Not Making This Up: Unborn Children Must Be Registered As Separate Guests When Visiting White House May 8, 2012

We're surprised that feminists aren't up in arms about this.

Over at Life Site News, there is an image of a newsletter posted from Ellie Shafer, Director of the White House visitor's office.

"Crazy as it may sound," the newsletter states, a "baby that has not yet been born" must be included in the overall count of guests in a White House tour.

Actually, we don't think it's crazy at all. Simple biology dictates that there is a person inside a mother's womb.

But we understand why someone who works for this White House finds that "crazy".

It's because Obama, like most prominent Democrats, is totally crazy himself on the issue of abortion rights.

You see: You have to be crazy to justify elective abortion rights. There's no other reason to support the destruction of an unborn child for frivolous reasons.

Okay, maybe depravity.

Democrats, in fact, are so crazy/depraved over this issue that they hardly ever use the word "abortion". They instead cover up the concept using less offensive words/phrases like "choice", "reproductive rights", "keep Republicans out of my vagina", and "war on women".

Guess it's not too popular to use a word the describes the destruction of a child still in his mother's womb.

But the irony of the White House policy gets thicker. After the unborn child is registered, the newsletter dictates the the information about the child should be updated once the child is born.

And Douglas Johnson, the National Right to Life legislative director, puts the icing on the cake regarding this policy: "Notably, the newsletter provides no guidance on what the staff should do if an unborn baby is first registered for security purposes, but then aborted."

Maybe the child's information should be updated to reflect the fact that it was just a "choice".

---