Other than in the past on a professional basis, when he wrote highly technical articles about IBM's AS/400 computer system, Brian Kelly receives no compensation for his work. Additionally, Kelly has not taken any donations or contributions other than for his US Senate Campaign of 2012. Mr. Kelly has recetly canceled his write-in campaign for the US Senate, and instead he  endorses Tom Smith for US Senator from Pennsylvania v. Robert P. Casey Jr.  If you would like to donate to the closed campaign to help defray costs, feel free to go to and click the DONATE button. Your donations are most appreciated.

Additionally, if you would like to help Mr. Kelly in his efforts to continue to write free patriotic articles and to write additional patriotic books for the good of America, feel free to visit this site or that site to purchase Mr. Kelly's patriotic books. His latest book, Saving America, the How-To Book is available from this site. Thank you.

Please enjoy the rest of this article.


Would you consider it torture if a prankster intentionally stomped on a turtle egg or worse yet, poured acid on the egg? It would certainly be against the law.

What if our laws changed and we were now OK to kill adults? If it were legal, and adults would be killed, would we want not want it to be as painless as possible? Suppose for example that it was OK for you or another adult to be dropped into an acrid solution that was so strong it would burn your skin initially; then eat your flesh; and then consume your organs until you stopped breathing. Would that be torture? Would it be even worse than water-boarding since, when it is over, unlike the victim of water boarding, who surely would have had a deep scare, you would not be alive.

Well, guess what one of the most common methods of abortion is? You may already know that it is to use a saline solution, which is harsh brine, so to speak. When used in the process of a saline abortion for example, the acrid brine scalds the child from the outside-in. With constant contact, the intention is to have the solution cause the layers of the baby’s skin to peel off; then, the flesh, until the solution reaches the organs and causes death. It is not an immediate process. It takes time. It’s almost as horrific as you or I being dropped in a vat of that bad stuff. The difference of course is that it is just a baby, whereas you are an adult. But ask yourself: is that a valid difference?

By the way, some of the little tykes that are supposed to be aborted swim like hell and they actually make sure that they are born alive, though they obviously have some body-damage from their painful journey.

Perhaps it is more sanitary to discuss babies that are just about ready to come out of the womb to be born than scalding babies in the womb. When we make such a discussion as sanitary as we can, perhaps we can put aside the fact that a baby dies in almost every abortion. For those that almost make it, we may still use the term abortion, though the child is for the most part, already out of the womb at the time. But, to be more accurate, it is better that we use the term infanticide to describe the killing of a baby when it no longer is in the womb or it is only partially in the womb.

These horrific acts upon our smallest and most defenseless human beings can be performed legally, as they can euphemistically and conveniently can be called late term abortions. You may know that at the recent DNC convention the delegates voted to keep all forms of abortion legal by removing restrictions and protections for the unborn.

With infanticide methods such as partial birth abortion, the baby’s head is pierced or perhaps crushed by forceps, though the latter may occur in the womb also. Those that decide to kill a baby in this fashion may be able to convince themselves that there is no torture involved in the process. But, they can’t convince me or the baby of that! Well, at least it is not as torturous as the saline solution abortion? Who really knows—maybe it is—especially when at the end, the abortionist’s tools suck the brain out of the baby’s head. I wonder what that feels like.

If the baby is not killed before it gets out of the womb in an in-womb abortion, the person that chooses to abort their child may even have a second chance to rid themselves of this potentially lifelong “problem,” i. e. an unwanted child. Once the baby is fully out of the womb following a botched abortion, and it is deemed to have been born wrongfully, some “hospital caretakers,” in some hospitals may even help out by not feeding the infant. In this way, your baby girl starves to death instead of being killed in the womb. It is the same result but starving takes a few days or a week or so and thus it may keep you tied up longer than a quick saline abortion that actually works. So, do we think it is torture to deprive a newborn of lifesaving nutrition? I vote yes and the baby votes yes. Do you think water boarding is worse? Maybe it is? Perhaps that is why the US has laws against water boarding.

For those that need a refresher on human development, since human children are not born in eggs and are not listed in any law as being in danger of imminent death, and thus are not protected by the Endangered Species Act, it might help to know when a baby becomes a person. I mean exactly.

Why wouldn’t God just tell us unless, like me, the Almighty thinks that it doesn’t really matter? Why would God think that anybody would ever use that knowledge to hurt one of His innocents? There you have it–finally we have the proof that God was not born in the twentieth or twenty-first century or he would know that answer for sure. “Choice!”

Perhaps it would be easier to kill little unborn babies if the slayer knew exactly when personhood arrived. But then maybe it would not matter at all to the abortionist. If we studied the issue, we might just learn that those who kill unborn babies in the womb really do not want to know the answer to that question. Maybe God will never tell us, but I have a feeling that if pressed, and we could squeeze it out of Him somehow, our Lord would say that life begins at conception, if not sometime even before that. After all, who knows where God builds those nifty little immortal souls that he installs in all the newborns.

Most God-fearing people would agree that personhood occurs when a baby is conceived. Some would add that is when God gifts the new life with her unique and immortal soul. Others, such as adults looking to expand their choices in life might use technical terms to cover up the murder of an innocent.

If we can check back into the refresher course on human development for a minute here, you may learn that by 20 weeks—halfway through the fifth month, a live-born baby’s lungs may be developed enough that the baby may breathe for an hour or so on its own before dying if unattended.

By 23 weeks, which is just into the sixth month, 1/3 of the babies survive the birth process and become normal people. Unfortunately, we never really get a full sampling on who would live and who would not—in other words, we cannot tell which given baby would have been part of the one-third that make it. You see; before the live-born baby even has a chance to cry, during the partial birth abortion, her skull is punctured and her brain is removed.

When the live-born baby is starved in a hospital after a botched abortion, it could be counted in the third that make it, even though it will only gets to live from a few days to a week before it starves to death. After all, this baby already survived an expert’s attempt to kill it painfully in the womb. If it were not for lack of nutrition after such an unwanted baby is placed on a hospital shelf to starve to death, it would not be too many years for her to be just like any other toddler when she learns about the miracle of Santa Claus.

To help these little people that are killed indiscriminately so that other “more worthy” adult humans can have more choices, I am an advocate for both the baby and the mom. I am pro-baby and pro-mom. Unfortunately, the laws of the United States currently do not support my stance that a baby is a human being.

The pro-death crowd, or the pro-choice crowd as they euphemistically like to be called, insist that abortion is a valid and positive reproductive choice, but none would agree to giving the baby a choice in the matter, while in the womb or even afterwards for just a few days.

Logic dictates, and we all know it intrinsically, that a baby in the womb or out of the womb would chose life if it were able to be asked. And, so to give more meaning to the reckless killing of millions of tiny people each year, I decided to change the words describing my stance from pro-life to pro-baby. I want the little guy, who is forming his or her life in the womb to be the focus of the argument of whether she lives or dies.

Unfortunately, the notion of killing live babies in the United States has become very political. From the Democratic National Convention, I got the sense that all Democrats wanted the right to kill unborn babies at any time right up to the time prudent people would call it infanticide, and perhaps even after that. Yet, I am a Democrat and I do not feel as the DNC Democrats. I do not want abortion or infanticide.

I think that just a small group of “choice at any cost advocates,” want their choice to kill babies legalized by the rest of us, who do not feel as they do about the matter. I know there are many Democrats just like me who think that a baby, in or out of the womb, is a person and therefore should be protected by law, not killed so some adult has the opportunity to exercise a choice.

Unfortunately, the # 1 Democrat in the country, Barack Obama is not on my side. Back in his days in Illinois, today’s President Obama was the only Illinois Senator to not only vote against babies, he actually rose up and gave a speech against a bill that would have protected babies who survived late term labor-induced abortions. He also voted against a bill designed to prevent partial-birth abortions. I know I would not have spoken up against that bill and I would not have voted the way then State Senator Obama voted. What would you have done—voted for the right to kill or the right to save babies from a torturous death.

Yes, I am pro-mom.

Pro-baby and pro-mom are synonyms. Obviously, the greatest friends to live babies in America are their moms, and I commend all moms for all they do. Besides the moms, one of the greatest friends of babies in America is Congressman Ron Paul. I have a little story about the Congressman coming up shortly.

Thumbs up or thumbs down? As hard as it is to believe, there are many who think that fully grown adults ought to decide the fate of newly born babies who “wrongfully” survived abortion attempts. You remember the gladiators in the Colosseum. Thumbs up or thumbs down? Life, or death?

While running for office last year, I wrote an article that I titled, “The Butcher of Lyon” as my perspective on those who would prefer to butcher the newly born survivors of abortions, rather than save them. You can access this on Google or another search engine by typing in: “The Butcher of Lyon and Brian Kelly.” Perhaps you would be surprised to find who thinks that babies are not people, and who thinks babies born-alive and living outside the womb should be starved in hospitals.

When we think of a baby, don’t we all project the virtues of kindness and innocence? Of course we do! Would you not bet that if the babies were given the choice, they would make better and more pure decisions about whether adults should live or adults should die? Can’t you see babies always giving thumbs up as to whether elders should live or die. Don’t you think? Ask yourself who is it that has given man such power over God’s precious creations? If your answer is “nobody,” then you and I are on the same page.

My mother was as nice to me as any mom to any child, and I love her for it. My wife was as wonderful to our children in the womb, out of the womb, and on through life as any woman could possibly have ever been. I love her intensely, and her care for our little ones was an eye-opener for me. As much as I loved my wife to ask her to marry me, her selfless caring for our children was just awesome. She was a professional person with a degree, but the three little ones were more important to her than anything else. That’s probably how most moms feel when they make the big decision to have a baby, and they are fortunate enough to have a husband who can pick up the slack.

Sure, some people get caught in the middle of their lives with unwanted pregnancies. Some would suggest that because I love babies that I do not support the individual liberty of a potential mom to decide. I would never want to decide who lives or dies under any circumstances. But, if somebody wanted to kill the mom, I would fight against it with the same strength that I fight the idea that sinless babies in the womb can be killed. Babies and moms should both live. That is the natural plan.

Having a baby is a tough road for a family but especially a mom. Then again, we must remember that nothing in life worth having is easy. Moms go through the arduous process of a nine month pregnancy, the trauma of birth, and then the first two years. Wow! It is tough! But let me say again—nothing in life worth having is easy.

Giving birth and raising a child is an intrinsic part of a mom’s life, and the dad’s role is also a huge part of the dad’s life. If this were not so, the world would be extinct of people.

If there were not another living being involved in whether a baby should live or should die, I would agree with those who value choice first that there would be a denial of liberty and in this case, the mom should decide the baby’s fate. But, again this would be only if the baby were not a baby! But, the baby is a living baby—in or out of the womb—and this being is unbelievably dependent and helpless. Just because it is helpless does not mean that an adult has a right to determine if a living child is to be terminated. So, I am very comfortable in being pro-baby and pro-mom. I want both to live.

I am convinced that the individual human beings—the smallest Americans—our mom-womb babies, whose liberties are most vulnerable, are the unborn. We must agree to protect them and their right to be born and to live. No human has the right to take another human’s life, regardless of how fragile or in need of care the other human may be. I am pro-baby and I am pro-mom.

I certainly support a woman’s right and freedom to choose whatever they want in life. I would submit that the decision to abort a human, causing its death is not something a man or a woman has a right to choose under God. Death is murder when an innocent child is killed. Women, men, and babies, in and out of the womb, are equal in God’s eyes. How can they not be?

Is not the womb of a dog or a cat sacred until it produces its offspring? Even then, what American does not feel that the living puppies are sacred? Who thinks killing puppies or kittens is a good thing? How much more sacred is a child in the womb, especially when the conclusion is that it is a human, with the same DNA as other members of the family?

The choices humans make, both women and men, with regard to humans cannot include the termination of the life of another human. God has not given any of us that right. An aborted / killed unborn baby, whose soul has just been placed in the womb by God, would not have chosen death. Who are we to take away the purpose for that soul?

I have a picture of Ron Paul that really melts me and it shows his inner goodness. It is of Dr. Paul in his hospital scrubs delivering a baby. While a Congressman from Texas, Ron Paul, an Obstetric M.D. both before and after he was elected to Congress, would go home on weekends from Washington to Texas, and deliver his patient’s babies. He is a clear champion of liberty, and if I may be so bold, I am talking about your liberty as well as the liberty of a ton of little babies. In a campaign picture from December 18, 2007, Dr. Ron Paul is shown with “Baby Liberty,” wrapped in an American flag, shortly after Dr. Paul delivered the baby. The picture was submitted by Michael Nystrom and it can be seen on the Web by doing a simple search. It is impressive. Who would be so bold?

I am 64 years old and not many things affect me in the same way that they did when I was younger. Ron Paul is a bit older than me but he offers the best thoughts I have heard in ages. My brain still is young in thinking about life but sometimes my knees cannot keep up. When I saw the picture of the flag-draped baby it just hit me how important this issue really is for all human beings.

Not all members of Congress are pro-baby. You may recall that during the negotiations between President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Bart Stupak in 2010. Stupak turned out to be the deciding vote as the defender of the pro-life cause. Because of Stupak’s 30-year stance for life, pro-life Americans were encouraged that we would not be called upon by the Obamacare legislation to pay for abortions. Bart Stupak turned out to be a fake and a dud, and he duped us all. Washington Times reporter Kerry Picket on March 21, 2010 wrote the following:

“Whatever Mr. Stupak thinks his principles may be, pro-life advocates are not buying it. Mr. Stupak will always be known as a self-proclaimed pro-lifer who stabbed the life movement in the back.” Congressman Mike Pence also showed the sham of Bart Stupak. He blasted his colleague: “You traded 30 years of pro-life law for a promise from the most pro-abortion president in history.”

The Democratic Party platform, which unsuccessfully tried to remove all references to “God” this year has become the “abortion always is right” Party to the point of infanticide with partial birth abortion. When babies are partially born alive, right when they should be making their first big cry, they are killed in a very cruel and painful way. A game of whack-a-mole is more civil than what happens to the little baby’s head once it pops out of the womb in what the baby probably thinks is her birth process. Everybody expected the President to approve the Democratic platform with no questions asked about killing babies. We were right. Still, isn’t that a shame?

The overriding message that you have been reading in this essay is for moms to love yourself, give birth to your baby, and then love your baby intensely. One day your baby will make you so glad that you chose the light. Your baby will love you, and you will be blessed. Life is real. Babies are real. Moms are real. Dads are real. Moms who give babies their opportunity for a real life are the most wonderful people on earth and this act pleases God for God surely loves the little children.

In your heart, you know that all babies are given their souls by God so they can live and serve the world and the Lord. Let’s let the babies live. I am pro-baby and I am pro-mom. How about you?

Brian Kelly is a business owner and former assistant professor at Marywood University; he and his wife live in Northeastern Pennsylvania. Kelly is running for Senate in his state and believes limited government brings liberty and freedom.


About Brian Kelly

Brian Kelly is a business owner and former assistant professor at Marywood University; he and his wife, Pat live in Northeastern Pennsylvania. Kelly ran for COngress and for the US Senate in his state and he believes limited government brings liberty and freedom. Brian's 48th book is titled, Saving America, The How-To Book. It is available at and

View all posts by Brian Kelly →