Which party is more extreme?

A party that supports allowing abortion all the way up to full term or a party that seeks to limit abortions?

A party that would say it is OK to withhold health care from a fully developed child outside the womb if the mother doesn't want the baby or the other party?

I heard a Democrat from Missouri ask how people sleep when they want to limit abortions to the first eight weeks of pregnancy or when the heartbeat is detected.  I would ask how anyone can sleep who would say it is OK to deny health care to a child after he has been born.

Very few countries in the world allow abortion after twenty weeks, yet in the U.S., people who support limitations are described as "extreme."  A significant majority of Americans are against late-term abortions, but I have not seen one Democrat running for president stand against late-term abortion.  If Democrats said that, they might be labeled as being against reproductive rights.

Democrats say they believe that everyone has a right to health care, but some obviously don't believe it because they are willing to withhold health care from the most vulnerable: a child who has been delivered.

We know that Democrats are more than willing to withhold health care from people they don't deem worthy based on what President Obama said to a woman at a town hall meeting when he was lobbying for Obamacare.  She asked if her 100-year-old mother could get a pacemaker if her doctor agreed that she had great zeal.  Obama essentially said the 100-year-old had lived long enough, and maybe she should just take a pill. 

Obviously, President Obama didn't give a damn about what the woman or her doctor thought.  In his thought process, it was up to government to decide.  Why don't journalists stop pretending they let people choose when they want the government to choose?

We also know that under Obamacare, which was passed 100% by Democrats, hospitals got bonuses if they didn't readmit as many patients.  Again, the government, not the patient or the doctor, was controlling the decision.

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who helped advise President Obama and Democrats, thinks people live too long.

The public was told that health care would greatly improve for all if Obamacare was passed, but life expectancy went down unexpectedly starting in 2015 for three straight years.  Could the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program and a president and his advisers who determined that people may have lived long enough be equated to a death panel?

I see nothing from Democrats that says they want to give people freedom of choice and control of their own health care. 

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a progressive, racist, and eugenicist.  She wanted abortion to kill minorities, the physically and mentally disabled, and anyone else she deemed necessary to build a cleaner race, and she is celebrated to this day by Democrats.  Hillary received the Margaret Sanger Award.  Why would anyone be proud of that?

Which party is racist?  The party that wants more minority women to have their babies or the party that wants to continue to abort minority children at a much higher rate than their percent of the population?

Democrats say they are the party of science, so why won't they admit that the only date a human life can begin is at conception?

Why do Democrats call themselves progressives?  I think they should be called the oppressive, regressive party.  Even as science gets better and children can survive better from early childbirth, they lengthen the time to be eligible for abortion.

A nine-ounce baby was born in Japan recently and five months later was able to go home.  Think of what a miracle that is, that the baby had all the body parts and organs necessary to survive outside the mother's body at 9 ounces.  Democrats would not have even called him a baby at that stage.

Now, which party is extreme?