Aborted babies are being incinerated to provide electricity in the United States

biohazard-bags

After reports a few weeks ago that aborted babies are burned to heat hospitals in the UK, today we get this:

The remains of aborted humans are being shipped to a US power facility, in order to provide electricity to Oregon residents.

The British Colombia Health Ministry has confirmed that ‘medical waste’ is sent to our country to be converted to electricity in waste-to-power plants. ‘Medical waste,’ in this brave new world of ours, includes amputated limbs, cancerous tissue, and the bodies of murdered children.

I don’t have any long tirade for you. I just need you to understand what’s happening here in your one nation under God. We are incinerating slaughtered babies so that we can charge our iPhones and power our televisions.

If we displace a few caribou to build a pipeline, or disadvantage a couple of dolphins to drill for oil, the public outrage cannot be contained. The cries of injustice and eco-treason can be heard across the land. But using the corpses of dead kids like firewood? Well, that’s just a practical cost-saving measure, now isn’t it?

God help us. And God help the sick, perverted, psychopaths who can’t recognize this for the atrocity that it is. We kill these human beings, can’t we at least treat their bodies with dignity?

I read these stories and I remember the accounts of ancient pagans burning their children alive as a sacrifice to the god Moloch.

tumblr_mbyexeYCke1qf1b42o1_500

These are terrifying times. Don’t let yourself be too buried in piles of Tweets and selfies and Netflix binges to notice that the ship is sinking straight to hell.

In our comfort and our apathy, we scoff and say, ‘ah, it can’t be that bad.’

But it is that bad.

And it will only get worse from here if we don’t wake up.

 

*****

Update: LifeSiteNews reports that the Marion County Board of Commissioners have announced that the practice of burning aborted babies for power will be stopped immediately. They claim that they were unaware of the practice, but will now put it to an end.

This is a positive development, but it does not make this story any less outrageous.

*****

A response to the dismissive “what’s the big deal?” comments:

Look, if you don’t believe in God, and you reject the sanctity of life, and you believe that we are all nothing but a collection of random molecules, then I suppose I can’t really explain why the body of a deceased human ought to be treated with dignity. Particularly if you accept and promote abortion, I can’t tell you why dead bodies should be treated with respect, when you don’t even think living bodies should be treated with respect.

All I can do, in your case, is appeal to that natural instinct, that voice inside your head — “conscience,” it’s called — that tells you cannibalism is depraved, even if the person is already dead. What we have here is a form of Industrial Age cannibalism: using dead bodies for fuel.

All I can do is remind you that, God forbid, if your child died, or your mother, or you sister, you would be outraged in the very pit of your being if someone spit on their corpse, or defiled it in someway. By your professed logic, the act shouldn’t bother you. After all, you say, that body isn’t them. They’re gone. They are nothingness now. They don’t exist. What does it matter?

But we both know that it does matter. The only difference is that you don’t understand WHY it matters, or else you pretend not to, whereas I, and many other commenters on here, do.

I know it’s awfully cool and terribly trendy to carry on like materialistic utilitarians who scoff at totally outdated and completely old fashioned concepts like dignity and decency. I know we have this habit nowadays of thinking a thing is pointless if it can’t be ‘used’ in some manner. And, if a thing can be used, then we tend to say that it should be used, just on the principle that useless things have no right to take up space on this planet. But, again, deep in my heart, I know that deep in your heart you see this attitude for the vacant, hollow, lie that it is.

Yes, the body of a deceased human is useless. Yes, it can, apparently, be converted into electricity and, yes, electricity is useful. Yes, and so what? The Mona Lisa is useless, should we chop it up for firewood? Your grandmother isn’t nearly as useful as she once was, should we send her the farm to be put down? Music is useless, should we throw all the guitars and pianos into the inferno also?

No? Then maybe, just maybe, you really DO understand that sometimes the value of a thing has no relation to its usefulness.

What I’m saying is this: the body of a deceased child is useless, yes. But it has value. It has dignity. It deserves to be treated with respect.

Now, to those who call themselves Christians but still make excuses for this practice: you should be ashamed. Truly, you should be ashamed. Our bodies and our souls are not two separate entities. Your exterior is not some fleshy shell. Your body and your soul are in harmony with one another, and the two, together, make you you.

Jesus Christ became man, and this act forever puts to rest the debate about whether or not the human body, in and of itself, deserves to be respected and treated with dignity. God Himself took its form, forever elevating that form to something sacred. End of discussion. The argument is settled.

You are a Christian, are you not?

In any case, Christian or Jew or Muslim or Atheist, we should all be, at the very least, civilized people.

Civilized people don’t burn dead babies for fuel. They just don’t.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

771 Responses to Aborted babies are being incinerated to provide electricity in the United States

  1. Sarah B says:

    I don’t have any additional comments to add, but can you *please* fix the spelling of British Columbia? …Thanks

  2. Although I agree with every other thing you’ve said, I think this is enough:
    “Civilized people don’t burn dead babies for fuel. They just don’t.”

  3. ryan0991 says:

    You mean aborted fetuses are being incinerated. What would you rather be done with them? I’m not prone to emotional knee-jerk reactions, so I have no problem with this.

  4. Jenna Lolly says:

    You think that is bad you should read the modest proposal and you’ll see how the world has been doing this for years!

  5. Kevin says:

    It takes energy to incinerate remains, it doesn’t create energy. You can’t produce power with something that isn’t a source of energy. I suppose you could ferment the remains to produce some kind of fetus alcohol and burn that, but I imagine that would also result in a net energy loss.

  6. Heather says:

    This conversation thread is both discouraging and alarming. What you do with the aborted babies isn’t nearly as big an issue as the fact that they were aborted, not recognized as life in the first place. Why would it be surprising that the murdered child (a.k.a. “blob of cells”) was thrown away like rubbish? And for pity’s sake, shut up about the “conservatives denying women access to birth control”. I’m literally nauseated with the absurdity of that argument. What form of birth control is being withdrawn from availability? The conservatives are accused of “denying access” because they do not want to foot the bill. Not funding is not the same as “denying access; it’s the same as saying, “If it’s important to you (like cigarettes, lottery tickets, and TOILET PAPER, which are also not federally funded), YOU find a way to pay for it. Are the liberals willing to fund a short term missions trip or a Bible study in a public school? At some point, we need to be responsible, even financially, for our own choices.

  7. Christian says:

    What makes a fetus innocent? I understand they didn’t live a life, but the fact that they didn’t live any sort of life should not make them innocent, let alone guilty of anything. Just because they have a heartbeat does not mean they have a conscience. Many people who have abortions are because they don’t have the means to take care of one. Would we rather bring a child into this world where they would not be properly cared for? Oh well there’s adoption, because everyone that goes into adoption leads amazing lives because they are picked up by loving caring families. Speaking from the stories my own mother was told about how her life was going through foster care, why would you want to put any kid through that? Not every kid given up for adoption gets that loving family, so now we have hundreds of kids given up for adoption because they weren’t aborted, and they have to go through hell with the possibility of not having biological parents. Don’t want to incinerate our children? Alright let’s bury them. Now we have to take hundreds upon thousands of new grave sights for these fetuses. Who’s going to attend this funeral? Who’s going to pay to get the gravestone and site? The kid who had to get an abortion because they couldn’t afford the kid in the first place? Who just spent $500 on an abortion? You have no real alternatives. We can’t house and feed every child in america, it’s just not practical. We barely have the money for it now. Yes I get our money says “One nation under god” on it, but there is separation of church and state. This article is nothing but sensationalism, using Pathos to target your emotions without thinking of the practicalities or of smart alternatives. To everyone saying people who accept what’s going on here are “immoral” or are “sheep” sit back and think for a second. You are just as much of sheep as we are, simply following what a blogger, or the bible, or the news, or your friends, or your church tells you. I’m not saying anything against religion, it has its pros and its cons just like everything does. So instead of just saying “lets feed all the kids” “lets bury all of them” “we shouldnt be doing this” actually figure out a solution, or an alternative that isn’t just a grand remark. I personally agree with what’s going on, but if there is a better, smarter option, I wouldn’t be opposed.

  8. chamblee54 says:

    This post currently has 661 comments. If there are four comments ahead of me in the moderation que, then I can be number 666. My blog, chamblee54 dot wordpress dot com, has a tasteful commentary on this post.

  9. ShdB says:

    But wait. For those who support abortion, how can these remains be anything more than “human tissue,” such as infected tonsils or a putrid gallbladder? Why be shocked or outraged? Why, for that matter, is abortion such a difficult decision (as the pro-abortion community laments), if we’re only talking about “tissue?” You can’t have it both ways. If it’s tissue, no big deal…remove it, burn it. If it’s a baby, killing it is first degree murder. And every single one of us knows within our deepest selves which it is.

  10. Ron Maynor says:

    Thanks, Matt. I get so frustrated with other Christians who think everything is fine as long as the sermon isn’t too long or work isn’t too hard. Ask them to vote for decency? “That’s political!” No, that’s life, and death. God is not pleased with us hiding our heads in the sand.

  11. Bohicamonster says:

    Who cares!? I need my iPhone!

  12. Sketch says:

    Ever read the Book “Brave New World” by Huxley?
    Creepy when life imitates negative utopia art…

  13. The lame excuse that they didn’t know doesn’t hold water. You knew. You would know where all of your “material” was coming from that you were using and someone knew this was happening. If they wanted to be honest, they would have said, “we didn’t care, but now we care that people are angry at us and we don’t want any more calls, emails, or letters, so we will stop in order to get the harassment to end”. Disgusting.

  14. Reblogged this on grace abounds in deep waters and commented:
    We cannot sit back and allow this or pretend as if it didn’t happen. I don’t know how we’ve gotten so far away from Jesus.. Even so, come Lord Jesus!

  15. Pingback: The New Holocaust In America. | M. Sheridan

  16. if you dont like the way unwanted aborted babies are being deposed of , the form a group and go to hospitals to collect the aborted babies to make them a funeral…. its ovbious that the mother of that babie dont want anything to do with the baby. and for the people that say that burning the is the way to recicle the body, well a my biologi teacher told us, htat the way to retur to eart what we took from it (FOOD) is to be buried directly in the ground with out a casquet, or to lets us lay on the ground so that other animals que eat us and be usefull to them. my mom wants to donate her body for science, so her empty body can be usefull after her death,. now if the isue is that those babies dindt have a natural death, or didnt get to live, well then thats the parents fault, not the hospitals or the companies thata are burning then ……

  17. Edik415 says:

    “Update: LifeSiteNews reports that the Marion County Board of Commissioners have announced that the practice of burning aborted babies for power will be stopped immediately. They claim that they were unaware of the practice, but will now put it to an end.

    This is a positive development, but it does not make this story any less outrageous.”

    No, it doesn’t make it any less outrageous. Just irrelevant. If it’s not occurring any more, then there’s no reason to be angry about it occurring.

    • firefighter1230 says:

      Tell that to NAACP or Al Sharpton about slavery. I’d be willing to bet you don’t condone that and it upsets you that it happened. Why is the government still paying millions, if not billions, every year to Native American reservations? We aren’t taking their land anymore so there’s no reason for them to be angry about it, so we shouldn’t have to continue to pay them. That was a ridiculous argument about this whole thing.

  18. AmandaM says:

    So what? Do you think cremating bodies is also horrible, or just the aborted fetuses?
    Burying bodies is such a colossal waste of land, and has no purpose, we should all be burned after we die.
    What makes the cremation of fetal bodies so much more despicable than the burning of other medical waste?
    Yet another post just so you can decry abortion.

    • Crash says:

      How can you read this and believe that it is the burning that outrages us? Did you fail reading comprehension in school? Or do you so ardently support the murder of the unborn that you ignore your conscience and reduce the arguments here into “dur hur, fundamentalists are afraid of fire”? Are you so eager to make yourself feel better about this that you would redefine something so blatantly evil as nothing more significant than burning wood for warmth? It’s despicable because it equalizes humans with coal, or any other natural resource to be used up and thrown away like trash. WE ARE NOT TRASH! YOU ARE NOT TRASH! Human life is precious, children especially so, even if it is abundant. THIS is what makes this act so repulsive.

      • AmandaM says:

        I am well aware of Matt’s beliefs about abortion, but this article – as it specifically mentions in the title – is about the BURNING of fetal bodies as medical waste.
        Sure, you can argue human life is precious all you want, but once we’re dead there’s no use for our bodies….why not burn them? What’s the big deal?

    • Sarah says:

      Yes! Your response is spot on. There is literally nothing wrong with this story. First of all they are not babies yet, they literally cannot survive out of the womb until 20 weeks and are barely developed at all when women get abortions. Most women get abortions because the baby will harm them medically, they cannot properly take care of them or they were raped. Those are all very good reasons in my opinion not to bring a child into the world. When the abortion takes place it is literally nothing but a very tiny lump of cells and some goo around it. It is absurd to think a funeral should be held for a bag of goo. Burning it for this reason makes a lot of sense and eliminates a lot of waste….

      • 1% of abortions are because of rape. Get your facts straight. Most women get abortions for practically no reason at all, other than that they “can’t take care of the baby.”

      • Kerry says:

        Your whole comment was slightly….stupid. Can you please explain to me how a baby harms a women medically? Does Jr. wait until mommy is unsuspecting then jump out of the crib with a bowie knife to attack her? I must assume that’s what you are talking about because later in your comment you say its not a baby by a lump of cells w/ some goo around it. I dare you to say that the next friend that is excited about being pregnant. No really, say to her “What’s the big deal? Its only a lump of cells with goo around it. Come back in 14-16 wks , then lets talk.” I have a sneaky suspicion you wont have many friends left. (And I a sneaky suspicion you probably support abortion all the way up to birth, as most pro-abortionist do.) Also, addressing the comment about why women get abortions. DUH. Of course if you lump women that get abortions because they cant take care of the “lump of cells” (I went ahead and changed it because I’m sure that’s what you meant, not “baby”), in with women who do it because of rape/medical issues, you pretty much cover every single abortion ever performed. But if you separate them and look at them individually, you would see that rape/incest/(physical) medical issues only cover about 1-2% (guessing high) of abortions. MOST abortions are because the woman cant/wont take care of the baby. Now, here’s a radical idea you may not have heard of. Its called “adoption.” I know, I know, what women would give up a “lump of goo” that she has carried for 9 mths!!?? (an argument I always hear at least once in any conversation about abortion I’ve ever had. “I just couldn’t give up baby I carried for nine months inside me!!”)But really, IF you can imagine the inhumanity of expecting a women to give up the goo she carried for 9 mths inside of her, you could research and find THOUSANDS of couples/people wanting/waiting to adopt an “unwanted” baby.

    • shirley says:

      Sorry I do not want to be cremated and therefore babies should not
      be cremated.

      • AmandaM says:

        So, because you personally don’t want to be cremated, nobody should be?

        • Patrick Miller says:

          I don’t know too many people that are cremated in order to power the electrical grid. Willingly, at least.

        • AmandaM says:

          Sure Patrick, but is it an option for us? Maybe people would be willing to give their bodies to the power grid after death if it was something we could do.

  19. jack says:

    I eagerly await the arrival of the modern hell that feminist women are creating. Here’s a pro-tip for you ladies: Monsters most often turn against their creators.

    Do not expect men to save you from your pride, arrogance, folly, and sin.

    I won’t.

    • Eva says:

      Excuse me, I must have missed something…are the feminists burning aborted babies as well? Or is it just the feminists that have abortions? Oh, or is it the feminists who abort their babies and then specificly ask that they be used for fuel? Wow…

  20. jack says:

    It’s all fruit from the same rotting tree of destruction. You can pretend that they are not correlated, but I will not play along.

    Female pride and the you-can’t-tell-me-what-to-do spirit that infects modern women has turned them into narcissists whose only aim is to maximize their own libertine desires, while attempting to smoke-screen the evil fruit of their actions (see the comment by Eva, total smoke-screening).

    God will eventually deal with the stubborn pride of this age. I dream of leaving the US so I will not be here when it happens.

  21. Admin K says:

    That’s nice. Except the fact that Moloch is not Pagan, and is instead a Semetic god, most frequently referred to in Christian texts. It’s good to see that your misinformed bias is consistent throughout your articles at the very least. You have good points occasionally, but you lose credibility when you get offensive AND wrong.

    • jonolan says:

      Moloch isn’t popular amongst the modern Pagans – really, Neo-Pagans and whatnot and hence your proper capitalization of it – but Moloch was a “small p” pagan God in that He wasn’t a Christian or, more broadly, Abrahamic deity. One could have also said heathen, though then someone would have them said that this was wrong because Moloch is not a Heathen – modern Nordic pagan sects – God.

Comments are closed.