choose to speak for the unborn? Because, just like in space, in the womb no one can hear you scream. I speak for those who are unable to speak on their own behalf. I speak for the innocent and helpless. If unborn children are not innocent and helpless then what children are?

In sharing this, would I suggest that there is no time when an abortion might appear to be the correct choice? No I would not. Sadly, when a woman's life and health are deemed at risk, or in the event of rape or incest, an abortion might be deemed as exceptions to the rule for those of us who share the belief that unnecessary abortion is not a rights choice. This said, in times past, there were women who possessed such powerfully strong maternal instincts that they would bravely risk their lives to bring new life into this world -- giving their own lives that their child might live. I praise such wonderful women, for they can never be praised enough … But that was then, this is now …

To our shame, we have allowed a deteriorating society of declining moral values to strip away the very fabric of such marvelous maternal instincts, character, and integrity once exhibited by women -- a tragic reality that can be wholly credited to the Women's Rights Movement.

Do I wish for a woman to sacrifice herself for the child within her womb? Am I suggesting that such sacrifice is what should take place? No, not at all. Self preservation is a powerfully key instinct to both men and women, and not everyone possesses the courage and withal to sacrifice themselves for others. I cannot even say for certain that I do, myself, though I would sincerely hope that I do -- and would. But I am saying that there was a time, here in America, when women possessed such a zealous fervor and excitement at the very notion of bringing new life into this world that many would have given their lives freely for the privilege of doing so -- never giving such sacrifice a second thought. In the process of this deterioration of, what was once a woman's joyous blessing of childbirth, men have also lost sight of their moral character, integrity, and paternal instincts -- as honorable men -- to shoulder up responsibility in loving, raising, and supporting their own children, instincts that were once instilled and kept alive and functional, if nothing else, out of fear of a woman's angry father and the wrath he might inflict upon those who transgressed in violating his daughter. Yes, indeed, not all change is good change, as the freedom thought gained by women has handily translated into freedom from responsibility for men -- all too handily in my humble view.

As a man, I am clueless as to the feelings a woman might have in finding herself in an unwanted pregnancy, especially that of rape or incest -- pregnancy due to incest undoubtedly the result of rape in most every single incidence. I would never pretend to even faintly grasp a woman's feelings in such a helpless and seemingly hopeless situation. Yet, though a rapist has most certainly committed a heinous atrocity against a helpless and innocent woman, is the unborn child any less helpless and innocent than that of any other child conceived in a loving marriage, or the heat of a romantic moment? What wrong has any unborn child committed against anyone present upon this earth? ... What crime has a helpless and innocent fetus carried forth against its own mother, except that of its existence within her womb? …

Truly, in such unspeakable circumstances -- circumstances that render us men absolutely, indisputably, ineptly, clueless -- it would take a woman of exceptional kindness and tenderheartedness to raise a child that would, every single day of its life, remind her of a horrifying past she wishes to not remember, or relive, ever again. In sad reality, very few women possess such a kind and tender heart. In all honesty, for that matter, very few men possess such a kind and tender heart that would allow them to raise a child that was not their own, most especially if that child was conceived due to rape or a secret affair. Some hurts are simply too much to bear for a woman -- or a man.

At the same time, what has an unborn child, growing within the womb of an abused woman, done to deserve the death penalty of abortion? As the saying goes, “Two wrongs never make a right,” most especially when we are speaking of the right to take a human life, where an unborn child faces the death penalty for a crime committed by its father who, in many instances, gets off Scott free, totally unpunished whatsoever. We can each make our own excuses and think up a million justifications for our thinking and actions, but the truth, which screams to us from the heavens above, is that no fetus ever conceived in the womb, upon this earth since its creation, has ever done any wrong or committed any crime against anyone or any person -- especially not its own mother to whom it looks to and depends upon for nourishment, shelter, and survival. This is the truth we must face when speaking of exceptions to the rule of when an abortion is to be deemed as an acceptable and necessary course of right and proper action. How is a woman's decision to abort her child made deceptively easier? Simple: They are indoctrinated into the foolish conceptual belief that an, as yet, unborn fetus is just a piece of meat.

Development at 16 Weeks: The baby now measures about 4.3 to 4.6 inches and weighs about 3.5 ounces. You should be able to feel the top of your uterus about 3 inches below your belly button. The baby's eyes can blink and the heart and blood vessels are fully formed. The baby's fingers and toes have fingerprints. https://www.webmd.com/baby/ss/slideshow-fetal-development

Clearly, from what we see above, how could the fetus in the photo be considered as a piece of meat or a lump of tissue, and not human life in the developing? If the fetus shown above was (or is), in truth, only a lump of tissue or a piece of meat, as some would have us believe, then, no matter how long it grew in the womb or how large it became, it would always be nothing more than a lump of tissue or a piece of meat. It would never be human at all but, in fact, would be classified as a tumor. But, the reality is to date, no fetus has ever been classified or identified as a tumor.

So, why are women presented with deceptive jargon that leads them to believe that what grows within them is not human at all, but is only a lump of tissue -- only a piece of meat to be discarded at will and without consequence to anyone? I wish I could simply say that it was all because some wickedly cold-hearted people have reasoned out, in creating this malarkey, that if a woman is going to murder her child, then this stage of development is the kinder of cruelties, rather than waiting until the child is born to snuff out its life. To such cruelly simple reasoning, I would handily respond by asking: But kinder to whom, the unborn child to be destroyed, or the mother in saving her from witnessing the fact that the fetus growing inside of her is a unique human life that desires to live, grow, and experience life upon this earth, as we all have and do?

I truly wish that it was all as simple as that, rather than what is the horrifying truth of why women around the world are being deceived each and every day, into murdering their own unborn children: Abortion is a business -- Big Business for Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies that sell fetal tissue (by law at no alleged profit) to Biotech Companies (such as Senomyx), grants to major universities⁵ (such as (Columbia, Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Berkeley), and government funded research laboratories, that rake in billions annually; lining their pockets (like grave-robbers of olden days who robbed freshly dead bodies to sell them to those who justified their purchases in the name of Science) with the profits made from the peddling of human fetal flesh.

But, you might ask, how do such Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies, peddling fetal tissue at no profit, remain viable, operable, companies if they do not find some means of assuring themselves a profit, and where do they obtain aborted fetuses to peddle to Biotech Companies, Universities, and Government Funded Laboratories -- all of the above working together in unison as a monstrous, multi-headed, Hydra-Styled-Fetal-Flesh-Peddling-Pagan-God-Like-Entity (henceforth referred to, for simplicity's sake, as The Hydra Entity, operating within the gray shady areas of legality), that keeps its affairs tightly under wrap and protects its own? Where would such a fiendish Hydra Entity find a more than ample and daily replenish-able supply of freshly killed fetal produce? After all, every successful business must have and maintain a dependable source and supply of materials for, either, manufacturing, and or, packaging, shelving, distribution and presentation for resale.

It seems that, rather handily, the law regulating the use of aborted fetal tissue (the one that states fetal tissue cannot be sold for profit but can be donated with reasonable shipping and handling fees aptly charged) does not place, define, or specify, what exactly are reasonable shipping and handling charges, leaving a profits door open for Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies to stay more than prosperously afloat through sight unseen profits made from the charge of exorbitant shipping and handling fees.

And where do these Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies obtain freshly aborted fetuses? The Facilities of Planned Parenthood, of course (where employees, patients, and visitors, alike, are mentally programmed with false propagandized rhetorical Pro-Choice, Pro-Abortion, jargon), which effectively serve as a metaphorical -- but in reality a true -- Temple of worship that offers up human aborted fetus sacrifices to The Hydra Entity which profits, feeds, grows, and nourishes, itself off of the aborted fetus market they, themselves, have created (truly a modern day form of child sacrifice to the Hydra Entity god of Abortion) -- if one is fool enough to believe their propagandized lies … And this abomination of abominations (ascended from the depths of a smoldering hell to rival that of any ghastly horror movie ever made), perpetrated as a merciless assault against those unable to defend themselves or speak even a word in protest of their slaughter -- all in the name of Science and the Almighty Dollar, an Almighty Dollar that causes us to serve and obey The Hydra Entity, as we each unwittingly and ignorantly worship and serve this monstrosity of an Entity through our consumer purchases from companies (Pepsico⁹, Campbell Soup, Kraft Foods and Nestle) whose products contain taste enhancers developed through the use of aborted fetal cells, or have contained them in the past, until public outcry forced a few of them to announce that they would halt their use of aborted fetal cell developed taste enhancers.

This Hydra Entity's influence is more than present, in its murderous power, within each and every (metaphorical Temple of worship to The Hydra Entity) Planned Parenthood facility in the land, choosing to intelligently remain discretely invisible, hidden behind the scenes so that you and I will not see what a hideous monster The Hydra Entity truly is.

The Hydra Entity is, in fact, such an abhorrent monster, that it causes one to wonder who, in their right frame of mind or the goodness of their hearts, would wish to work for such companies and organizations. I mean, honestly, what kind of human being would desire to assist a woman in murdering her own child, by choosing to work at a Planned Parenthood facility or any abortion clinic -- knowing full well what that child's body tissue would most likely be used for? What kind of human being would desire employment as an acquisition agent for a Fetal Tissue Brokerage Company, working to acquire aborted fetuses in dedicating their lives (personally and financially) to the peddling of human fetal tissue? For that matter, what kind of human being would desire to be an employee of a Biotech Company, such as Senomyx, working with and cloning aborted fetal tissue to be used to develop taste enhancers that the public, unawares, would consume without the slightest notion of the fetal life that has paid the ultimate price for the tasty treats and soft drinks they so enjoy? I suspect such human beings as being much less than human, and even lower than animals.

What's more, during our discussion segment above regarding The Hydra Entity (along with footnotes I have provided for my readers as evidential proofs of what I have shared), an interesting point comes to light and this light is actually emanating forth from the very law that regulates The Hydra Entity's disgusting Abortion Industry. This light can actually be seen within my footnote number eight, titled as, Eight Things To Know About The Planned Parenthood Controversy, section two, where the footnoted article states and refers to, “quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.” Curiously now, if a fetus is truly nothing more than a lump of tissue or a piece of meat, as the Pro Choice and Pro-Abortion advocates would have us believe via their propagandized jargon, then why is fetal tissue regulated by law and referred to by such law as in fact being “human tissue?” If the fetal tissue is designated by law as being human, then that human fetal tissue was alive until it was torn from its mother's womb. And if it was living human tissue, then a fetus is a living human life, just as being in a state of living (we are each in a state of living) is indisputably equivocal with being alive and life itself. Once again, clearly a fetus is a human life and, as we witness with our own eyes, is stated as such by the very law of this land that allows the murder of our nation's unborn children, and, then, attempts to regulate its distribution and use. Regulations possibly stemming from some subconscious warped sense of guilt, somehow bubbling to the surface, by those government officials who penned these “human tissue” lines? One can only guess.

Also, be aware of this slippery tactic used by some Pro-Abortion advocates in attempting to make light of the fetal-cell-developed taste enhancer issue by stating that no actual fetal tissue is contained in the products that use taste enhancer technology, stating that the fetal tissue involved -- designated as HEK 293 (HEK stands for Human Embryonic Kidney cells, with 293 denoting that the HEK was from the 293^rd experiment) -- was taken from a single aborted fetus in the 70's, thus, this line of reasoning is supposedly intended to absolve our society (smooth things over) of any acquired or implied guilt in the murder and death of a child that could have grown up to be just like you and me, but instead was ripped from its mother womb to wind up as a test subject aiding money hungry researchers in developing taste enhancers for the express purpose of boosting consumer sales and dramatically increasing profits for, both, Senomyx and the collaborating companies that have chosen to support and contribute to this despicable project, while they ignore the fact that a human life has been brutally sacrificed all in the name of our consumer taste buds -- in the name of Science, once again, and the Almighty Dollar. Of course, PepsiCo's initial defense included a line of malarkey stating that the Beverage Giant sought to improve consumer health via its taste enhancer collaboration with Senomyx, also with no apparent thought to the lost life of an unborn child -- its fetal tissue doomed by abortion to be labeled as HEK 293 -- much less any thought to, or mention of, that murdered unborn child's health. This line of stunningly deceitful logic also seeks to subliminally program the notion into our minds that no other such fetal tissue is being used to develop other, newer, more, consumer or medical products, whatsoever, as though Brokerage Companies and Biotech Companies are able to remain profitably in business off the cloning of this one poor little fetus that was sacrificed to the Hydra Entity way back when in the seventies, in hopes of blinding us to the fact that, Brokerage Companies are continuing to sell fresh-kill-aborted-fetuses, daily, to universities, government research labs, and Biotech Companies. The sad reality? That poor, nameless, unborn child murdered by sacrifice to the Hydra Entity in the 70's, known only as HEK 293, is but the microscopic tip of the iceberg of what has transpired, and is continuing to transpire on a daily basis, within The Hydra Entity's Abortion Industry!

In closing this segment to continue on in sharing a message that is very important to me as a human being residing upon this planet earth, I would bring it to your attention that much of what I share within this article has been compiled and condensed from my own author notes attached to the many Anti-Abortion poems I have written over the years. If any of you, as my readers, have watched the news of late, then the truth of what I have shared above (above all, in importance, my footnotes) is more than evident -- in fact it is truthfully a disgusting reality that must be dealt a death blow ...

____________

The old saying, “Excuses are like arseholes, everybody has one,” seems to prove true all too often these days in Abortion advocate circles. In my attempts to reason with my Pro-Choice opponents, I have heard it said that many aborted children were simply not wanted, and were, therefore, better off dead than living in a world that does not want them -- statements like, “Oh, but unwanted children simply should not be born if they they are not going to be loved and cared for, poor things.” Such reasoning clearly confesses that aborted fetuses are human beings, and not simply a lump of meat or tissue.

I answer my opponents with this question: When was the last time you stood near a pregnant woman to clearly hear the child within her womb, screaming at the top of its developing lungs in rage, shouting, “Please, kill me! My parents don't want me! I don't want to live!” …? Need a child be wanted to be born, to be worthy of life? How many dogs and cats are born in this country each year that are, in fact, unwanted, yet every single one fights for life -- and that vigorously. What do most tenderhearted people do when presented with new and unwanted pets -- oftentimes the offspring of strays in their neighborhood or community? They care for and nurture those tiny newborn pets until suitable homes can be found for them, whereas the hardhearted cruelly kill them, dump them somewhere, or take them to a local Animal Shelter to be (adopted by someone seeking a pet for the very few that are lucky) properly disposed of -- properly disposed of a being polite terminology for their execution and death.

Why is it that we, as self professed, humane, human beings -- the term humane literally, in a word, defined as compassionate¹¹ -- cannot dedicate a small portion of our time and lives to caring for the unborn in the same tenderhearted manner that we would demonstrate toward an unwanted puppy or kitten, or a stray animal that had simply wandered into our lives? In the name of whatever God or Higher Power you serve (even if you believe yourself an Atheist), why do we not show the same mercy to our unborn children that we would readily show to a poor animal?

____________

As a human being who feels he is most blessed to have been born and walk this earth, I am clueless as to the feelings the unborn may have in finding themselves torn from their mother's wombs, dismembered, murdered, to never see the light of day or watch a sunset -- especially if they have fallen as victims of late term abortions. I, simply, cannot imagine how helplessly hopeless such horror might feel, yet so many will attempt to empathize and emulate such feelings for abused animals believing their abuse to be inhumane, and so we do have organizations, such as the SPCA (Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals) and The Humane Society, which exist in America solely for the defense and protection of animals.

Sadly, we fail to empathize or emulate such feelings for the unborn, for there is no organization that calls itself the Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Unborn Children. I say this to our shame in suggesting that we human beings might want to consider deleting the word humane from our vocabulary, simply because of our lack of compassion (compassionate, again, being the literal one word definition of humane -- what it is and truly should mean to be human in reference to all humanity) for our own unborn offspring truly renders us lower in the chain of life, decency, and compassion than that of most all animal life upon this planet earth, for even they, as cruel as they may seem to us, do not abort or rip their own offspring from their wombs.

Of course, someone will quickly point out that an animal may devour one of its offspring shortly after birth in order to give itself nourishment to feed and care for the remaining offspring of her litter. But such finger pointers will fail to point out that the mother does have the common decency to wait until its weak offspring has died (perhaps denying it milk in sensing it is the weakest of its litter, and unlikely to survive, in order to give precious nourishment to those stronger), they do not murder their own children upon delivery, nor do they enter their own wombs to extract and murder their own off spring out of pure and simple selfish acts of animal like behavior.

To reiterate, I am clueless as to the feelings the unborn may have in finding themselves torn from their mother's wombs, dismembered, murdered, to never see the light of day or watch a sunset -- especially if they have fallen as victims of late term abortions. However, I have given an honest effort to understand these unspoken, incomprehensible, feelings within the lines of my fictional story, Invasion Of The Metallic Tong Monster (attached at the conclusion of this article), in an attempt to cause any woman contemplating an unnecessary abortion to pause and reconsider her decision in enacting her rights, hoping she might choose to do that which is right, rather than proclaim her Women's Rights in terminating, not only her pregnancy but, the life of a child developing within the safe-haven-sanctuary of her womb.

____________

Amazingly, in moving right along, there are also people who justify their Pro-Choice stance by stating that the earth's natural resources are being depleted by over population, yet they, themselves, are free to live out their lives continuing to assist in the very raping and consumption of the earth's natural resources that they advocate as justification for unnecessary abortion and population control, passing on to the next generation the burden of a depleted earth, meanwhile depriving the unborn of the very life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness they, (again) themselves, have experienced in having been born (not aborted) and in living upon this earth -- seeking desperately to continue, protect, and proliferate, their own existence from day to day in hopes of living long, happy, prosperous, and healthy lives. I call those who possess such thinking (within their tiny self-encompassing-minds) -- teaching cow-patty-malarkey to young women -- egotistically-maniacally-selfishly-self-centered-hypocrites and incredulously-two-faced liars ...

Here is a bit of logical reasoning the disciples of Pro-Choice would not have you to contemplate: If the earth is truly over populated, if things are truly so desperate over the face of this planet that people cannot afford to have children or additional children, thus providing some semblance of an honorable excuse to commit the murders of countless unborn children each year, worldwide, then it would also be true that there would not be any readily available prospective parents seeking to adopt children.

The fact is, there are prospective parents who are seeking to adopt a child -- perhaps, because they cannot have children of their own, or simply because they love children and wish to offer an unfortunate child a loving home in which to live and grow to adulthood -- but find that they cannot due to the high costs and red tape involved in the adoption process, red tape meant to insure that adopted children will be placed in safe, healthy, loving, environments but, instead, actually serve to hinder the adoption process while, in the meantime, more and more unborn children are needlessly aborted each day.

No one would argue the point that there must be safeguards to protect children from prospective parents who truly would not be able to provide adequate care and loving homes for them, or who were seeking to adopt a child for abusively ulterior motives. At the same time, child protective regulations do need revamping to allow the adoption process to become one which attracts and encourages even more prospective parents by making the process affordable, with as little red tape as possible -- thus, speeding up the process and saving lives that would, otherwise, be terminated through unnecessary abortions.

After all, is it truly necessary that prospective parents be well off, financially, to become good and loving parents? I was raised in a poor home by parents who did not have very much in the way of money, but they did love me, and I am none the worse for it. In fact, growing up in a home where we did not have it all -- enduring a few hard times now and then -- helped to prepare me for the real world of adulthood where we don't always get everything we want, having learned as a child that we do get what we need, and what we need (what adopted children need) most of all is to love and be loved.

____________

In drawing this discussion towards its conclusion, please understand that the thoughts you see penned from heart above are not, were not, intended judgmentally towards women who have chosen an unnecessary abortion or those women who will choose an unnecessary abortion in the future. Women who abort their children, needlessly, have simply made a mistake, via the deception of the Hydra Entity, but it is a mistake made at the high price (in blood) of a human life -- her own unborn child. If there do exist feelings and thoughts of judgmental-ism, within the words my heart has penned to page, they are to be found in seeking to honestly and humbly judge the society we have allowed to be created around us, within us, and before us -- a society that accepts, believes, and promotes lies, and has ceased from valuing human life.

Our society has changed dramatically, and with that change has come a change in, both, lifestyle and terminology. Today a woman who is going to have a baby is said to be pregnant, pregnant being a term which erases the emotion and feeling of the humanity of the fetus within her womb. It was once said -- for many thousands of years -- that, “She is with child,” which clearly recognized that a woman carried within her a child, a human being, a life waiting to see its very first sunny day, safe and protected within the sanctuary of its mother's womb. Society's terminology change has handily dehumanized the unborn.

How do you teach your children to value human life, when we, as a society, do not value human life and excuse ourselves by simply making the determination that a child who has not yet taken a breath is not yet human, and is therefore fair game to be aborted at whim? In doing so, we are teaching our children that unborn children are not helpless and innocent and are fair game for extermination by abortion, and, at the end of the day, no one is truly worthy of life upon this planet, nor exempt from their pent up fury in a world gone mad, released in random rage shooting sprees we all watch in shock upon our televisions. Why are we so shocked? We care more for animals and the harm that might befall them, than we do about our own human and unborn children. Shame on us! Our children learn from our words, our actions, our beliefs, our loves, our hates, and our attitudes. They watch us intently, learning to imitate all we are. We have taught them all they know!

Honestly now, as my readers, ask yourself this question, answering from the very depths of your heart where all that heartfelt humanely defined compassion for poor, helpless, mistreated, animals resides: How can it be possible that the unborn are less innocent, less helpless, than the children who are growing up among us? In recent years there has been shooting after shooting with innocent young adults and children murdered, their lives cut all too short. Can you answer this question in your heart? Are unborn children any less innocent and helpless than were those at Newtown, Connecticut? … Columbine, Colorado?

We are reaping, in our society, exactly that which we are teaching and allowing our children to be taught. Banning all the guns in the world will not end the problems we face in our nation today, and will not change the fact that, as a society, we have failed our own children as parents, as teachers, as neighbors, as friends, and as leaders -- morally, ethically, spiritually and politically.

In my humble opinion, guns are not the problem here, we, as a society, are.

In my final estimation and sincere belief, no one is safe in our society when the yet unborn are not safe.

___________

The bottom line, at the end of any day, is: The rights of the innocent, weak, helpless, and defenseless must always take precedence over the rights of those who are strong and, because of their strength, are thus obligated by moral conscience and the simplicity of human logic to defend those who dearly need defending, and to protect those who dearly need protecting.

Anything short of this is insanity in the name of claiming ones rights by the right of might rather than demonstrating ones right to set rights aside in doing that which is right, decent, moral, ethical, and merciful … I believe this properly defines what most people would call love.

Our nation was founded upon these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

When a man and a woman join together in making love and she becomes pregnant, human life is created within her womb, “created equal,” though yet unborn and, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The Creator spoken of within our nation's Declaration of Independence is not the man whose seed fertilized a waiting egg, nor is it the woman (or else mankind is playing God) within whose womb human life has now begun to grow, but it is the Creator of all life upon this planet, from whom we each are given, by Him, the same unalienable rights, or else we truly do not believe the quoted words above, and in such a case we then have no right to claim such rights, most especially, while ignoring the rights of the unborn to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ...

There are humanely viable options to unnecessary abortion. If a woman will not, or finds that she simply cannot, raise and love her own child, adoption is a life preserving option to an unnecessary abortion. In light of the reality of the number of abortions taking place in our nation each and every day of each and every year, I find myself absolutely befuddled that the option of adoption is not recognized and sought after as the life saving light at the end of the tunnel of unnecessary abortion that it truly is. Why is there not more focus placed upon reforming adoption laws that will enable potentials parents to adopt children more easily, while also insuring that they will be raised in the protection of loving and caring homes? Why does our government not seek to promote legislation that would provide financial incentives to encourage the adoption of children over abortion, rather than funding and supporting the Hydra Entity? Why is that, I wonder? Do you wonder? The answer is a simple, but demented, one: To promote the Big Business of fetal cell research, regardless of the cost ( both moral & ethical) to unborn human life, as being in the name of Progress, Technology, Science, and the Almighty Dollar -- true worship of the insidiously nefarious Hydra Entity that is the Abortion Industry.

The Hydra Entity works behind the scenes -- ravenously seeking new converts through the Temple of worship represented metaphorically by Planned Parenthood -- to maintain a steady supply of sacrificially aborted fetuses in protecting its carnivorously cannibalistic appetite as a monster that gets its jollies from the peddling of human fetal flesh, the realization of ever increasing annual fetal blood money profits, and the assurance of an ever increasing supply of aborted fetuses (future fetal harvests) through Pro-Choice propaganda fed to young women, as well as government officials who have the power and position to put a halt to the slaughter of our nation's unborn children and to remove the obstacles that daunt prospective parents from adopting children less expensively without all the entanglements of encumbering red tape -- but simply decline from doing so for their own politically and financially motivated selfish reasons.

Yes, you understood what I just said, perfectly. The Big Business of fetal cell research (the Hydra Entity) wants your unborn children -- wants them dead -- so that they may peddle them piece by bloody piece upon the world markets of research and experimentation, and all that, for the Almighty Dollar. If this is not so, then why do we not see or hear of incidents of Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies, Biotech Companies, and Planned Parenthood Facilities, clamoring, pushing, and working, for child adoption regulation reforms that would allow for more children to be born and adopted, rather than slaughtered and murdered, torn from their mother's wombs? … But we don't do we? ...

Why is adoption not promoted as a first line of defense for the unborn and the preferred alternative to unnecessary abortions? If people seek to adopt, are they not planning on becoming parents? Is this not Planned Parenthood? Should this not be the ultimate goal of all Planned Parenthood Facilities across our land?

Adoption is a reasonable, logical, ethical, moral, merciful, compassionately viable, option to ending the slaughter of our unborn children and the shameful act of unnecessary abortion.

Please stand with me in defending the rights of the unborn to, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” To take any other stand, to stubbornly remain Pro-Choice, is to aid and abet a monster -- the fetal flesh peddling monster that is fetal cell research, and is the insidiously nefarious Hydra Entity that is the Abortion Industry. Those who choose to feed monsters, rather then destroy them, run the risk of appearing, themselves, to be monsters -- and that by choice, Pro-Choice, Pro-Abortion.

The next time you think of an aborted fetus, please consider and envision this thought carefully: That fetus could have been me -- it could have been you ...

Let's stop the carnage now!

“I'm a reasonable person,

and if people can come up with

a reasonable explanation

of why they'd like to kill a baby,

I'll listen.” -- Dr. Ben Carson

(Written November 4^th, 2015)

Author's Note

EVIDENTIAL FOOTNOTE PROOFS:

1Big Business — Sept 21, 2015 ... The stock market may have been a rollercoaster in recent weeks, yet over the past year biotech shares have mostly outperformed Wall Street as a whole. That accounts for one interesting finding in this year's GEN List of Top 25 Biotech Companies — a 23.7% jump, to $1.225 trillion, in the combined market capitalization of the companies whose stocks made the list compared with the $990.89 billion racked up by the top 25 Biotech Companies of 2014 … http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence-/top-25-biotech-companies-of-2015/77900519/ The rich are getting richer when it comes to publicly traded biotechnology companies, judging by their ballooning market capitalization … http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence-/top-25-biotech-companies-of-2014/77900218/#gsaccess

2Fetal Tissue Brokerage Companies — Denise Grady & Nicholas Fleur, July27, 2015 … “ … Companies that obtain the tissue from clinics and sell it to laboratories exist in a gray zone, legally. Federal law says they cannot profit from the tissue itself, but the law does not specify how much they can charge for processing and shipping ...” Http://mobil.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/heath/fetal-tissue-from-abortions-for-research-is-traded-in-a-gray-zone.html?referer=

3Biotech Companies — A biotechnology company is a company whose products or services primarily use biotechnology methods for their production, design or delivery. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity defines 'biotechnology' as: “Any technological application that uses biological systems, living organism, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use.” In other words, biotechnology can be defined as the mere application of technical advances in life science to develop commercial products. Today, no comprehensive global database of biotech companies is available online, despite the fact that a free and open access project was launched in late 2014. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biotechnology_companies

4Senomyx — September 1, 2011 ... Senomyx is a high tech research and development business that is “dedicated to finding new flavors to reduce sugars and reduce salt.” But their focus is not on whole organic fruits and vegetables, or grass-pasturized meats, dairy and eggs. Senomyx develops patented flavor enhancers by using “proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems.” … That's a testing system that provides scientists with biochemical responses and electronic readouts when a flavor ingredient interacts with their patented receptor, letting researchers know whether or not their flavor enhancer is effective. The receptors are made from HEK293 — HEK stands for Human Embryonic Kidney cells, with 293 denoting that the HEK was from the 293rd experiment. HEK293 originally came from a healthy, electively aborted baby whose cells were then harvested and cloned. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/archive/2011/09/01/what-you-don't-know-about-flavor-enhancers-can-harm-you.aspx

5Fetal Cell Research Grants – “ … Denise Grady & Nicholas Fleur, July27, 2015 ... The National Institutes of Health spent $76 million on research using fetal tissue in 2014 with grants to more than 50 universities, including Columbia, Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford, Yale and the University of California in Berkeley, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco. It expects to spend the same amount in 2015 and 2016 ...” Http://mobil.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/heath/fetal-tissue-from-abortions-for-research-is-traded-in-a-gray-zone.html?referer=

6Hydra — … the Hydra was an ancient serpentine water monster with reptilian trais in Greek and Roman mythology. … It possessed many heads(“more than the vase-painters could paint”) and, each time one was lost, it was replaced by two more. It had poisonous breath and blood so virulent that even its scent was deadly. ... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Lernaean_Hydra

7Fetal Tissue Donations — Kimberly Leonard, Sept 4, 2015 … Donated tissue can be used for things like cosmetics research, and women might not be aware … The consent form patients at Planned Parenthood sign if the choose to donate fetal tissue after an abortion explains that such tissue has been used in the research on diabetes, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, cancer, and AIDS. Women are asked to initial several parts of the form, including a line that reads: “I agree to give my blood and/or the tissue from the abortion as a gift to be used for education, research or treatment.” … The reality, however, is that Planned Parenthood – or any abortion provider – has only a limited ability to specify the purpose for which fetal tissue will ultimately be used. Even Planned Parenthood seems to tacitly acknowledge this in its form, another section which requires women to initial a line that reads: “I understand I have no control over who will get the donated blood and/or tissue or what it will be used for.” http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/09/04/beyond-abortion-and-planned-parenthood-regulating-fetal-tissue

8Eight Things To Know About The Planned Parenthood Controversy — Will Cabaniss, Joshua Gillin, August 5, 2015 … Controversial videos released by an anti-abortion group have highlighted the murky guidelines for using fetal tissue for research purposes … Confused about what's going on? We're here to help. Here's our rundown of eight things we know – and don't know – about fetal tissue donation and Planned Parenthood ...1. It is illegal to sell fetal tissue. But donations are legal … The National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993 allows a woman to consent to donating fetal tissue after an abortion. The federal law sets restrictions that prevent the woman from knowing or having a say in how the tissue is used, or profiting from it. … Fetuses also can't be aborted for the specific purpose of using tissue, especially to sell it. The option can't be discussed with the woman until after she has decided to have an abortion. … Researchers have used fetal tissue since the 1930's; experimentation on the tissue was instrumental in eventually developing the polio vaccine. Current studies are using the tissue to research diseases like AIDS, muscular dystrophy and Parkinson's disease. … 2. The law allows for “reasonable” fees to cover the group's costs of donating the tissue. … Part of the video shows Deborah Nucatola, senior director of medical services at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, telling undercover activists that tissues can be obtained for fees in the $30 to $100 range. Activists against abortion rights point to this as proof that Planned Parenthood is “selling the body parts of aborted children.” … But the 1993 law also makes allowances for “reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.” … The fees Nucatola discusses in the video likely fall under that definition, experts told PolitiFact. … 3. Nothing specifies how much appropriate fees should be. … What counts as a “reasonable payment” is not explicitly outlined in the law. Organizations don't have to publicly report how much they are charging buyers that process the tissue and isolate specific cells before selling them to researchers. Activists in the videos were posing as brokers and went back and forth with Nucatola to get her to disclose Planned Parenthood's fees. … The amounts she cites do not appear to be out of the ordinary, but no one knows because there is no registry or compendium of fees charged by organizations (or) institutions supplying fetal tissue,” said Arthur Caplan, director of the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University's Langone Medical Center. “When she haggles about fees, that does not appear to me to be trying to profit.” … 4. There are no regulations for what brokers charge researchers, either. … While abortion clinics or hospital sometimes provide tissue directly to researchers, organizations or private companies like the tissue brokers mentioned above often act as middlemen. Profiteering may be occurring on this level Caplan said. … Caplan said brokers can resell tissue to researchers at what seem like fairly high markups, but “regulations don't exist on fees, so what they charge is set by market.” … California based StemExpress is one such broker and is cited in one of the Center for Medical Progress videos as contracting with Planned Parenthood for fetal tissue. The company charges fees for many kinds of human cells, from $100 for a vial of peripheral blood to $24,000 for a vial of highly concentrated fetal liver cells. The company reported $2.2 million in revenue in 2013, according to a profile in Inc. Magazine. … Prue Talbot, the director of the Stem Cell Center at the University of California, Riverside, agreed with a StemExpress statement that said research methods and expensive medical equipment are expensive. Talbot said skilled technicians that can isolate and preserve specific kinds of cells also command high salaries, driving up costs. … 5. Political pressure is driving the issue in some states. … Since the videos were released, at least 12 states, including Florida, Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina, have called for investigation into the organization's tissue program. … States follow the federal law, but Wisconsin legislators have vowed to ban fetal tissue donation in the fall. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a presidential candidate, canceled his state's contract with Planned Parenthood even though the two facilities in that state don't offer abortion services. … “It is against the law for any organization to sell body parts,” Florida Gov. Rick Scott said on July 29. “If a Planned Parenthood office is not following the law, we will move quickly to take legal and regulatory action against them.” … Florida's health services agency announced Aug. 5 that three facilities would be cited for performing second-trimester abortions without a proper license and a fourth will be cited for improper recordkeeping following its investigation. … Planned Parenthood says it only has donation programs in a few states. But we don't know which ones. … Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards has said her organization conducts tissue donations in “less than five” states. … But no one – not from Planned Parenthood, its state affiliates or companies that procure the stem cells – will disclose the states where this happens. … A spokeswoman for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the organization's national wing, cited security concerns. So far, affiliates in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Indiana and Florida have denied having any form of a tissue donation program. … 7. Federal law does not require Planned Parenthood to disclose this information on their tax forms. … You may think that because Planned Parenthood receives federal money, it has to disclose more information about its business, including the fetal tissue donation locations. … But that's not the case. … Planned Parenthood is a network of affiliated organizations that cooperate with each other, led by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. As a registered 501(c)(4) nonprofit, each affiliate only has to release a yearly tax report called a Form 990. On the 990, those affiliates have to list their five largest contractors, but don't have to provide any other details about their operations. … 8. Abortions do not make up the majority of Planned Parenthood's services. But neither do mammograms. … The tissue donation controversy has reignited the country's abortion wars, with advocates and critics alike slinging statistics about what Planned Parenthood really does. … In a recent interview with GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, Fox Business reporter Smith said “almost 95 percent of all their pregnancy services were abortions.” … That rates false. The cherry-picked statistic traces back to a political action committee that opposes abortion. By the group's measure, which considered only Planned Parenthood's reported abortions, prenatal care services and adoption referrals, abortions made up 94 percent of Planned Parenthood's “pregnancy services.” But the majority of Planned Parenthood's work does not focus on prenatal care, and the group does not keep records on how many pregnant women it refers to outside health care providers. … Democratic presidential candidate and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley went the opposite direction, telling reporters “97 percent of the work that Planned Parenthood does is about mammograms and preventative health.” … That rates half true. The 97 percent figure accounts for services other than abortion, including contraception, STD testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and more. Preventative care comprises about 85 to 90 percent of all their services. Mammograms are part of that group, but Planned Parenthood doesn't offer mammograms. They perform breast exams and give referrals to outside clinics that provide mammograms. … http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/aug/05/politifact-sheet-8-things-know-about-plan-national/

9 Pro-lifers drop boycott after Pepsi disavows use of aborted fetal-cells — Victor Morton, April 30, 2012 … A pro-life group called off its yearlong boycott of Pepsi products Monday after the soft drink giant provided assurances it would no longer use an aborted fetal-cell line to develop flavor enhancers. … Children of God for Life revealed last year that PepsiCo had contracted with Senomyx Inc., a San Diego biotech company that listed HEK-293, “a human embryo kidney” cell line produced from an aborted fetus in the 1970's, in more than 70 patents related to flavor enhancers. Http://m.washingtontimes.com/new/2012/apr/30/pro-lifers-drop-pepsi-boycott/

10Company Uses Cells From Abortions to Test Artificial Flavors — STEVEN ERTELT Mar 29,2011 … A pro-life group that monitors the use of cells from babies victimized by abortion is today highlighting a biotech company, Senomyx, which it says produces artificial flavor enhancers using aborted fetal cells lines to test their products. … The group Children of God for Life is call for a public boycott of major food companies partnering with Senomyx. … Debi Vinnedge, the director of the pro-life organization, tells LifeNews.com today that, in 2010, her group wrote to Senomyx CEO Kent Snyder and pointed out that moral options for testing their food additives could and should be used. But when Senomyx ignored her letter, the group wrote to the companies Senomyx listed on their website as “collaborators” warning them of public backlash and threatened boycott. They included food giants PepsiCo, Kraft Foods, Campbell Soup, Solae and Nestle. … The company's key flavor programs focus on the discovery and development of savory sweet and salt flabor ingredients that are intended to allow for the reduction of MSG, sugar in food and beverage products,” the Senomyx web site says, “Using isolated human taste receptors, we created proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems that provide a biochemical or electronic readout when a flavor ingredient interacts with the receptor.” … Vinnedge says a boycott is important because the collaborating companies provide Senomyx with research and development funding plus royalties on sales of products using their flavor ingredients. … “What they don't tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 – human embryonic kidney cells taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors,” she said. “They could have easily chosen animal, insect, or other morally obtained human cells expressing the G protein for taste receptors.” … Vinnedge says she has contacted the food companies working with Senomyx, but said it took three letters before once company, Nestle, finally admitted its relationship with Senomyx and company officials claimed the line of cells from abortions was “well established in scientific research.” … Both PepsiCo and Campbell Soup also responded. … PepsiCo wrote: “We hope you are reassured to learn that our collaboration with Senomyx is strictly limited to creating lower-calorie, great tasting beverages for consumers. This will help us achieve our commitment to reduce added sugar per serving by 25% in key brands in key markets over the next decade and ultimately help people live healthier lives.” … Campbell Soup officials told the pro-life group: “Every effort is made to use the finest ingredients and develop the greatest selection of products, all at a great value. With this in mind, it must be said that the trust we have cultivated and developed over th years with our consumers is not worth compromising to cut costs or increase profit margins.” … While Campbell Soup didn't state they would change their methods, their response, gave Vinnedge hope. … “If enough people voice their outrage and intent to boycott these consumer products, it may convince Senomyx to change their methods,” she said, “Otherwise we will be buying Coca-Cola, Lipton soups and Hershey products.” … UPDATE: Within hours of its press statement to LifeNews.com, the pro-life group received notice from Campbell Soup that the company has severed its ties with Senomyx. Juli Mandel Sloves, Senior Manager of Nutrition & Wellness Communications at Campbell Soup Company, told Vinnedge, “We are no longer in partnership with Senomyx. This fact was discussed during the Senomyx conference call with its investors earlier this month.” http://www.lifenews.com/2011/03/29/company-uses-fetal-cells-from-abortions-for-articfial-flavors/

11Humane — 1. characterized by kindness, mercy, sympathy, etc 2. inflicting as little pain as possible https://www.thefreedictionary.com/humane

12Humane — “A humane person is one who shows great compassion and caring for others, including animals, and who tries whenever possible to alleviate another's suffering. The idea of being humane is linked to a higher level of a person's character. While the word is derived from the word human, the sad fact is that a person can be human without being humane. Britain's Royal Humane Society, created in 1774 to rescue drowning people, focuses on recognizing acts of human bravery. In the United States, however, the Humane Society works to eliminate cruelty to animals.” www.vocabulary.com