Trying to stop dead baby eaters!

Apparently they eat dead fetuses in Oklahoma. Otherwise how do you explain State Senate Bill 1418 regarding: “Food; prohibiting the sale or manufacture of food or products which contain aborted human fetuses.”

The Bill put forth by State Senator Ralph Shortley reads thus:

SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.



  1. bernie says:

    I thought Sharia law covered this. Oh, that’s right. That’s illegal in Oklahoma, too.

  2. RODEDOG says:

    google “aborted fetus in food -bill” you may be suprised what you find

  3. Anonymous says:

    I’m betting that whoever sponsored this bill recently watched the 1973 film “Soylent Green” starring Charlton Heston. Otherwise, it may have been a move to stop gun ownership.

    Wait a sec…

    I think they’re trying to do that too! (And not just in Oklahoma.)

    • Glenn E. says:

      I was thinking the very same thing, concerning that movie, when I read this. Are they trying to prevent Soylent Pink and Soylent Blue, from ever happening? Apparently, Okies have no problem with recycling the old folks…. yet. What color cracker will they be made into?

  4. msbpodcast says:

    Do I believe that human fetal cells (aborted or not) are being used in research?

    Yes.

    I have no doubt that its being justified by big pharma as a response to pressure by Peta.

    Hey! At least we’re not dropping fluffy into the chipper shedder. It never looked cute and cuddly. Trust me.

    • Dr Spearmint Fur says:

      Do I believe that human fetal cells (aborted or not) are being used in research?

      Yes.

      Well then, who needs proof? Or public approvals? Or peer review?

  5. Glenn E. says:

    This bill it probably just another propaganda move, to either stop something that simply doesn’t exist, but sounds good to the voters. Or is just a tiny part of the bill. And opposing some other part of it from passing, also means “yer in favor of eating dead babies!”. So it’s to insure the bill passes. The opposite trick of tacking on something like a gay rights cause, to make sure a bill FAILS. Are these politicians a bunch of gutless morons, when they resort to these tactics? Because they obviously want a bill to pass or fail, but know it will look bad for them (to the voters) if they cast their vote for or against a simple bill. So they toss in these diversionary clauses, that they’ll point to as their REAL reason for voting the way they did. And not the main point of the bills. Gutless chicken sh*ts.

  6. Rich says:

    I think this guy’s either mad as a hatter or has seen into the future and wants to head off his vision of a dystopia.

  7. Glenn E. says:

    On the other hand, this bill may be to stop those cheap Chinese food imports, from ending up on grocers’ shelves. Figuring that there must be some parts of people, in them. I wonder what percentage of human fetuses, is allowed by the FDA, in foods? Did Senator Shortley even bother to research that? Or did he just assume the FDA’s standard was too slack?

    So, to recap. All other grounded up, unborn animal parts as food or food research, is Ok for the Okies. Just not any unborn people animal parts. Does this mean I can’t byte my lips, or chew my nails, in Oklahoma? Because technically, I’m eating human body parts. Even though its my own. And better watch out for those babies that suck their thumbs, in public. The new law might come down hard on them.

    • Skeptic: Post # ≥1 says:

      Glen, they’ve accounted for that.

      Section 112, Part 3a, paragraph 4:
      “Any resident of Oklahoma, or any visiting relative of said residents, or any government official of any country, or any person named Jesus, may consume human flesh of not less than 50% of their own, naturally occurring DNA, from conception to, and not exceeding 3 years of age, while within the borders of the State of Oklahoma.

  8. Schleprock says:

    ……Read slowly, with a deep drawl…
    I think this whole thing is unconstitutional! When Obama was voted in by illegal imigrants and terrorists, the big government started telling me what I can and can’t eat. The young’uns is the tenderist. Breast feeding definitely makes the best flavor(like a good veal) and formula ruins the meat. If ya’lls gonna use the “little buggers”, I reckon they’re best in a jambalaya or on a kabob .Ya’ll need a might lot though.. If’n you aint blessed with sextuplet misfire(at least) ya might as well use it as a dog treat. Best is if ya live next to a blue state. The roads is good enough to get yer trailer in You won’t believe what they chucks out! Some of the red bags ya dig out have little tiny basters. Watch out though, cuz they’s sharp.
    Satire is still protected…right?

  9. eNon says:

    This is in response to a recent outcry against Pepsi for partnering with a research group which used kidney stem cells originating from a donated aborted fetus to create flavor receptors to use during testing of new drinks. It’s been making the rounds on all the hippy dippy liberal health nut sites and everyone’s trying to boycot pepsi, even though a lot of other companies also do this or worse.

    What they fail to realize, partly because of bad/biased reporting, partly stupidity, is that there is actually no fetus put into any final product, and the cells were originally from a single fetus donated in the 70s and current tests use cells that were derived from them.

    Everyone’s freaking out like there is dead baby in their pepsi, or there’s some medical fetus racket profiting off of thousands of stolen abortions.