A Glimpse into the Heart of Evil
Back during the 2003 debate over partial-birth abortion, Slate ran an editorial by abortionist Warren Hern entitled, “Did I Violate the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban?” His thesis is that the law’s language was vague, which would lead to problems. Full disclosure: I haven’t looked at his argument in detail (I might for a future post, and if you want to read the law for yourself, click here). In my opinion, there’s no substantive moral difference between a month-1 abortion and a month-9 abortion. But right now my interest is in Hern’s closing paragraph:
–
“Earlier this year, I began an abortion on a young woman who was 17 weeks pregnant. Because of the two days of prior treatment, the amniotic membranes were visible and bulging. I ruptured the membranes and released the fluid to reduce the risk of amniotic fluid embolism. Then I inserted my forceps into the uterus and applied them to the head of the fetus, which was still alive, since fetal injection is not done at that stage of pregnancy. I closed the forceps, crushing the skull of the fetus, and withdrew the forceps. The fetus, now dead, slid out more or less intact. With the next pass of the forceps, I grasped the placenta, and it came out in one piece. Within a few seconds, I had completed my routine exploration of the uterus and sharp curettage. The blood loss would just fill a tablespoon. The patient, who was awake, hardly felt the operation. She was relieved, grateful, and safe. She wants to have children in the future.”
–
Read that again. This “doctor” is describing an act of murder, admitting that his victim was “alive” at the time, and doing so without the slightest hint of regret or embarassment; indeed, he is proud of the grotesque way in which he makes a living! I’ve never been surprised at the existence of evil in this world, but the degree of acceptance his kind has achieved in so-called civilized society still makes me sick to my stomach.
–
“Earlier this year, I began an abortion on a young woman who was 17 weeks pregnant. Because of the two days of prior treatment, the amniotic membranes were visible and bulging. I ruptured the membranes and released the fluid to reduce the risk of amniotic fluid embolism. Then I inserted my forceps into the uterus and applied them to the head of the fetus, which was still alive, since fetal injection is not done at that stage of pregnancy. I closed the forceps, crushing the skull of the fetus, and withdrew the forceps. The fetus, now dead, slid out more or less intact. With the next pass of the forceps, I grasped the placenta, and it came out in one piece. Within a few seconds, I had completed my routine exploration of the uterus and sharp curettage. The blood loss would just fill a tablespoon. The patient, who was awake, hardly felt the operation. She was relieved, grateful, and safe. She wants to have children in the future.”
–
Read that again. This “doctor” is describing an act of murder, admitting that his victim was “alive” at the time, and doing so without the slightest hint of regret or embarassment; indeed, he is proud of the grotesque way in which he makes a living! I’ve never been surprised at the existence of evil in this world, but the degree of acceptance his kind has achieved in so-called civilized society still makes me sick to my stomach.
Odds & Ends
John McCain jokes about bombing Iran, then tells predictably-shocked (shocked!) liberals to “get a life.” Good for you, Senator.
–
Meanwhile, another Hollywood leftist turns out to be a rotten bloke in his personal life. Does this count as “verbal violence,” Senator Obama? Unlike the Rutgers basketball team with Don Imus, this poor girl actually had to spend long periods of time with this creep, whose tirade was far more vicious than “nappy-headed ho.”
–
Oh, and Jo[k]e Biden decries the “politics of polarization,” saying “since 1994 with the Gingrich revolution, just take a look at Iraq, Venezuela, Katrina, what’s gone down at Virginia Tech, Darfur, Imus. Take a look. This didn’t happen accidentally, all these things.” But there’s nothing polarizing or divisive whatsoever about blaming a political party for, among other things, a school shooting and overseas genocide in the same breath. Nope. Nuthin’.
–
Meanwhile, another Hollywood leftist turns out to be a rotten bloke in his personal life. Does this count as “verbal violence,” Senator Obama? Unlike the Rutgers basketball team with Don Imus, this poor girl actually had to spend long periods of time with this creep, whose tirade was far more vicious than “nappy-headed ho.”
–
Oh, and Jo[k]e Biden decries the “politics of polarization,” saying “since 1994 with the Gingrich revolution, just take a look at Iraq, Venezuela, Katrina, what’s gone down at Virginia Tech, Darfur, Imus. Take a look. This didn’t happen accidentally, all these things.” But there’s nothing polarizing or divisive whatsoever about blaming a political party for, among other things, a school shooting and overseas genocide in the same breath. Nope. Nuthin’.
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.
Barack’s Brilliance
During Barack Obama’s campaign stop in Milwaukee, WI, he used the Virginia Tech massacre as a jumping-off point to address “other kinds” of violence:
–
There’s the “verbal violence” of Imus.
–
There’s “the violence of men and women who have worked all their lives and suddenly have the rug pulled out from under them because their job is moved to another country.”
–
There’s “the violence of children whose voices are not heard in communities that are ignored,”
–
And so, Obama says, “there’s a lot of different forms of violence in our society, and so much of it is rooted in our incapacity to recognize ourselves in each other.”
–
Many politicians would avoid, I think, suggesting that outsourcing and mass-murder belong in the same category.
–
As well they should, to say nothing of a radio jock’s obnoxiousness! Verbal violence?! More like verbal flatulence.
–
There’s the “verbal violence” of Imus.
–
There’s “the violence of men and women who have worked all their lives and suddenly have the rug pulled out from under them because their job is moved to another country.”
–
There’s “the violence of children whose voices are not heard in communities that are ignored,”
–
And so, Obama says, “there’s a lot of different forms of violence in our society, and so much of it is rooted in our incapacity to recognize ourselves in each other.”
–
Many politicians would avoid, I think, suggesting that outsourcing and mass-murder belong in the same category.
–
As well they should, to say nothing of a radio jock’s obnoxiousness! Verbal violence?! More like verbal flatulence.
—
Listening to Obama’s speech, I had another question: where was the Senator’s famed charisma? I sure didn’t hear it. Maybe Obamamania has to be taken in small doses due to its extreme potency…yeah, that’s it…
–
(In comparison, I think my guy—who just received the Ronald Reagan Award from Frontiers of Freedom—has the upper hand on charisma.)
Listening to Obama’s speech, I had another question: where was the Senator’s famed charisma? I sure didn’t hear it. Maybe Obamamania has to be taken in small doses due to its extreme potency…yeah, that’s it…
–
(In comparison, I think my guy—who just received the Ronald Reagan Award from Frontiers of Freedom—has the upper hand on charisma.)
What I’m Reading Right Now
Currently I’m juggling the following:
–
I’ve finally started The Da Vinci Code, and I’ve got to give Dan Brown this much: he knows how to write suspense. The mystery and the distinct characters surrounding it do have quite an allure. Which is why all the falsehoods (Wikipedia’s article on ‘em is surprisingly long, but be careful—it is Wikipedia, after all) within are so inexcusable, especially considering Brown’s “Fact” preface in the front. And occasionally Brown wanders into displays of sheer idiocy like this line: “Langdon was always surprised how few Christians who gazed upon ‘the crucifix’ realized their symbol’s violent history was reflected in its very name: ‘cross’ and ‘crucifix’ came from the Latin word cruciare—to torture.” Uh, note to Dan: the torture Christ endured for our sins isn’t exactly an obscure part of Christianity…Bottom line: if Brown had instead prefaced the book with something along the lines of, “The following story takes creative license with several elements of history, religion and art,” I could probably give The Da Vinci Code a thumbs-up (at least so far; we’ll see how things go when I’m finished).
–
Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel—Why Everything You Know Is Wrong by John Stossel and The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Radicals in America by David Horowitz. These gems—the former on various falsehoods in all walks of life, the latter on demented college professors—are nice because they’re broken down into bite-sized passages that can be read & set aside without forgetting some important context that came before. Highly recommended.
–
At a thrift shop tonight I found Reagan: The Political Chameleon. It’s a book written before the Gipper’s presidency by ex-California Governor Pat Brown. Once I finish the above, I look forward to reading how spectacularly wrong Brown, in retrospect, is with his assertion that “there is no need to qualify this view in the slightest: Ronald Reagan’s election to the presidency would be a national disaster.” Also, this passage from the jacket got me thinking:
–
“What sort of man is Ronald Reagan? His philosophy has ranged the political spectrum—from left-wing Democrat during the McCarthy era, to capitalist spokesman for General Electric, to Goldwater conservative—changing colors as the chameleon does, constantly camouflaging himself to match his environment. Do Reagan’s beliefs truly reflect the man, or are they merely a method of matching the views of his current circle, with no more depth or profundity that the varying hues of the chameleon?”
–
Hmm…who does the Left level that charge against these days? (Now, I don’t want to jinx anything, or prematurely make him into another Reagan…but we can hope…)
–
I’ve finally started The Da Vinci Code, and I’ve got to give Dan Brown this much: he knows how to write suspense. The mystery and the distinct characters surrounding it do have quite an allure. Which is why all the falsehoods (Wikipedia’s article on ‘em is surprisingly long, but be careful—it is Wikipedia, after all) within are so inexcusable, especially considering Brown’s “Fact” preface in the front. And occasionally Brown wanders into displays of sheer idiocy like this line: “Langdon was always surprised how few Christians who gazed upon ‘the crucifix’ realized their symbol’s violent history was reflected in its very name: ‘cross’ and ‘crucifix’ came from the Latin word cruciare—to torture.” Uh, note to Dan: the torture Christ endured for our sins isn’t exactly an obscure part of Christianity…Bottom line: if Brown had instead prefaced the book with something along the lines of, “The following story takes creative license with several elements of history, religion and art,” I could probably give The Da Vinci Code a thumbs-up (at least so far; we’ll see how things go when I’m finished).
–
Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel—Why Everything You Know Is Wrong by John Stossel and The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Radicals in America by David Horowitz. These gems—the former on various falsehoods in all walks of life, the latter on demented college professors—are nice because they’re broken down into bite-sized passages that can be read & set aside without forgetting some important context that came before. Highly recommended.
–
At a thrift shop tonight I found Reagan: The Political Chameleon. It’s a book written before the Gipper’s presidency by ex-California Governor Pat Brown. Once I finish the above, I look forward to reading how spectacularly wrong Brown, in retrospect, is with his assertion that “there is no need to qualify this view in the slightest: Ronald Reagan’s election to the presidency would be a national disaster.” Also, this passage from the jacket got me thinking:
–
“What sort of man is Ronald Reagan? His philosophy has ranged the political spectrum—from left-wing Democrat during the McCarthy era, to capitalist spokesman for General Electric, to Goldwater conservative—changing colors as the chameleon does, constantly camouflaging himself to match his environment. Do Reagan’s beliefs truly reflect the man, or are they merely a method of matching the views of his current circle, with no more depth or profundity that the varying hues of the chameleon?”
–
Hmm…who does the Left level that charge against these days? (Now, I don’t want to jinx anything, or prematurely make him into another Reagan…but we can hope…)
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.
Abstinence Education a Failure? Not So Fast
Social lefties are giddy that a new study is making the rounds which purports to show precisely that, but dig a little deeper, and that conclusion becomes premature. For one thing, the study only looked at four such programs. For another, the report itself includes this caveat:
–
“Targeting youth at young ages may not be sufficient. Most Title V, Section 510 abstinence education programs are implemented in upper elementary and middle schools and most are completed before youth enter high school. The findings from this study provide no evidence that abstinence programs implemented at these grades reduce sexual activity of youth during their high school years. However, the findings provide no information on the effects programs might have if they were implemented in high school or began at earlier ages but continued through high school.
–
“Peer support for abstinence erodes during adolescence. Peer support for abstinence is a significant predictor of later sexual activity. Although the four abstinence programs had at most a small impact on this measure in the short term and no impact in the long term, this finding suggests that promoting support for abstinence among peer networks should be an important feature of future abstinence programs.”
–
It’s obvious that any meaningful effort would have to be “comprehensive” (to use a word the Left loves so much). I would also add that, for the best effect, abstinence education in schools would have to be part of a broader societal effort to take back the culture: reemphasize parenting, condemning sexual saturation in the media, reaffirming that sex has consequences by fighting abortion & free distribution of birth control, not electing moral degenerates President…Meanwhile, Michael Medved has some good insights on sex education & federal funding here.
“Targeting youth at young ages may not be sufficient. Most Title V, Section 510 abstinence education programs are implemented in upper elementary and middle schools and most are completed before youth enter high school. The findings from this study provide no evidence that abstinence programs implemented at these grades reduce sexual activity of youth during their high school years. However, the findings provide no information on the effects programs might have if they were implemented in high school or began at earlier ages but continued through high school.
–
“Peer support for abstinence erodes during adolescence. Peer support for abstinence is a significant predictor of later sexual activity. Although the four abstinence programs had at most a small impact on this measure in the short term and no impact in the long term, this finding suggests that promoting support for abstinence among peer networks should be an important feature of future abstinence programs.”
–
It’s obvious that any meaningful effort would have to be “comprehensive” (to use a word the Left loves so much). I would also add that, for the best effect, abstinence education in schools would have to be part of a broader societal effort to take back the culture: reemphasize parenting, condemning sexual saturation in the media, reaffirming that sex has consequences by fighting abortion & free distribution of birth control, not electing moral degenerates President…Meanwhile, Michael Medved has some good insights on sex education & federal funding here.
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.
Evil at Virginia Tech
A horrifying day at Virginia Tech University: 32 killed and 15 injured by a currently-mysterious gunman, who apparently killed himself afterward. Lord, a lot of people need Your comfort today…
Conservative Standards 