A new documentary about those who regret their abortions.
pro-life
The Latest on Rudy
Laura Ingraham gets this week’s “Pundit with Principles” award for (not following Hannity’s lead and) actually grilling Giuliani on abortion.
–
I’m currently debating the Mayor’s support for premeditated child homicide at Bloggers4Rudy.
–
If Rudy “hates” abortion, he’s got some ‘splainin’ to do: Remarks to NARAL’s “Champions of Choice” Luncheon, and his spin as to why he donated to Planned Parenthood doesn’t hold water. (hat tip: EFM)
–
Bill Donohue asks a great question: “If helping pregnant women make choices is the supreme issue for Rudy Giuliani, then he should be able to document all the checks he’s written to support Crisis Pregnancy Centers—not just Planned Parenthood. If he can’t, it is logical to conclude that the only real choice he thinks is worthy of his money is the one which results in the death of innocent human beings. And that would make him a fraud.” (hat tip: K-Lo)
–
“But he significantly increased adoptions in the Big Apple, right?” Not so fast.
–
Oh and by the way, Rudy’s problems aren’t all abortion-related: meet Bernie Kerik, the elephant in the room (no pun intended).
–
I’m currently debating the Mayor’s support for premeditated child homicide at Bloggers4Rudy.
–
If Rudy “hates” abortion, he’s got some ‘splainin’ to do: Remarks to NARAL’s “Champions of Choice” Luncheon, and his spin as to why he donated to Planned Parenthood doesn’t hold water. (hat tip: EFM)
–
Bill Donohue asks a great question: “If helping pregnant women make choices is the supreme issue for Rudy Giuliani, then he should be able to document all the checks he’s written to support Crisis Pregnancy Centers—not just Planned Parenthood. If he can’t, it is logical to conclude that the only real choice he thinks is worthy of his money is the one which results in the death of innocent human beings. And that would make him a fraud.” (hat tip: K-Lo)
–
“But he significantly increased adoptions in the Big Apple, right?” Not so fast.
–
Oh and by the way, Rudy’s problems aren’t all abortion-related: meet Bernie Kerik, the elephant in the room (no pun intended).
I’m Ashamed of Myself…NOT!
A milestone in my life as a conservative rabble-rouser: I’ve been banned from a liberal blog! Why? Because I was “obnoxious,” “patronizing,” and I “insulted” people.
–
If you want the full context of what went down, check out the debate on this post, then this one, and lastly this one. Under a revised profile I left a parting message for the little darlings, but just in case they decide to delete it, I think I’ll post it here for posterity:
–
Hah! I’ll admit, I took a couple potshots at some stunningly bad logic, and described your position in frank terms, but you libs really oughta consider that for the most part, my insults were in RESPONSE to:
–
– Aryeh insulting as a “scumbag,” a “nosy and controlling neo-christian,” a “cultist,” and a “bully”
–
If you want the full context of what went down, check out the debate on this post, then this one, and lastly this one. Under a revised profile I left a parting message for the little darlings, but just in case they decide to delete it, I think I’ll post it here for posterity:
–
Hah! I’ll admit, I took a couple potshots at some stunningly bad logic, and described your position in frank terms, but you libs really oughta consider that for the most part, my insults were in RESPONSE to:
–
– Aryeh insulting as a “scumbag,” a “nosy and controlling neo-christian,” a “cultist,” and a “bully”
– Emily lying about my very words, mischaracterizing “I understand there will always be some teens who have sex” as “You aren’t willing to admit that sex is something that teenagers have and will continue to have.”
– that twit Things Come Undone likening me to ABORTION CLINIC BOMBERS based on – you guessed it! – ZERO evidence whatsoever.
– Brittainy demagoging me a sexist, an “ideology-driven nutjob,” “crazy anti-sex, anti-woman” (also based on nothing more substantive than her hatred & ideology), & insulting my “reading comprehension skills.”
–
It’s also worth noting that Brendon’s idea of an “insult” is more than a little bizzare; I claimed that societal narcissism is a result of liberalism. Right or wrong, it’s a debatable position, not a personal insult.
–
Now, do I particularly care that any of you insulted me? Nah – I’m a big boy, and I’ve taken worse from better. I don’t mind a light jab or two – from either side – but I DO mind when self-righteous hypocrites get on their high horses and pretend they’re innocent little angels (remember Angelica from the cartoon “Rugrats”? That’s you guys.)
–
Not only that, but you shouldn’t be surprised that your position – that some humans are unworthy of being protected by lethal force – is looked upon unkindly by normal Americans.
–
Anyway, thanks for the laughs and the practice; I do so enjoy taking the occasional trip to the ol’ intellectual boxing bags! Catch ya later.
–
Calvin
–
PS: as always, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers to the “invisible man in the sky.”
–
It’s also worth noting that Brendon’s idea of an “insult” is more than a little bizzare; I claimed that societal narcissism is a result of liberalism. Right or wrong, it’s a debatable position, not a personal insult.
–
Now, do I particularly care that any of you insulted me? Nah – I’m a big boy, and I’ve taken worse from better. I don’t mind a light jab or two – from either side – but I DO mind when self-righteous hypocrites get on their high horses and pretend they’re innocent little angels (remember Angelica from the cartoon “Rugrats”? That’s you guys.)
–
Not only that, but you shouldn’t be surprised that your position – that some humans are unworthy of being protected by lethal force – is looked upon unkindly by normal Americans.
–
Anyway, thanks for the laughs and the practice; I do so enjoy taking the occasional trip to the ol’ intellectual boxing bags! Catch ya later.
–
Calvin
–
PS: as always, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers to the “invisible man in the sky.”
–
UPDATE: Yup, I’ve been deleted. Oh well, their hypocrisy is pretty glaring on their own pages for anybody independent passersby, and as for the rest…well, I can’t even begin to guess how many psych-analysts & all the intensive care you’d need to untangle the years of brainwashing and biases that’ve layered on over the years. Deception is a tangled web, indeed.
Way to Go, Andrew Wilkow!
Check out this stellar performance in which he deftly pummels evil and stupidity, in this case personified by Kim Gandy, president of NOW.
Score One for the Good Guys!
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court today voted to uphold the 2003 ban on partial-birth abortions. Predictably, in her dissenting opinion Ruth Bader Ginsburg whined that “the ruling ‘refuses to take … seriously’ previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion.” Well…yeah, that’s kinda the point.
–
Predictably, the frontrunners of the ‘08 Republican field have embraced the ruling, while all three leading Democrats promptly took the Nazi position on the issue (by the way, Barbara Boxer’s reaction was even more extreme; too bad she’s not running for President!).
–
Today was a great day—a great day for America, for human rights, and even for President Bush (both of his appointees delivered today). But this battle isn’t over by a long shot. It won’t be over until the rest of our countrymen remember that “unalienable” really does mean “unalienable,” and every human life, from the moment of conception onward, is recognized & protected by US law.
–
Predictably, the frontrunners of the ‘08 Republican field have embraced the ruling, while all three leading Democrats promptly took the Nazi position on the issue (by the way, Barbara Boxer’s reaction was even more extreme; too bad she’s not running for President!).
–
Today was a great day—a great day for America, for human rights, and even for President Bush (both of his appointees delivered today). But this battle isn’t over by a long shot. It won’t be over until the rest of our countrymen remember that “unalienable” really does mean “unalienable,” and every human life, from the moment of conception onward, is recognized & protected by US law.
–
(Oh, by the way: if you wanna see a general abortion debate that’s just taken a turn for the stupid, click here.)
–
UPDATE: Though I still think pro-lifers are right to celebrate today, Ross over at Sullivan’s blog has a somewhat-more sober reaction that’s worth reading.
UPDATE: Though I still think pro-lifers are right to celebrate today, Ross over at Sullivan’s blog has a somewhat-more sober reaction that’s worth reading.
America’s Mayor Aborting Own Candidacy?
Too early to be sure, but one can only hope…
–
Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani warned GOP activists in Des Moines on Saturday that if they insist on a nominee who always agrees with them, it will spell defeat in 2008.
–
Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani warned GOP activists in Des Moines on Saturday that if they insist on a nominee who always agrees with them, it will spell defeat in 2008.
–
“Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 2008 if we are a party characterized by what we’re for, not if we’re a party that’s known for what we’re against,” the former New York mayor said at a midday campaign stop.
–
Republicans can win, he said, if they nominate a candidate committed to the fight against terrorism and high taxes, rather than a pure social conservative.
–
“Our party has to get beyond issues like that,” Giuliani said, a reference to abortion rights, which he supports.
–
Over at the Corner there’s some doubt as to what precisely Giuliani meant, but to me, it’s immaterial. We know he’s an extremist on abortion, and that he hasn’t a clue what judicial originalism means. I don’t think there’s any doubt that he’d love it if the social Right would just vanish, and chances are this was a case of the real Rudy bubbling to the surface.
–
Over at the Corner there’s some doubt as to what precisely Giuliani meant, but to me, it’s immaterial. We know he’s an extremist on abortion, and that he hasn’t a clue what judicial originalism means. I don’t think there’s any doubt that he’d love it if the social Right would just vanish, and chances are this was a case of the real Rudy bubbling to the surface.
Man’s Inhumanity to Man…& the Spin Defending It
Back on April 5, the Reporter ran this pro-life letter:
–
Abortion: ‘Man’s inhumanity to man’
Abortion: ‘Man’s inhumanity to man’
–
Keith Kramer
Keith Kramer
–
Because abortion cannot be defended on its own merits, population controllers argue for a woman’s right to choose, never about what is being chosen.
Because abortion cannot be defended on its own merits, population controllers argue for a woman’s right to choose, never about what is being chosen.
–
Choosing abortion always kills the innocent glimmer of light within our very dark world. A grieving time for life, our society begs healing from questions still to be asked; yet a man’s intellect never quite permits asking, lest complacency flee like dried dandelion fluff.
Choosing abortion always kills the innocent glimmer of light within our very dark world. A grieving time for life, our society begs healing from questions still to be asked; yet a man’s intellect never quite permits asking, lest complacency flee like dried dandelion fluff.
–
We would dwell beyond the snares of “man’s inhumanity to man,” leaving inhumanity at the door of the Nazi holocaust. Now that we are the enforcer, we justify atrocity as somehow necessary and excusable.
We would dwell beyond the snares of “man’s inhumanity to man,” leaving inhumanity at the door of the Nazi holocaust. Now that we are the enforcer, we justify atrocity as somehow necessary and excusable.
–
“I tremble for my country when I recall that God is just.”—Thomas Jefferson
“I tremble for my country when I recall that God is just.”—Thomas Jefferson
–
Today this response appeared:
Today this response appeared:
–
Brent Schmitz
Brent Schmitz
–
Mr. Keith Kraemer asserts in his letter to the editor on Thursday (April 5) that “abortion cannot be defended on its own merits,” and proceeds to refer to pro-choice Americans as “population controllers,” evoking images of the government mandated infanticide and involuntary sterilizations of parents that have occurred in China for the past decades.
Mr. Keith Kraemer asserts in his letter to the editor on Thursday (April 5) that “abortion cannot be defended on its own merits,” and proceeds to refer to pro-choice Americans as “population controllers,” evoking images of the government mandated infanticide and involuntary sterilizations of parents that have occurred in China for the past decades.
–
It’s equally safe to assume that there won’t be a mass program to imprison & kill Jews in the United States, too. Does that mean we can’t attribute such a desire to neo-Nazis operating within the country? Furthermore, while a variety of motivations prop up abortion (all of them sick), there is a very real movement of “population controllers” on the Left, as evidenced by Mark Morford of the San Francisco Gate.
It’s equally safe to assume that there won’t be a mass program to imprison & kill Jews in the United States, too. Does that mean we can’t attribute such a desire to neo-Nazis operating within the country? Furthermore, while a variety of motivations prop up abortion (all of them sick), there is a very real movement of “population controllers” on the Left, as evidenced by Mark Morford of the San Francisco Gate.
–
By focusing on abortion as “inhumanity,” Mr. Kraemer ignores the vital question of this issue, “When does human life begin?” I am neither a doctor nor a theologian, and do not presume to answer this question with an assertion, though Mr. Kraemer feels no such apprehension.
By focusing on abortion as “inhumanity,” Mr. Kraemer ignores the vital question of this issue, “When does human life begin?” I am neither a doctor nor a theologian, and do not presume to answer this question with an assertion, though Mr. Kraemer feels no such apprehension.
–
I suspect Mr. Kramer “feels no such apprehension” about accepting unborn humanity as a given because we live in an age where that fact ought to be as clear as that the sun rises in the morning. I think that, considering the length of the average Opinion letter, Kramer focused on a point that needed to be heard.
I suspect Mr. Kramer “feels no such apprehension” about accepting unborn humanity as a given because we live in an age where that fact ought to be as clear as that the sun rises in the morning. I think that, considering the length of the average Opinion letter, Kramer focused on a point that needed to be heard.
–
I would ask him what qualifications he has to assert the beginning of life at conception. This position, if supported adequately, is certainly valid, and thus would render abortion immoral, but Mr. Kraemer has given us no evidence to support his conjecture.
I would ask him what qualifications he has to assert the beginning of life at conception. This position, if supported adequately, is certainly valid, and thus would render abortion immoral, but Mr. Kraemer has given us no evidence to support his conjecture.
–
I also find it interesting that Mr. Kraemer compares a pro-choice society to Nazism without acknowledging that there is doubt in whether or not abortion terminates a human life—there is no such doubt that millions of innocents died in the Holocaust.
I also find it interesting that Mr. Kraemer compares a pro-choice society to Nazism without acknowledging that there is doubt in whether or not abortion terminates a human life—there is no such doubt that millions of innocents died in the Holocaust.
–
Actually, the only doubt is among those who want abortion to be legal. In reality, “life begins at conception” is a scientific fact. But Mr. Schmitz’s acknowledgement of doubt points to another flaw in the case for abortion: unless science could unequivocally establish that life begins at some point after conception, to terminate something you understand might be life is a clearly-evil act.
Actually, the only doubt is among those who want abortion to be legal. In reality, “life begins at conception” is a scientific fact. But Mr. Schmitz’s acknowledgement of doubt points to another flaw in the case for abortion: unless science could unequivocally establish that life begins at some point after conception, to terminate something you understand might be life is a clearly-evil act.
–
Mr. Kraemer ends his letter with a quotation from Thomas Jefferson. I will do the same. “Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.” Mr. Kraemer, defend your position without invoking religious dogma, which cannot be argued against, and our country can begin to have a serious debate about the moral dilemma that is abortion.
Mr. Kraemer ends his letter with a quotation from Thomas Jefferson. I will do the same. “Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.” Mr. Kraemer, defend your position without invoking religious dogma, which cannot be argued against, and our country can begin to have a serious debate about the moral dilemma that is abortion.
–
The most serious debate our country ever had was about the moral dilemma that is slavery. And that is the evil to which Jefferson referred when he trembled for his country at the thought of God’s justice. Does Schmitz think Jefferson’s invocation of “religious dogma” invalidated his disgust for slavery? Did the explicitly-religious rhetoric invoked by the rest of the Founding Fathers supporting the overall concept of liberty invalidate the American Revolution or the Constitutional Convention? What about the deep influence religion held on Abraham Lincoln? Or Churchill’s calls to fight for “the survival of Christian civilization”?
The most serious debate our country ever had was about the moral dilemma that is slavery. And that is the evil to which Jefferson referred when he trembled for his country at the thought of God’s justice. Does Schmitz think Jefferson’s invocation of “religious dogma” invalidated his disgust for slavery? Did the explicitly-religious rhetoric invoked by the rest of the Founding Fathers supporting the overall concept of liberty invalidate the American Revolution or the Constitutional Convention? What about the deep influence religion held on Abraham Lincoln? Or Churchill’s calls to fight for “the survival of Christian civilization”?
–
Maybe the issues revolving around America’s birth, slavery, the Civil War, and World War II don’t count as “serious.”
Maybe the issues revolving around America’s birth, slavery, the Civil War, and World War II don’t count as “serious.”
Calling Today’s Abolitionists!
There’s still time to order your shirt for American Life League’s fifth annual Pro-Life T-shirt Day. Only six bucks, and you can take a stand for what’s right – on April 24, and beyond.
Conservative Standards 