The American Spectator

Booger| 1.21.11 @ 6:15AM

The following link is NOT suitable for children, and is probably not safe for work (although this is nothing in any way pornographic or sexually explicit). Please follow the link to Michelle Malkin's website, and especially read the embedded PDF from the grand jury, especially the section beginning on page 99. Please forward this to friends and family as well, this is the face of our country's future if nothing changes.

http://michellemalkin.com/2011.....ts-a-pass/

If this link will not work here I have it posted at http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/

Deborah D| 1.21.11 @ 8:35AM

Oh my God, Booger. Joseph Mengele is all I can think of. The United States of America, home of the brave and the free has created a monster who preys on babies and mothers. And, not to let the women off the hook here -- if you're already seven months pregnant, have the baby and put it up for adoption already. How sick is this?

Alan Brooks| 1.21.11 @ 4:32PM

As long as abortion is not third trimester.

The Big E| 1.21.11 @ 4:44PM

Using the criteria established in Roe v. Wade, your assertion about the third trimester will ultimately be irrelevant. The Court used the third trimester as a cut off because that was the point in time - as technology existed then - at which a fetus/child was "viable" - i.e. - could potentially survive outside the womb. That date has backed up some since then, and assuming medical technology continues to progress (which I know is a hell of an assumption in the current environment), the day will come when the date of "viability" and the date of conception are one and the same.

Of course, in reality, "viability" had nothing to do with it anyway, and was merely used as a pre-text by the Court to justify a ruling that was otherwise utterly unjustifiable.

Alan Brooks| 1.21.11 @ 7:11PM

Do what you think is right-- but count me out; we are not allies.

MikeD| 1.22.11 @ 9:47AM

I didn't get the impression you were being asked to be an ally. As technology gets better in the areas of premature infant care and improved imaging of developing babies in the womb, abortion is being more clearly recognized for what it is: murder of the defenseless. Unless there is a clear case of potentially fatal danger to the mother, there is no longer any reason for abortion; especially the butchery euphemistically called "Partial Birth Abortion". It is brutal murder and there are no 'flowery' or 'pseudo-scientific' terms that can disguise it.

The democrat's unapologetic support for abortion on demand clearly defines them as murders; and no amount of media 'spin' can change that. Any republican who declares themselves as "pro-choice' is no better. I continue to find it interesting that those in favor of murdering babies still think that calling it 'pro-choice' somehow makes it less evil. It doesn't. "Pro-choice" advocates are the philosophical descendents of hitler and mengele.

Gran Torino| 1.22.11 @ 11:50PM

Dear MikeD,
Thank you for your comments. You are 100% right. The Supreme Court has made itself into a secular papacy, the final authority on matters of faith and morals. One day they will stand before the Righteous Judge Jesus Christ.
Creeping into secret leagues with a few renegades, these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, as brute beasts, foaming out their shame.
Into what mental black hole do Americans consign the obvious facts in order to believe that abortion is not murder?
Oh, there will be a day of reckoning for all murderers of infants! A totalling of sums and a snapping of necks, and you will count yourselves among the damned!

Alan Brooks| 1.23.11 @ 5:20PM

"I didn't get the impression you were being asked to be an ally."

Good, when I vote for Obama (didn't vote in '08) next year let no one complain. Not that politics really interests me anymore, but after 2 decades of post-Reagan cluelessness, I do not trust the GOP/Tea Party in any way whatsoever. And you don't even care about ghetto children-- let alone the unborn; you only care about your families, or else you would do much more for others' families.
Especially poor pregnant women. You would build refuges for them and treat them like family.
I voted GOP in the '80s, but Reagan was an honest man. Unlike some of you.
I curse you from the bottom of my soul and hope that you are disenfranchised so that a real conservatism-- one that conserves-- is born.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 6:19PM

Booger,

Thanks for the heads-up!

I only had time to get 25 pages into it, but what an indictment of RINO governor Tom Ridge and typical democrat "Fast Eddie" Rendell.

I hope this gross dereliction of duty taints the two of them from ever holding a public office again.

Alan Brooks| 1.23.11 @ 9:02PM

You guys don't even care about ghetto children.
It's only natural you care only about you and yours';
but why pretend you care about unborn children when you don't even care about others' toddlers?
Why don't you take single pregnant women into your homes so to carefully, long term, explain the situation to them better? instead you leave them to Section 8, plus you even expect the govt to take responsibility for abortion by overturning Roe v Wade and arresting people involved in abortion-- a nonstarter; a fantasy that Roe v Wade will be struck down.

Don L| 1.21.11 @ 6:29AM

The quickest way for the left to take down America wasn't by giving away someone else' money, but with sex. The truning from God, and family values, the corruption of the culture was long the goals of the communist party. They have succeeded just as certainly as driving a Prius on the Baja race would fail -so would a Godless America. Sadly, as on the Titanic, so many didn't believe she could sink until it happened.

Alan Brooks| 1.21.11 @ 7:13PM

Only thing that really matters is commerce.
The business of America is business, you are all getting what you deserve.

MoeBlotz| 1.21.11 @ 6:38AM

Across the river from my home state,the future of hundreds of Phluffyans (Mayor Goode lingo there) was snuffed out by the grisly culture of abortion on demand. Dr.Gosnell was very good at what he was doing and benefited from an indifferent regulatory organisation . God help us,please.

Alan Brooks| 1.21.11 @ 9:07PM

No one at AS really cares about the unborn.
Do you stay awake at night worrying about abortions? no, you do not. You care about your own lives, your kin.
Pro-life is merely a wedge-issue for you.

skip| 1.21.11 @ 10:46PM

You must not read any of my posts.

Your post is unintelligent and dishonest.

Abortion is the single most significant problem facing the United States.

All other problems stem from this basic violation of life itself. If life is relative, just a choice, everything else is just relative. Nothing is absolute.

Except what an idiot you are.

Alan Brooks| 1.22.11 @ 1:34AM

"Abortion is the single most significant problem facing the United States."

Oh, now it's abortion. First you said "socialist Obama" was our most significant problem; now you say it is abortion.
So what ARE you saying? socialism began in '73 with Roe v Wade?

Alan Brooks| 1.22.11 @ 1:42AM

Alan the Wingnut Keyes thinks the HOMOSECKSHUEL AGENDA
is the gweatist thweat to Amewica.

boo hoo

Alan Brooks| 1.22.11 @ 1:42AM

Alan the Wingnut Keyes thinks the HOMOSECKSHUEL AGENDA
is the gweatist thweat to Amewica.

boo hoo

MikeD| 1.22.11 @ 9:50AM

I'm so relieved that I no longer need to think for myself since you feel you are doing it so well for me. Every post you stick here betrays you and your philosophy. You have destroyed the democratic party and are well on your way to doing the same for our Country. Some of you lefties are occasionally amusing. You're just tiresome and boring.

Alan Brooks| 1.23.11 @ 5:24PM

You feel guilt for wasting 12 years with Bushes, Doles, and that guy whose claim to fame was for being tortured in 'Nam.
And you will keep on wasting our time with post-Reaganites.
Reagan WAS the last great American!

Alan Brooks| 1.23.11 @ 5:25PM

Not merely 12 years-- but 2 entire decades you wasted! Thanks for NOTHING.

Appleby| 1.21.11 @ 6:49AM

These are the same people who do not want TheKids to know that it is possible to NOT have sex in the first place, and still REMAIN ALIVE. Millions of nuns live to be over 100 years old, after all!

When I was young, 1,000 years ago, my uncle used to tell what was a very risque joke about a young couple who wanted advice about how not to get pregnant. They went to their rabbi who advised *Eat an apple!*

*Before or after?* asked the wife.

The rabbi shook his head and replied, *Instead!*

Tina B| 1.21.11 @ 7:04AM

Appleby, that reminds me of my first laugh at a parochial school high school sleepover in the mid 60s.
"Did you know that aspirin could be used as birth control as well as for headaches?"
"Oh really, how?"
"Just take two and hold 'em between your legs."
It took me forever to get it.
Keeping your legs closed was the big battle in thosee days. We were, most of us, modestly dressed, douple dating or in groups, had to be home by 12:30 Saturday nites, and then had to account for our evening, every last minute of it, it seemed. Very few unwanted pregnancies in my local culture back then. No abortions either.

Mimi| 1.21.11 @ 9:13AM

Heh TINA..... We had 2 sayings... DON'T TOUCH THE MERCHANDISE UNLESS YOU INTEND TO BUY & IF YOU WANT CHEAP..GO TO THE FIVE & DIME.....We all mostly married YOUNG!!!!

Melvin| 1.21.11 @ 7:24AM

Since the female persuasion is in fine form this morning, I have to ask this.
Maybe it is a generational thing, I don't know. But there is enough contraceptives out there for males and females to choke a horse, but young people still don't get it, and exercise responsibility.
My wife bless her heart, took our daughter and got her onto the pill during her teenage years.
Her message to me was simple, "Dad, our daughter may or may not have sex, but we have to assume that she is, and she and we are not ready to be a parent or grandparent just yet."
As a father I didn't like it, but deep down, I knew it something my daughter had to do, and we are all thankful that her mother had the foresight and the diplomatic skills to guide our daughter and me through it.
As a male, to me abortion for casual birth control is a bit extreme, especially when there are other less drastic methods to control having a baby.
Sex today with young people, seems more like two beings conducting themselves like dogs in heat.
I was summarily informed one day by a young person that it is no longer called, "Having Sex, its called hooking up."
No wonder MTV is putting vile crap like that series SKINS on TV. MTV executives should be taken out back and beaten within an inch of their lives for putting this junk on TV.

Booger| 1.21.11 @ 8:19AM

Dear Melvin,

You said:

"My wife bless her heart, took our daughter and got her onto the pill during her teenage years.
Her message to me was simple, "Dad, our daughter may or may not have sex, but we have to assume that she is, and she and we are not ready to be a parent or grandparent just yet."
As a father I didn't like it, but deep down, I knew it something my daughter had to do, and we are all thankful that her mother had the foresight and the diplomatic skills to guide our daughter and me through it."

You are NOT a father. You are at best a sperm donor. Coward.

Cordially,

Booger

Sara B| 1.21.11 @ 8:51AM

As the mom of two teen girls right now I not only assume but insist that my girls abstain from sex for several reasons. Among the conversations we've had include God's guidelines, psychological and physical ramifications and the hard reality of carrying a baby to term and relinquishing for adoption. My husband and I will not raise their child. They understand a pregnancy is the end of dance classes, college tuition and the dream of a formal white wedding. We love our girls more than life itself and feel obligated to protect their sweet souls and emotional well being for as long as possible.

Stephanie| 1.21.11 @ 9:04AM

What a wonderful mother you are Sara.
Fantastic~

KyMouse| 1.21.11 @ 10:51AM

Sara B., very true -- and "God's guidelines" include very strict warnings about the sin of fornication (what an old-fashioned word!). Key passages include Ephesians 5:3-5, Hebrews 13:4, and especially I Corinthians 6:9-20.

A lot of parents seem far more concerned about their children's bodies than about their souls -- one of my relatives, who is a preacher, has daughters shacking up with guys, but he won't say anything to them about it.

The good news is in I Cor. 6: "Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor [etc.] shall inherit the kingdom of God...and such were some of you...but you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus..."

JoAnn S| 1.21.11 @ 4:31PM

I totally agree, Sara, you ought to be out there shouting from the rooftops to America what you just shared here!
A good mommy! :-)

Canisius| 1.21.11 @ 1:59PM

Here, Here Sara way to go....giving a teenage girl the pill is giving her the OK to sleep around

Pelligrino| 1.21.11 @ 7:33PM

Sara B., good for you! Your daughters have a super mom.

Add this to the mix: There is not a guy within 14,800 miles of where your daughters live that would get them pregnant and give a rip about your daughter and the child in her womb.

He's interested in hours of mindless computer games, texting, cars, what's in the fridge (provided by his mom & dad, of course), internet surfing, 19 hours of sports TV viewing per week, thinking about a tatoo (and where), beer, and bowling.

He is not at all interested in her.

Responsibility or Responsibilities are utterly foreign, incomprehensible words to him. (And this applies to all males in the Western world aged 35 and below. At 36 there might be a chance.)

Fact.

Melvin| 1.21.11 @ 10:48AM

Coward in what way. I don't live in this off world fantasy of, I trust my kids completely. If you trust a teenager completely then your the fool not I.
Guess, what all three of my kids didn't get knocked up or get someone knocked up before marriage in which all three are now. They have healthy well adjusted children, they're happily married and, all are working for a living and not being parasites off society. Thats not bad work for a sperm donor is it?
A parent cannot be with their kids 24 hours of every day. I don't give a rats ass how mobile you think you are with your children. Yes, there is exceptions to this rule, but they are the exception and not the rule.
This notion that, "My kid would never do that," is all well and good until you get that little voice, "Mom, dad can I talk to you , I think I made a mistake."

Byzcat| 1.21.11 @ 1:35PM

Melvin, there is more to healthy kids than keeping them from getting pregnant. By supporting contraception rather than responsible moral behavior you promote sexual immorality, send the message to your daughter that she is incapable of abstaining, and therefore of lesser value, and expose her to any number of diseases. Also, if you knew anything about contraceptives, you would know that they often act as abortifacients. Therefore, by promoting contraception you are morally complicit in the killing of innocent human life. Open up your eyes. Someday you will meet that child in eternity. What will you say then? What will your daughter say? What will God say? Think about it.

Ryan| 1.21.11 @ 2:18PM

To point it out, the pill being an abortofacient argument is a toss-up at best. It's too much of a maybe. The evidence just isn't there to make a definitive statement.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 8:25PM

Ryan,

Do some more reading on the subject.

The pill can prevent a human being, i.e. fertilized ovum, from implanting into the uterus, after conception has occurred.

That is an abortion.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 6:29PM

Melvin,

Any married couple that is using contraceptives does not have a happy marriage.

Momma| 1.24.11 @ 11:09AM

It's not a fantasy world to think you can demand and expect your children to not be having sex. You and your wife gave up the battle in advance, capitulating to the assumption that it might just happen anyway, "so let's get her on the pill."

It's hard work, but you can set the standards and enforce your expectations. My kids are not allowed unsupervised time at friends' houses; I must know the mom, and know that we are in agreement on the issue of supervising our children. My children are not allowed to come and go as they please; they are accountable for how they spend their time.

We have long been laying the groundwork for why we oppose "recreational dating," because we don't want them to be facing temptations that they are too young and ill-prepared to handle. Our children know dating is something that is to begin once you're ready to find the person you want to marry. And you don't start looking for that person until you have the means and the maturity to be an independent adult.

No, abstinence is not as easy as giving into the world's ways, but God's ways are the ways we choose to follow. Our kids know that some day they'll give themselves to someone who has also waited for marriage, and they can love one another as God intended, and they'll be free of diseases, and they'll be free of the emotional baggage that comes with fornication.

Beer (f.m.h.)| 1.21.11 @ 3:36PM

Booger, just wondering: Are you a father? A father to a teenage girl? Just wondering if you've metaphorically walked a mile in Melvin's shoes....

Pelligrino| 1.21.11 @ 7:39PM

Booger is right. He's right on.

It is the same as having your 13 or 14 year old daughter get the 3-part HPV vacination.

It says, "Well, I know you are going to do this anyway. Might as well be safe."

That's not real love. And a young teen knows it.

And it is certainly not "safe."

Real love is the Sara B. way (above).

jolizoom| 1.21.11 @ 9:18PM

I am considering getting my daughters the HPV vaccine without informing them that it is a preventative measure for STDs, ONLY BECAUSE rape does happen. While I hope it will never happen to them, I can at least protect them from one consequence, if not all the others. I need to do more research, though, on any side effects of the vaccine.

BTW, I am raising the daughters you hope your sons will marry someday. They have been taught since they first began to express curiosity about where babies come from, that babies result from activities that are only pleasing to God when they are between a husband and wife. They both love the Lord, and the younger is going to be baptized on Palm Sunday (she's only waiting that long because her grandparents will be here then).

I am also trying to raise the son you hope your daughter will marry someday... although that's a tougher go, since my husband subscribes to the "boys will be boys" school of sexuality. I wonder how he'll feel when boys try to be boys with his daughters!

Sara B| 1.24.11 @ 6:43AM

No HPV vaccines for my girls either. We weighted the pros and cons together and with their pediatrician and decided no.

jothepro| 1.21.11 @ 8:34AM

Melvin,
There is a clue in what you wrote.Think about it.

Le Cracquere| 1.21.11 @ 9:49AM

As someone whose dating years began after the close of the sexual revolution, and ended well before anyone had heard of "hooking up," I have one observation to offer:
[Bangs head rhythmically and repeatedly against nearest wall. Rest. Repeat.]

Melvin| 1.21.11 @ 10:50AM

So what are you saying other than the same old bang head against the wall routine?

Le Cracquere| 1.21.11 @ 11:16PM

[anguished, pre-verbal yell]

[return to banging head]

gw| 1.21.11 @ 2:30PM

Were you aware that the pill is linked to increased cancer risks in later years?

Peggy| 1.21.11 @ 6:10PM

Melvin,
You just agreed to expose your daughter to a hormonal contraceptive risk to breast cancer. Just google "hormone contraceptive link to breast cancer". What a Dad!

Richard Baker| 1.21.11 @ 8:00AM

These killers just got to kill 'em babies. Sick, sick mentality. Margaret Sanger and Heinrich Himmler must be SO proud.

SonOfSam| 1.21.11 @ 9:02AM

The baby killers in this country fear an alternative to Banned Parenthood the way vampires fear sunlight, and for much the same reason.

btw, many of us were first repulsed by Barack Obama when we heard about Rev Wright or Bill Ayers, but not me. My own epiphany came when I read that the Illinois state senate voted on a "born alive" bill, meaning that if a child survived an abortion, they were not just left to die in a sink or a wastebasket, but were given medical attention and care. Obama was one of four senators who voted AGAINST this measure. That was when I knew that he is a pile of filth, and utterly evil. It is also part of the reason I call his followers ObamaNazis

Brian Mc| 1.21.11 @ 9:14AM

Well said, SOS...I might add that it is my personal character test when time to vote, even at the local level. I need to know where the individual stands on murder for the asking. It tells me everything I need to know about how they will 'govern'.

Appleby| 1.21.11 @ 3:12PM

When Obama said that if one of his daughters got pregnant out of wedlock, he didn't want her to be "punished with a baby" (or himself "punished with a grandchild," I assume), I knew this was a man who was still buried in his sophomore year at university.

Claypoole| 1.22.11 @ 9:22AM

If I remember correctly, there was a report during the 2008 campaign that Barack Obama, when asked about his vote in the Illinois senate, said that the mother's wishes should be carried out. In other words, if Mommy wants a dead baby, she gets a dead baby.

Mimi| 1.21.11 @ 9:24AM

NARAL and the PRO CHOICERS are committing SELF-INFLICTED extinction to their Organizations...It just takes time. The BATTLE is near over their losing numbers. Its too bad they can't see the potential LIFE in the UNBORN.! We all humans on this EARTH were once unborn!!!!

George S| 1.21.11 @ 10:05AM

How many other countries have "abortion on demand" laws? Two, three? Yet the Supreme Court's liberals never ever dare to cite foreign laws in adjudication of abortion cases.

Isn't abortion illegal after the first trimester? Yet one can get around this by a technicality: the "health of the mother" argument. Even if there is nothing wrong with the mother, NARAL and PP will still find a way with willing doctors. This is a crime, a conspiracy to circumvent law to commit murder. Gun manufacturers have been targeted by prosecutors for accessory to mass murder because they did not keep a tight enough chain on downstream distributors or gun show booths. They should have known, goes the argument, yet didn't care in the name of profits -- not even the Second Amendment or personal responsibility mitigates anything. But abortion -- a man created right -- does not factor in responsibility or profiteering or a conspiracy to break the law when a state legislature sets its sights on a more humane alternative.

Crazy.

Jack London| 1.21.11 @ 1:48PM

Grow up George. You have no right tell a woman what to do.

Ryan| 1.21.11 @ 2:19PM

What about murdering her unborn child?

The Big E| 1.21.11 @ 3:06PM

You know, in ancient Rome, they had a practice called "exposure." At that time, children were not considered "human" until they were able to talk, and until that time, it was permissible for a parent to take an infant out into the wild and just leave it to die. It wasn't considered murder because, hey, infants weren't considered people.

Sounds like a VERY progressive practice to me. What do you think Jack London? I mean, after all, what's the big deal about having come down the birth canal? The infant is no more able to take of itself after it's born then before, right? Its just as much an inconvenience, maybe even more of an inconvenience after its born, because then it becomes such a responsibility.

skip| 1.21.11 @ 5:41PM

Jack London,

Your multiple posts of unintelligence and dishonesty are only possible because your mother didn't abort you.

Try to exhibit enough intelligence and honesty in your life and in your posts so others don't regret your mother's decision.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 5:48PM

Mr. London,

"You have no right tell a woman what to do."

Why not? I can't tell a woman not to steal or commit murder because I'm not the same gender as she?

What idiot taught you that illogical nonsense?

Appleby| 1.21.11 @ 3:14PM

Canada has real abortion on demand. There are no rules about it at all up here. None. You can get a state-sponsored abortion in your 9th month if you want one.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 5:33PM

Appleby,

As we've seen with the disgusting abortionist in Philadelphia, and with others like him for the past couple of decades, we have both pre-natal and post-natal abortion in America.

Are there cases like these in Canada?

MikeD| 1.22.11 @ 2:22PM

What is the difference between late term abortion and infanticide? Even california prosecuted men who killed unborn children during the murder of the mother. What hypocricy! If mothers can kill them at will, why can't somebody else? Either an unborn child is a person, or it isn't. No shades of gray. If somebody kills a baby during homicide on the mother, what makes his act any different than late term abortion?

We've raised at least two generations who don't give a damn about anything, or anybody but themselves. It goes back to Dr. Ben Spock and his crap about the "Child Centered Society" and Sesame Street telling the kids that "...they're the most important person in the whole wide world." Yeah, unless you're an inconvenience to mom, in which case you'll be sucked out of her body and either left to die or get your head smashed or your spinal cord 'snipped'... and then thrown in the garbage. Where's your defense Jack?

KyMouse| 1.21.11 @ 10:15AM

I recenty wrote an article about a pregnancy-resource center, which also has a maternity home, in my area. The woman who runs it pointed out that caring for mothers who decide to carry their babies to term is something that people on both sides of the abortion debate can support.

However, it doesn't seem to be. I've asked a number of pro-abortion people to contribute to that center, but haven't gotten any takers. They support a woman's right to "choose" -- but, when it comes right down to it, not the choice for life. Lip service is all they're willing to pay.

In contrast, there are lots of pro-life people who donate to the center, and many do errands, mow the lawn, or provide other services. God bless 'em!

John II| 1.21.11 @ 10:57AM

You've nailed it, KyMouse. There's nothing surprising in the attempts of the "pro-choicers" to eliminate the choice for life. Abortion is an unspeakable evil, however accustomed the culture has become to speak about it casually. And evil cannot survive without aggrandizing itself.

You have to love that mug shot of Ranker, though. If Hollywood types ever thought of doing a movie of "Faust," the casting director would jump on the chance to recruit Ranker for the role of Mephistopheles.

jolizoom| 1.21.11 @ 9:30PM

Remember all the furor over the Tim Tebow superbowl ad last year? The pro-abort crowd was incensed that given the choice, Pam Tebow had the gall to choose life. Anyone who hasn't figured out yet that the pro-choice crowd is only pro-choice when the choice is abortion, is asleep!

Jack London| 1.21.11 @ 1:52PM

Yeah right - let's send vulnerable young women off to 'centers' run by religious freaks. While we're about it, let's give them a free pass to the Moonies and the Scientologists, just to make sure.

Ryan| 1.21.11 @ 2:21PM

So it's *bad* to encourage mothers to carry their babies to term, to give them the moral and physical support they need, and to show them that there are alternatives besides death?

What are we supposed to do?

And since when do regular Christian folks equal Moonies or Scientologists?

VBMax| 1.21.11 @ 4:15PM

From "Dianetics" by L.Ron Hubbard:
"Anyone attempting an abortion is committing an act against the whole society and the future; any judge or doctor recommending an abortion should be instantly deprived of position and practice, whatever his "reason".

VBMax| 1.21.11 @ 4:33PM

I should mention it was published in 1950

Jack London| 1.21.11 @ 5:07PM

Excellent - well quoted. As we should know, but the article writer here from 'Realclearreligion' (how misleading can that get!) won't tell you, these 'centers' tell lies to women, such as abortion causes cancer. They are more fake than a fake thing.

I'd say the mad Christian right is actually worse than the Hubbard lovers, as the latter are really just engaging in good ol American pyramid selling.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 5:40PM

Mr. London,

"They are more fake than a fake thing."

Boy, you have really lost your talent for writting! I guess death will do that to a person.

Why don't you put on a meat suit, and go visit White Fang.

Jack London| 1.21.11 @ 5:50PM

'writting'

At least I can spell, Nick.

But you've hit on something here that I've just confirmed - with White Fang, London was accused of being a 'nature faker', a charge he later addressed - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Fang

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 6:11PM

Mr. London,

I claim no such talent.
None the less, ever heard of a typo?

JoAnn Stevens| 1.21.11 @ 2:54PM

You don't know what you're talking about, because you are spiritually blind. If you keep this attitude, I would hate to be you on the Creator's, Jesus the Savior of mankind, Judgment Day! May God help you to wake up and repent, before it is too late for you! After the judgment to the lost, not only comes eternal death, but right before that, a terrible punishment ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS!

mames| 1.21.11 @ 2:57PM

Vulnerable? Ladies? Their behavior is slutty and the resultant pregnancy is the fault of two selfish creeps. The child within is not her body to play with and she needs to understand that before she lets another penis inside her. Don't try to cover a bad decision with a worse one; adopt the child out there are plenty of folks looking for infants since we kill so many of ours already. Spare them the need to go out of country. No matter how you look at it once conception takes place life begins to develope and we do not have the right to kill that life any more than we have the right to kill outside the womb. All other arguments are evil rationalizations.

Tim the Enchanter| 1.21.11 @ 3:42PM

Jack- I hate to be the one to say this, but you are an asshole. Plain and simple.

carol| 1.21.11 @ 1:58PM

tell Michelle my belle to forget obesity and start educating the young black women out there who use abortion as birth control. look how many democrat voters will be born or maybe even getting married first then having the babies

Lindsay| 1.21.11 @ 2:48PM

The thing to do to eliminate abortion? Just say NO. No to sex. Period. But not only if he's your boyfriend. If he's your husband as well. When your husband "demands" sex, tell him NO. Unless he wears a condom. He doesn't want to wear a condom? Tell him you're not available. What, that isn't the "Christian" thing to do, to deny your husband marital relations? Tough. You don't like abortion, do you? Then you must allow women ALONE to decide IF AND WHEN they want to have sex, if at all, even if it's their husbands demanding it. If he leaves you because you won't have sex, consider yourself well rid of him. You will not be burdened by someone who pesters you 24/7, and you won't be burdened by children you do not want. No abortion = no sex. Problem solved.

JoAnn| 1.21.11 @ 2:59PM

Lindsay, you've got it down! :-)

mames| 1.21.11 @ 3:18PM

Whew! What a warped view of the Christian view of sexuality. As a Christian man I am to treat my wife as Christ treats the church. And how did he treat the church? He gave his all of us and if my wife prefers not to have sex with me at any given time that does not mean she HAS to; it means I have to consider her as well as myself. My wife will never leave me for forcing her to have sex or to have it in a way she is uncomfortable with as I love her and am mindful of her needs as well as mine. When she is ready for sex I give her my all and there is little she does not enjoy doing! :)
Most Christians do believe in birth control that prevents conception but after conception all bets are off. BTW the condom is only 80% effective against pregnancy (leaks, seepage) and infection ( AIDS virus can pass through condom barriers). Our preferred method was BC pill as it prevented conception and was 96% effective the other 4% resulted in our wonderful now 21 year old son. I pray for all Christians to follow the whole council of God and abuse of your wife is not in his owners manual! God love ya Lindsay!

mames| 1.21.11 @ 2:49PM

The consequences to abortion should be the death penalty for both the doctor and the woman. To willfully take the life of a helpless child which would not exist if the woman had kept her legs together is beyond all reason. Of course when asked what punishment should be for abortionist if abortion was once again outlawed the "nice" senior Bush said, "I haven't decided on that yet." 'good man doing nothing and he is not the only one. BTW it is not your body being murdered "ladies" it is a child residing in you. That is reality regardless of how you fell or think.

JoAnn| 1.21.11 @ 3:02PM

That would stop the crime in its tracks! Good one, Mames!! The punishment should fit the crime! Unfortunately in the USA, it rarely does, is the main reason why we have so much crime!

idalily| 1.21.11 @ 4:00PM

Mames, I have several points to make in response to this. First, let me say that I am AGAINST abortion. I believe it to be morally wrong (life of mother and rape/incest excepted).

With all of that out of the way, I'd like to remind you and some of the other posters here that actions have reactions. Abstinence is great and should be encouraged, but sex is also a natural human survival mechanism. People will and do succumb (especially when they are young enough to be stupid) because they are biologically wired to do so. It happens. And abortion came about because until recently in history, most men could and many men did walk away from ANY responsibility for the children they enthusiastically participated in creating. They were able to walk away from most rape charges (if any were even brought), and only women were ostracized and humiliated for the consequences of unwanted pregnancy by the society at large. Men pretty much got off scot-free and were often admired for their sexual exploits while the girls were shuttled off in shame, their future in ruins. My point here is that abortion became an option FOR A REASON. Women didn't decide one day, oh, gosh, let's swing and be sluts and act like men and kill the babies. Convenience wasn't the reason AT FIRST. Being alone, young, scared and a social pariah for one stupid decision was the reason. I'm old enough to remember when girls did use coat hangers. Yes, they were that scared. The free and easy access to abortion now is appalling, but so was the lack of compassion for the girl and the lack of expectation society had for the men involved to step up and take responsibility.

I don't agree with abortion, but I have enough compassion to at least acknowledge the desperation that can drive a person to an immoral act. It would do some other posters here some good to acknowledge that, too.

Jack London| 1.21.11 @ 4:52PM

Very well put. The knee-jerkers would do well to realize that the inequality they love to promote also gives rise to increased rates of teen pregnancy. They would do well by looking to reduce social disadvantage but of course they do the opposite and then whine about the consequences.

idalily| 1.21.11 @ 7:45PM

Please don't twist my words to mean that I believe in government's ability to "reduce social disadvantage," if that's where you were headed. I don't believe the government can fill that function.

Jack London| 1.22.11 @ 8:33AM

Oh no - don't tell me you're a member of the "let's cut all taxes for hedge fund managers" school for reducing unwanted pregnancies. Besides, I take it you've heard of Medicare, medicaid, social security, food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit etc.

And for the record, I don't like abortion, but unlike others here I'm in favor of genuine ways to reduce it, not either voodoo or forcing women into illegal back street measures.

MikeD| 1.22.11 @ 7:17PM

Back in the days of the alleged coat hanger self-abortions there was no real way to identify the father; and it came down to who got believed. With DNA, paternity is instantly, and infallibly, determined. And so is responsibility.

Hiding behind the term "Pro-choice" is still the coward's way out. Murder is still murder, and unusually it is for convenience sake. Liberals NEED to hide behind the pro-choice charade because they are desperate to excuse their own rampant obsession with sex and any other pleasure they can find without taking responsibility for their actions. I do agree with one thing; it is overwhelmingly the men who do whatever they want and expect others to clean up their mess. But, in today's world, the girls are almost as eager to spread their legs for whatever reason, be it momentary popularity or the same obsession for mindless pleasure that drives their male counterparts. At the end of the day we all reap what we sow. The worst thing about it is that your obsessions result in horrible painful death for the most innocent among us.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 6:08PM

Idalily,

If abortion is morally wrong, why is it okay in the case of rape or incest? What do the circumstances that lead to the creation of a separate, unique human life have to do with whether, or not, it is morally permissable to kill the unborn baby (fetus in Latin)?

The "exeption" argument is just as illogical as the so-called "pro-choice" one.

idalily| 1.21.11 @ 7:38PM

You're right, it's not logical, but if we were all logical, girls wouldn't get pregnant until they were ready. I can live with this particular inconsistency, because the rights of the woman were violated in the first place. Is it morally right to kill a baby via abortion because of rape? No, IMO, it is not. But in the case of a woman who has been raped, I'm willing to allow her the personal dignity and compassion to make that choice because she herself has been brutally victimized and her rights violated. I can live with that personal inconsistency.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 8:19PM

Idalily,

I feel sorry for you. You are serving two masters. Murder has been rationalized from the beginning.

You want to answer one act of evil, rape, with an even greater act of evil, murder. Killing innocent human beings can never be justified. No exceptions. Period.

How are you "allow[ing] her the personal dignity and compassion" by killing the unborn baby (fetus in Latin)? If any thing, you are compounding her trauma.

Please, give this more thought.
And prayer.

idalily| 1.21.11 @ 11:10PM

I have given it plenty of thought, thank you. I stand by my opinion. You don't agree, fine. That's your opinion. We disagree. Let it go, dude.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 11:23PM

Idalily,

No, I won't let it go. Dude? Really?

It's not my opinion. It is fact. Ever heard of "Thou shalt not kill?"

Is it your opinion that innocent human beings can be killed in certain situations? Are there any other circumstances? Besides killing the babies that are the product of rape and incest, that is?

mames| 1.21.11 @ 8:26PM

so, its ok to kill a baby if it is the result of rape? what difference does it make? in reality pregnancy from rape is very rare as the shock of the assault usually evokes a rejection response by the woman's body - so it is rare although it happens. The baby is not in any way at fault.

The men should be held responsible on every level and determining the father today is rather easy. People make dumb decisions but we must live with them and deal with their consequences not kill a baby to make it go away. Trust me if we were consistent with consequences the incidences would soon diminish.

idalily| 1.21.11 @ 11:24PM

I didn't say it was "okay." Please do not put words in my mouth. It is understandable, and I would under the law be willing to make that particular compromise. I'm not saying it's a perfect or even logical line to draw, but that's where I draw it. Others disagree, fine. I respect their opinions. I ask that they respect mine.

And the point I was making was that men have NOT be held responsible in the past, which is why this nightmare began. In this thread I have seen very little acknowledgment of that fact, you included. Death for the mother and doctor, you suggested, but no mention of punishment for the father of the baby who let it happen?

mames| 1.21.11 @ 3:03PM

What would happen if geneticist determine a specific gene that leads some to homosexuality, transvestism, bisexuality and parents then began to aborted those children? Do you think the "women's right to choose" would mean a damn then?

RichTex| 1.21.11 @ 3:11PM

In spite of the Supreme Court, there is a simple way any state can eliminate abortions. Probably many municipalities can also, depending on the powers they have under their state’s laws. How does any government create a shortage of any good or service? The answer is easy: price controls!

If a state set strict controls on the price any abortion provider could charge for an abortion, and that price was set low enough, there would be no profit incentive left for anyone to perform them. Regardless of all of the socialist rhetoric you might hear from them, Planned Parenthood certainly doesn’t apply that rhetoric to itself and is definitely in it for the money. Would they still be performing abortions if all they could charge for each procedure was $50?

This proposal could be sold in the legislature as necessary to help the poor women of the state to be able to afford to exercise their constitutional right to have an abortion. (Remember that legislative history is important whenever a court reviews the constitutionality of a law.) This would place the abortion mills in the position of having to subsidize their operations from other sources, a possibility but something unlikely to be done on a long term basis, or to attack the law on the grounds that the government can not impose such controls.

Imagine that! Liberals claiming that government can not regulate a portion of the economy!

chris haynes| 1.21.11 @ 4:58PM

Its nice that you have "compassion".

Definition of compassion: Mass murder. 50,000,000 innocent children, the biggest ho0locuat in history. 8 times what the fuhrer pulled off.

Tina B| 1.21.11 @ 5:10PM

The reason for any thinking person to be against any talk of abortion is simple. The abortion kills a baby, a child, a person, an individual. Someone who is entitled to life, respect and a chance to love and be loved. Someone who may make the world a better place.

If you believe it is ok to kill a child, a living person, because of rape or the health of a mother, then do you also think it's ok to kill the rapist? Could we just kill the mom, whose health won't be a problem anymore?

In fact, if you're going to say it's ok to kill an innocent little baby, I will posit that it must be ok also to kill an older teen who makes a habit of slapping women around or stealing cars, how about just killing anyone who does something really bad, but who's to say what is really bad. Subjective morality.

It's ok to kill preborn babies because that is better than, what, carrying one for 8 more months and everyone knowing you were "stupid, careless, sexually active, horny" just fill in the blank. Then giving your child as the greatest gift you can give to an infertile but loving couple??? That's for those who hate abortion except in cases of. . . yaddayaddayadda.

For those of you who say it's a reproductive choice involving a fetus and a mother's right to decide what to do about her own body, fetus be damned:
I know that if you someday ask God to forgive you for voting to kill His innocent babies, and you mean it, He will forgive you.

And I know that if you kill one of His innocents yourself, or pay for another to obort a baby, and down the road you ask for fogiveness, and mean it, He will forgive you.

God is in "the business of" forgiving. Hence His innocent Son's death on the cross for my sins, and yours. That is my wish for you.

Furthermore, you should be grateful your mom didn't find YOU inconvenient and kill you in the womb. Adoption not abortion.

Tina B| 1.21.11 @ 6:58PM

Regarding premarital sex, hooking up, living together and the like, Dr. Freda McKissic Bush has co-authored a book on the effects of hooking up on young women today.

She is currently serving on the clinical faculty at the U of Mississippi Medical Center in the Department of Ob-Gyn and Family Practice. She bases her writing on what she has seen first hand over the years. She's a certified Ob-Gyn, for 21 years in private practice and a mother of four and grandma of seven.

After hearing her in a Q and A on Focus on the Family radio, I realized how much of what she said rang true in my own life.

It is heartbreaking how we have destroyed wholesome marital sex for young people today by condoning this crazy cultures ideas about pre-marital and extra-marital sex. Daddy's who think birth control for their teen daughters is well mandated by Mom need to read Dr. Bush's work, "Hooked: The New Science on How Casual Sex is Affecting Our Children." You may want to override Mom, or Mom may change her own mind.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 7:15PM

Tina B,

Thank you, so much, for sharing your personal stories, yesterday, in another thread.

Personal anecdotes are just as powerful as facts and figures in this debate.

Steve in Pittsburgh| 1.21.11 @ 7:08PM

How can libs (usually but not always anti-war) have issues with war profiteering but not abortion profiteering?

Tina B| 1.21.11 @ 7:37PM

Thank you, Nik.

I am newly widowed and, though I am a public middle school teacher, conservative as heck. NOW. (don't worry, NEVER a lib) Can't really expose my past to my students. Retiring soon, though.

My husband used to listen to my rant, and I his. He was also a Christian and a Conservative. I feel the candor, eloquence, wisdom, humor, righteous anger, brilliance shown at this mag/web AmSpec has given me a think tank, and a forum. I am experienced in ways I wish I wasn't. I want those Daddy's of girls who are at "that age" to step up. To protect their girls as they should, from a culture of death. Death by many means from anorexia to abortion. Physical death, or as an earlier poster on this thread said, emotional harm or death. God bless you, Nick, and thanks for making me think in your posts too.

Nick| 1.21.11 @ 8:06PM

Tina B,

No problem.
God Bless!

mames| 1.21.11 @ 8:37PM

Tina B,

We a have a strapping, handsome son of 21 and he ahd been told by me form the time he hit puberty that sex is a fantastic thing but must be kept inside marriage and that women are precious human beings and must be respected as such. He has dated a lot of beautiful young women and the other day we heard via the grapevine that one of his dates told a friend of ours that he is a real gentleman and even though he is obviously "all man" he was highly respectful and kept his hands above board. :) He knows that what lives inside his underwear can bless or curse his life and others. Is he tempted? Is that a trick question? :)
We pray that he continue to do the right thing and when married have a ball kid!

PJ| 1.21.11 @ 11:12PM

Can your son meet my 21 yr old daughter? She's a beautiful, 21 yr old college graduate lady.

Tina B| 1.22.11 @ 4:02AM

Periodically, a young man or woman has parents who walk the walk as well as talk the talk. Then a child grows up with a different culture right in the home, and the outside culture is not the pervasive one in their lives. God bless these parents, and I have known more than a few. Even though I had strong moral and faithful parents, sad to say, I was not one of them. But I so admire the results of their faithful and difficult work in their childrens' upbringing.

Maybe my Dad's long hours working in the early Space Industry during the 60s, and my Mom's decision to go to work for the P.O. when I was in 8th grade to help us have a higher standard of living, in Southern Cali in the 60s, wasn't the best thing for me.

But having seen my situation come full circle, and a God who has honored my walk for the last few years and the prayers for my family contained in them, I am grateful. We are all doing fine now. But it wasn't always so. And my hubby and I are to blame. We were both children of the culture for far too long, and it showed in our offsprings lives.

I so admire those parents like you, Mames, who stepped up to the plate and fought the culture war with moral teaching and good examples in their own lives. That's what it takes, that and God, of course.

"By their fruits you shall know them." Your fruits show what you are. And as for me, I too have a mighty God who is faithful in all things and hears and answers all our prayers, even with the occasional "no," or "Not now." He has seen my tears and felt my sorrow and regret, and blessed us. But because of His grace, not my actions.

Richard Baker| 1.22.11 @ 8:15AM

London:
They weren't too vulnerable to get pregnant, were they? Abortion, the only legally and medically sanctioned form of personal murder. Aren't we proud of ourselves?

Renee| 1.22.11 @ 10:58AM

Idalily
you are absolutely correct on the reasons of how abortions got started.

J.C.Eaton| 1.22.11 @ 2:47PM

Nick, Tina, good for you. Abortion is a nasty issue and some allegedly very clever people make carefully nuanced arguments to defend it's practice[the one legitimate consideration to me is in the extremely rare case that the impending birth IS actually killing the mother, a truly rare occurrence that has been prostituted in to a de riguer "justification"]. In respect of this argument, you are either in or your out. You're out, bless you.

Nick| 1.22.11 @ 5:07PM

J.C. Eaton,

Thank you for your kind words.

I will never stop speaking out for the unborn. I was silent for far too long, earlier in my life.
God Bless!

Long Ben| 1.22.11 @ 4:06PM

In the on going battle over abortion , many pro-life Americans have undertaken to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness . A palpable expression of this is Crisis Pregnacy Centers . Now this swinehund Ranker comes along and wants to make this lighting of the candle illegal . One can only wonder , just how much of the Blood Money has he recieved from the Pro Aborts . If it becomes illegal in any state to help these poor Girls and little tykes in utero , what is left to do ? Perhaps the blood of tyrants to fertilize the tree of Liberty .

Long Ben| 1.22.11 @ 4:29PM

Abortion does lead to an increase in breast cancer . It does so by truncating the natural cessation of lactation , thereby causing cellular mutation in the breast cells . Certainly it's one thing to talk your girl friend into killing your child , but it kind of sucks that she is more likely to develope breast cancer in the bargain , huh ? Makes it a harder sale huh ?

Tina B| 1.22.11 @ 6:00PM

Thank you, gentlemen, both of you. I am a woman who is greatful to God for your firm stand on this life and death issue. All of the men who have posted their support for human life in utero here have made the angels smile.

And volunteering at a prolife counseling center is a great idea! For me, I mean.

Felix| 1.22.11 @ 8:51PM

What would Ranker have to say about "Doctor" Gosnell's Pennsylvania horror? How many similar "clinics" exist in the state of Washington?

SeattleBred| 1.23.11 @ 12:57PM

It’s interesting that generally people on the political left in this country oppose capital punishment but support abortion and people on the political right oppose abortion but support capital punishment.
A good argument can be made for either that depends upon where one stands on the sanctity of human life.
If that concept is rejected, then abortion is OK, capital punishment is fair retribution, and euthanasia and assisted suicide in the interest of dying with dignity should be quite acceptable.
If one embraces the sanctity of human life, an argument can be made for respecting life at its beginning (conception) and at its end (no capital punishment or assisted suicide.) In place of execution: imprisonment for life, no parole. The only justifiable taking of life would be in defense of family or self.
There would certainly be less hypocrisy if either position was strictly adhered to.

John II| 1.23.11 @ 10:15PM

Not exactly, unless one insists on looking at such issues through the sophomoric lens of logic divorced from the distinctions of experience and judgment.

For example, capital punishment itself rests on a sanctity of life ethic: one forfeits one's own life if one takes a human life in a manner judged--under extremely tight standards of judgment, by the way--to be cold-blooded, with malice aforethought, and so forth.

Under the sanctity of life ethic, murder so defined is an unspeakably vile act justifying the most severe public response. And to complicate matters more: given the condition of our prisons, life imprisonment is, arguably, a form of cruel and unusual punishment, next to which the death penalty seems positively humane.

Pro-abortion activists claim that abortion is not murder, and to a certain extent they are probably right--assuming that malice aforethought is not ordinarily an ingredient in the cold-blooded abortionist's agenda. Abortion nonetheless, utterly unlike capital punishment, constitutes a grave threat to the commonweal: a direct assault on the first principle on which all civil and criminal law finally depends for its coherence: innocent human life must be cherished.

Shred that first principle, and you shred the underpinnings of any argument you care to make about abortion or capital punishment or euthanasia.

And, eventually, the freedom to make public arguments against the shredding comes under assault. That's what abortion is about. That's what Mr. Ranker is about. And that's the point of Mr. Lott's article.

John II| 1.23.11 @ 11:45PM

And another thing. The Left's support for abortion and opposition to capital punishment is quite consistent: i.e., consistent with their basic ethic of irresponsibility--the ethic that drives their morals as well as their economics.

Jacob Richard| 1.24.11 @ 8:45AM

So in your mind there's a justifiable reason for innocent babies to be slaughtered?

Have you seen "fetuses" recoil in horror as the abortionist jams a contraption inside the woman and bashes in the brains of her baby?

So let me get this straight...you don't feel any more moral revulsion at a completely innocent child being crushed to death before it even understands why it's being crushed to death than you do at a man who rapes and kills several innocent children being put to death?

(I forgot..in your world murdering children isn't that big of a deal!)

Jacob Richard| 1.24.11 @ 8:42AM

Satan giggles every time Planned Parenthood wins at anything.

Adidas| 8.11.11 @ 4:56AM

is good

Alexander_thGr8| 8.23.11 @ 8:45PM

With all due respect, Mr. Lott. I whole-heartedly reject your main premise that the court decision of Roe v. Wade equates to a legal decree. The last time I read Article III of the US Constitution, the courts cannot legislate.

العاب بنات| 4.11.12 @ 2:17PM

Personal anecdotes are just as powerful as facts and figures in this debate.