WATCH: Millennials will sign petition to save baby eagles, but not baby humans

NEWS ABORTION, POLITICS - U.S. Fri Sep 6, 2019 - 1:59 pm EST

WATCH: Millennials will sign petition to save baby eagles, but not baby humans

Calvin FreiburgerCalvin Freiburger

LOS ANGELES, California, September 6, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Many on the political Left are passionate about humane treatment of animals while favoring the destruction of preborn human beings, an inconsistency highlighted this week in a new video by Prager University (PragerU).

In the video, PragerU’s Will Witt presents several Los Angeles residents in Echo Park with a petition to protect eagle eggs from destruction (something that is already illegal under federal law). The reactions are uniformly positive, from “of course don’t kill eagles” to “for sure, yeah, definitely” to “I hope you save the eagles.” But those same signatories all change their tune when Witt reveals a second petition advocating the same protection . . .



. . . In March, Democrat lawmakers embraced legislation to ban killing kittens for scientific research, while at the same time almost uniformly opposing legislation to require basic medical care for human newborns who survive failed abortions. Pro-lifers have long lamented the double-standard of left-wing subcultures passionately championing the inviolability of animal life while enthusiastically supporting abortion-on-demand.

I heard the audio from this video played on the radio yesterday.

These people were proudly pro-abortion and coldly so.
Notice how their demeanor changed from cute baby eagles
to baby humans?


Rubbish. That is current law.

Not “rubbish”.

Abortuaries are not even set up for neonatal emergencies (much less even attempt to provide this care for the babies).

All these kids need just what any other kid needs.

Emergency neonatal care.

You sitting around and denying what has already taken place (doing “nothing” or hastening death of these children) isn’t going to make it so.

It is just another chapter of ipse dixit from you dvdjs.


Rubbish. Current law requires basic medical for anyone born alive. That is a fact, not a matter of my say so.

1 Like

dvdjs (attempting to support wrong ipse dixit argumentation) . . .

Current law requires basic medical for anyone born alive.

Go ahead and tell me what you think “basic medical care” is.

And while you’re at it, tell me what being “born” is too.

If they keep the baby hooked up to the umbilical cord, then can they still murder it (do the heinous act of “abortion”)?

1 Like

That which is required fro all human beings in our country. The Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 requires that.

1 Like

Millenials often get a bad rap, but they’re actually becoming more pro-life, as science proves that life begins at conception, the embryo’s heartbeat, etc.

dvdjs . . .

The Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 requires that.

Go ahead and link to it and show me exactly what you are alluding to please.

And show me where the definition of being born is. (I get the “pulsation of the umbilical cord” thing. But a simple clamp of the umbilical cord (which is routine prior to cutting a cord) removes that pulse.

And show me where you get the emergency care that I called for.

Show me the law and show me the penalty for breaking the law.

I see a “Report” but I am afraid I missed the details I am looking for.

Since you seem to know more about laws than me, why not just show me these specific things I asked about that you say are all there?

Here is one link.

Perhaps you have other information.

I’ll be waiting dvdjs. And I’m going to read what you link to.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit