I’ve been staring at this image for WAY too long trying to make sense of it. It argues that “If you built the wall with aborted babies, the Democrats would agree to it in a millisecond!”
It’s obviously hyperbolic and untrue. What I don’t understand is how this makes sense even to conservatives.
1) Why would Democrats be for the wall if it used different building material? They don’t want a wall, period. Not with bricks. Not with concrete. Not with steel slats. Not with live babies. Not with “aborted babies.” The idea is bad in principle, not because the parties can’t settle on the ingredients.
2) At what age are these babies being aborted? Because “babies” don’t get aborted. Democrats are not making a push for the legalization of tenth trimester abortions.
3) Why would babies of any kind make good building material? They don’t listen to instructions, they’re not malleable, their giant heads get in the way of everything… Conservatives really haven’t thought these things through.
5) Are we aborting “babies” specifically for the wall, or are we using fetal remains to build it? Because I will go on the record and say I oppose infant genocide just to annoy Mexicans.
6) If the “aborted babies” are actually babies, what are we going to do with the body parts that stick out of the wall? Because it’s a lot easier to climb it if there are random limbs to grip.
7) If we were to build the wall with “aborted babies,” would Donald Trump agree to it? And would that mean we’re finally using taxpayer dollars to fund abortions? Are conservatives cool with that if it means being extra-racist toward Mexicans?
Anyway, if someone can explain to me what “Activist Mommy” Elizabeth Johnston is talking about, I would appreciate it. Otherwise I’m going to be up all night trying to make sense of all this.