BLOG: Abortion Is A Dirty Word

Bryan Dubois
Sep 16, 2010

The mere mention of the word is controversial - even though supporting the right to abortion is a tenet of the modern day Democratic party.

Debate any abortion supporter and they'll object to your use of the phrase 'pro-abortion' to describe their position. They'll claim that using the phrase in unfair and inaccurate because nobody wants abortions.  Nobody likes abortion.  The existence of such a grisly, barbaric act exists to the dismay of all, you see.  Democrats simply believe that a woman should have the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

So if you oppose abortion, don't bother demonizing those who don't.  All people recognize the inhuman nature of terminating a child's life because of the inconvenience the child may introduce into the parent's life.  Yes, the majority of abortions in this country fall under this category.

So don't bother.  You couldn't possibly demonize a concept that most people feel uncomfortable talking about already.  What you should do is continue pointing out the reality of abortion.  Abortion can only exist if supporters don't have to face the reality of abortion. 

For example:  How many supporters of abortion would be willing to describe to you - during a debate - the detailed procedure of a D & X abortion?  (aka dilation & extraction, partial-birth abortion).  If any of them even know the details of the procedure, I'd bet money that they'd decline to explain it to you. 

Common sense says, I'm not going to explain the procedure because I'd sound like a monster for supporting it.  Can we just describe it as a 'medical procedure?'

Opposers should concede that the act is a "medical procedure" by responding with a poster of an aborted child with the Hippocratic oath posted beneath it.

"...never do harm to anyone."

Let common sense do the arguing.

You might as well agree with them that abortion is wrong and that nobody likes it - and then simply point out that on such a divisive issue there are two groups of people: 

Those who disagree with abortion because it's inhuman and wrong, and those who disagree with abortion because it's inhuman and wrong - but are quite willing to tolerate it.

***

Kinda related:

What's in a name?

The makers of high fructose corn syrup have abandoned the idea of doing a name-saving campaign. 

Once a word has become so reviled, you can't even mention it without turning people off.

Comments

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

 Yes....the mutilation of a pre-born baby in it's mother's womb is just a tad 'controversial. And to think at one time in our culture the womb was not only a sacred place but a safe place to live for 9 months.

columbus avenue

Mime.  What planet have you come from?  Where is THAT written???  Do your history research honey.

Kelly
Bryan Dubois

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  I'd say the caption beneath this one is also worth a thousand.

Bryan Dubois

Columbus Ave, what are you talking about?

brutus smith

 Why do you guys want to abandon our Constitution for a theocracy?

meowmix

So, tell me Brian, just how many children have you adopted or fostered in the last several years?

Also, don't tell me or any other woman what she can or cannot do with her uterus and I promise you, I'll keep my opinions regarding your prostate gland all to myself.

Bryan Dubois

Meowmix, you believe that only women are allowed to discuss this issue?

brutus smith

 If men were the ones having babies this would be a non issue. We would have abortion clinics on every corner.

meowmix

You got that one right Brutus!

Also, the right to lifers always want to go the graphic route and describe the worst case scenerio abortion--i.e. the D and X as Mr. Dubois wrote.   But, why didn't he mention that abortions can also be performed by the simple act of taking two pills?

 

Either way, regardless of why a woman chooses abortion over birth is no one's business but her own.

Pundit

Lots of medical procedures have grisly descriptions. Should we ban open heart surgery because of how horrible it sounds? Are we that childish?

Bryan Dubois

1.  The simplicity of killing makes it more soothing to supporters.  The simplicity doesn't make it right.

If one is against capital punishment - does the seemingly "humane" nature of killing someone make it right?

2.  Open heart surgery is designed to save life.  Partial birth abortion is designed to end it.

Pundit, do you believe the two procedures are morally equivalent?

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

The notion that one must adopt or foster children or own a uterus to have a voice if they espouse a pro-life view is very weak argument...how in the world does that argument justify abortion?That's like saying only Jewish people can discuss the Holocaust. The premise that so called pro-choice advocates contend  (the baby by the way gets no choice)...is that these unborn babies are not somehow fully human and/or are not wanted or would place an undue burden on the life of the biological mother. President Obama called these pre-born babies "mistakes". I contend there are no unwanted babies...every baby is wanted by someone...just ask the 2.1 million infertile couples in the United States alone.

 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/fertile.htm

Gianna Jessen Abortion Survivor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-j9CDgRSt8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0pvR1v8Gjc&feature=related

 

Bryan Dubois

Thank you Mime.  I actually wanted to see if meowmix was willing to plainly state that only women could discuss this issue.   I don't think she would have.

As far as trying to make abortion a personal/privacy issue:  Citizens are not allowed to abuse narcotics.  Why not? 

Raoul Duke

So I'm assuming all of you anit-abortion people are also against any kind of war or military action, because unless you oppose a military action by your country, then you aren't essentially supporting it? And, killing, is killing.

Pundit

1. All the jurisprudence surrounding abortion is tied to the right to privacy found mainly in the 4th amendment, and to a lesser extent in the 9th and 14th. Thus, legally anyhow, abortion is a personal/privacy issue. I don't see any analogy with drug prohibition, but I'll let you flesh that out. 

2. A fetus is not a person until at the very least the 22nd week of pregnancy, it is at this point when it attains viability, i.e. it can live outside the womb with medical care. This is well within the general agreed upon time period when most abortion happens, the first trimester. If you want you may persist in your dogma that all abortions are the same, that there is no distinction by time and reason, but most people not writing for high school newspapers are able to understand the difference. Are you opposed to birth control? Do you believe life begins at penetration?

3. I don't have a scale of morals for medical procedures. Neither do doctors. Which is more morally valid lancing a boil or freezing a wart? Abortion can be to save the life of the mother, still opposed? This is the reason for your personal goblin, the extremely rare late term abortion, to save a life. And yes the life of the living breathing mother is more valuable than the fetus.

4. Women do take precedence in this debate for obvious reasons.

5. Do you seek to legally ban abortion Brian? Or is this just about moral condemnation? If so I can live with that, but don't impose your moral worldview on other peoples wombs. 

6. Glad to see you backed away from your 'abortion sound bad' position. Do you know anyone who has had an abortion? Are you one of those people out to stop the new pills that can terminate a pregnancy early on with no medical procedure at all?

7. Do you think people who kill abortion providers are morally justified? Is that not the logical conclusion of your beliefs? 

8. The frequency of abortions is at an all time low, yet most people, outside of the south, who need or want one can get one safely and legally. It seems like a settled issue. Which gets back to the Chimera woman, people want fix the economy and talk progress, not jabber about something most people have made peace with. Except for the occasional blogger and single issue activists I guess.

9. Oh, and just curious, but does the anti-abortion movement all get back to the belief that someone might abort the second coming of Jesus? Isn't that where it all starts out? Can't ever get an answer on this.

 

Chung Lee

Chung Lee no understand why conservatives are so concerned about babies in womb but after baby born to a poor family......to bad go hungry!  Baby born to poor family......baby no get healthcare because parents are lazy.  This make no sense.  Only thing clear is that tea party people no want government involved unless it is used to limit the liberty of others they no agree with.

starryeyes83

NO one ever explains  how the rest of us are suppose to   financially support all these  "non-aborted"  babies they want.  More babies equals more welfare bucks, afterall. 

Why is that?

 

Abortions have been around for hundreds of years; only the methods are different.

Lucius

Women have a choice about whether or not they want a baby but that power ends at conception. Abortion is murder. We were all just zygotes once and we had a chance to have a life and so it is our duty to protect those babies so they may have the same opportunities we have and enjoy.

Cross

For the record I'm anti death penalty, as well. Also, defending ones country is slightly different than killing viable babies, for whatever reason.

I can empathize with those who want immediate end to a pregnancy in the first few weeks, but the continued zealous support for second and third semester abortions is baffling to me. I'm curious if some of the bomb throwers here support late term abortion? Should it be on demand? Chung and Brutus, do you support this? When should abortion be not allowed? Do you support the Dems position on partial birth abortion?

Is it ok to terminate the fetus anytime it's in utero?

columbus avenue

Hey MIME, 

Why not ask those 'WANTED" ones that are beaten to death by parents who had them out of ignorance, drug and alcohol abuse, uneducation, prolifer guilt trips, Jesus etc.

 THEY ARE TRUELY THE ONES WITH NO CHOICE.

 

Pompous arse...

Hmmmmm.....

w.o.w.

Megalomania

This always seems to be a Dem vs. repub arguement.....

Why didn't the Republicans legislate against abortion all the many times they controlled congress and the White House?

Reagan, Bush..... total failures!

 

The truth be told.... Republicans don't value life any more than any other political group... they only value the votes the issue garners at election time...... if the failures known as Reagan and Bush had legislated against abortion, the repubs would have lost the abortion card played every November... disgusting hypocrites.

Raoul Duke

Who are we defending the country from right now in Iraq? How about Viet Nam? If we supposedly lost over there, then what happened? Who took us over? I'm against abortion, against the death penalty, and against any kind of military action. If you think that any one of those is immoral, how can you not think they ALL are? Do you pick and choose your morality? At the same time, they all happen, and that's just the way it is. Yet since we don't have to be part of any of it, it's really easy to make these comments. But, pull the switch once. Watch your daughter abort your grand child. Unload you automatic weapon into a couple of people. Most of us couldn't even look into a cow's eyes and eat a hamburger. Choosing to kill someone is never the first bad choice someone makes.

EastEndRez

It's the same old argument, time and again. Republicans are quick to tell you not to abort, it's murder, so on and so forth. But where are they when these children are born into poverty? Not wanting to foot the bill for their healthcare, that's for sure.

Ironically however, if these children make it to the age of 18, the Republicans will gladly send them off to war to be killed. Yet this is somehow justified.

Keep clutching your bible and your shotgun. I prefer to hold tight to common sense.

meowmix

Mime Blogging & Brian:--   I won't "plainly state" that only women have the right to discuss this issue--however, I will "plainly state" that we are the only ones who have a the right to decide upon this issue and decide what is best for our lives.

And please, don't pooh-pooh my statements  regarding the pro-lifer's position on taking away our right as women to choose  if they haven't stepped up to the plate to take on an unwanted child, nor have they ever found themselves in a position of an unwanted pregnancy.

I happen to be in a position where I see just what does happen to some children "lucky" enough to have been born to crack addicted mothers, abusive/neglectful parents and the like.    Sorry, I wouldn't want to see an animal abused in such a manner, let alone a child.

Regardless, it is a personal choice to decide whether or not to abort or give birth.  The option to do it safely should be a woman's right.

brutus smith

 cross, bryan and you others out there against Gov interference in your life. Why do you support Gov interference in a woman's life? 

Cross

Answer my question and I'll answer yours, Brutus, or is that against the playbook? Do you support second and third semester abortions? Do you support the legal right to late term aboriton?

In regards to why the GOP did not legislate abortion, Roe v Wade is a court decision. It needs to be reviewed and changed in the courts.

They've tried to pass partial birth abortion and other late term fixes, that have been blocked by the Dems.

This is surely about rights. A viable human life is snuffed out for convenience sake. It really is a shame, and some just play political football. 

Brutus, there are pro life Dems you know. This shouldn't be a political issue. I'm not talking about the morning after pill, or things that one can argue scientifically, I'm talking about all the aborted later term babies.

brutus smith

 cross, I don't know if I can be any clearer on this, it's not up to me, or you, to tell a woman what to do with her body. Now if you are asking me if I would like to see less abortions, of course. I would like to see less wars, less greed, less pollution also.

Pundit

 Seems like I post and then Bryan goes away!

Working on his next post no doubt. What ill informed, reactionary topic could it be?

What was on Fox News last week? What did Tom Jackson just blog about? Oh, yeah Republicans leading in polls... will bryan cut and paste a portion of that and then attempt to link it to some sort of ill defined trend?

Fellow Commentators place your bets! What will Bryan post about next?

(this is critical of bryan's journalistic abilities not his personal life. just wanted to say so before i get deleted and/or blocked)

Cross

Ok to clarify: anytime a child is in utero up until birth, you are ok with aborting it? It's whatever the mother wants? You feel we have no business trying to stop partial birth abortion?

The problem here is what you term 'the womans body', a lot of consider to be 'life'.

Supporting it to us is as foundation of our society, and it's right to 'Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'.

There's a reason life comes before liberty in my mind. I'm all for full reproductive rights.. until science tells me the child is thinking and can feel pain. Then that is where we differ, my friend. People can throw around whatever tangents they like, but to me the killing of a thinking feeling baby is a travesty. That's not to say there are not other bad things happening, but the ends does not justify the means to me.

 

brutus smith

 cross, you keep posting your anti Gov things. Answer my question.

Lucius

A woman has no right to decide to have an abortion just as any other human does not have the right to kill someone else.

Women have the choice not to have sex or use appropriate contraception. Their "pro-choice" ends there. That growing human attached to their uterine wall has to be protected by the law just as our lives are.

Pro-choice ends at conception.

Cross

I'm against any government operation, law, or work I deem immoral and anti ethical, Brutus. That's exactly what late term and second trimester abortion is to me.

Now, answer my question. Do you support late term abortion? Do you support any limits on abortion, or is it solely the province of the woman to decide when to abort when a child is in utero?

 

brutus smith

 lucius, another anti Constitution right wing nut. Why do you hate our Constitution? If you want to live in a theocracy, go to Iran.

Lucius

I don't expect you to understand the nuances of human embryology, but life begins at conception. Abortion is murder. You do not have the right to kill anyone and neither do I. So why should a pregnant woman have the right to kill her baby?

Liberals are so fast to try and protect those individuals who "can't" protect themselves so why wouldn't you want to protect this innocent and helpless baby?

You lack knowledge on this subject and it shows.

brutus smith

 For all those who equate abortion with murder, are you ready to sentence the woman to death? How about life in prison?

Buff

Brutus: Ohio law defines aggravated murder as: "No person shall purposely, and with prior calculation and design, cause the death of another . . .".  O.R.C. 2903.01.  Sounds like abortion to me. 

The penalty for a violation of O.R.C. 2903.01 can be up to life imprisonment, depending on certain factors.  So, yes, Brutus, I am prepared to sentence the woman who commits Aggravated Murder (abortion) to life in prison. 

Pundit

 "I don't expect you to understand the nuances of human embryology, but birth begins at conception." 

This is a hilarious statement. So birth begin at conception, Dr Luscious?

Lucius

Thanks Pudnit. I have since corrected my statement. I apologize for my error.

starryeyes83

And still -no one answers my questions.

Why is that?

 

Hmm?

 

 

Buff

I'm late to this party but I think I can sum it up succinctly, at least if you're a Christian of any denomination.  A little document (or stone tablet, if you will) called the Ten Commandments instructs us, among other things, that: 

Thou Shall Not Kill. 

How do you square that with the killing of unborn children?

Bryan Dubois

Starryeyes,

I think nobody is answering your question because it would require a book.

I'm against abortion because I value life.  I believe that our society should respect life and that our public policy should reflect that. 

What do you think of a society that says it's okay to kill babies?

brutus smith

buff, I missed the part in the Constitution that defined life as you see it. I just remember that Roe vs. Wade thingy in the Supreme Court. 

Hmmmmm.....

I am just flabbergasted by the people who think that a woman who has an abortion does it "for convenience"......like they haven't even considered other options or the emotional repercussions that come from their decision. Absolutely astounded. I certainly hope that none of you find your daughters, sisters, loved ones being referred to as "soulless murderers". Stop and listen to what you sound like when you spew such hate.......please.

Bryan Dubois

Eh, if abortions are not performed in the name of convenience, why are they performed?

Research shows the reasons as follows:

In other words:  they fully understand the responsibility of parenthood, but would rather not take on the responsibility.  The child will be an inconvenience, so they have the child aborted.

(Not only is abortion a dirty word, but the reasons for it will be denied by supporters because abortion is such a dirty concept.)

Buff

If these women fully understand the responsibility of parenthood and choose abortion,  shouldn't they also fully understand how to avoid becoming pregnant in the first place and choose that option?

Legalized abortion allows women (and men) to be irresponsible without any consequences. 

Raoul Duke

If you have kids, then I ask you--how could you kill your own child? I just don't understand. But I'm willing to let other people make that decision for themselves. Let's just hope it never gets to the point where government is allowed to force you to have an abortion...that, we would ALL need to fight against.

brutus smith

bryan says,

"What do you think of a society that says it's okay to kill babies?"

 

I think they are more concerned why a society would drop bombs on innocent civilians for their oil.

Bryan Dubois

brutus, your oil issue is only a theory.  You cannot prove that the United States "drops bombs on innocent civilians for their oil."  This is a theory that reflects your leftist world view.  Even if your theory were true, this theory is difficult - if not impossible - to prove.  It's kinda like "proving" public corruption with theories based on circumstantial evidence.  You cannot prove something with theories.

You believe it's okay to kill babies, but it's not okay to disagree with your unproven theory that the US kills innocent civilians for oil.

What passes for "logic" by the left is truly confusing. 

 

brutus smith

bryan, you made a statement about what people would think of a society, and I answered that they are  more concerned about what we do externally than what we do internally. Why then are we dropping bombs on innocent civilians?

Bryan Dubois

Brutus,

Your question assumes that I believe we're dropping bombs on innocent civilians.

There is a pattern of unfair statements/questions in your commentary and I think it's pointless to converse with you.

brutus smith

 bryan, you need an adult to review your writings before you post.

brutus smith

 buff, how many women do you know of that want to get pregnant just to have an abortion? No consequences? Really? 

Buff

My point is that if women don't want to get pregnant, there are things they can do to prevent it; abstinence being the best method. 

If the efforts to prevent pregnancy, i.e. abstinence, fail, then why not adoption?

Bryan Dubois

Good question.

Why abortion? 

Why not carry the baby to term, and offer the baby up to the millions of parents looking to adopt?

brutus smith

 buff, our "Christian society" is not exactly easy on unwed mothers. 

Buff

They made the conscious choice to become unwed mothers in the first place.  If they don't want to be unwed mothers, they could:

1.  Get married.

2. Quit sleeping around.

3.  Start using contraception.

4. Offer the unwanted child up for adoption. 

Sounds like an awful lot of choices to me.  But then again, by having an unwanted pregnancy, these women have already demonstrated the ability to use poor judgment.

Pundit

 Bryan is afraid to respond. He won't even offer up one of his platitudes about how answering logically cogent questions is beneath him. Bryan prefers to save his sophomoric bon mots for the easily dismissed comments he can cherry pick. Let the children play.

Here, let me fix your logical construction, "The child will be an inconvenience, so they have the fetus aborted." 

See how that works?

 

1. All the jurisprudence surrounding abortion is tied to the right to privacy found mainly in the 4th amendment, and to a lesser extent in the 9th and 14th. Thus, legally anyhow, abortion is a personal/privacy issue. I don't see any analogy with drug prohibition, but I'll let you flesh that out. 

2. A fetus is not a person until at the very least the 22nd week of pregnancy, it is at this point when it attains viability, i.e. it can live outside the womb with medical care. This is well within the general agreed upon time period when most abortion happens, the first trimester. If you want you may persist in your dogma that all abortions are the same, that there is no distinction by time and reason, but most people not writing for high school newspapers are able to understand the difference. Are you opposed to birth control? Do you believe life begins at penetration?

3. I don't have a scale of morals for medical procedures. Neither do doctors. Which is more morally valid lancing a boil or freezing a wart? Abortion can be to save the life of the mother, still opposed? This is the reason for your personal goblin, the extremely rare late term abortion, to save a life. And yes the life of the living breathing mother is more valuable than the fetus.

4. Women do take precedence in this debate for obvious reasons.

5. Do you seek to legally ban abortion Brian? Or is this just about moral condemnation? If so I can live with that, but don't impose your moral worldview on other peoples wombs. 

6. Glad to see you backed away from your 'abortion sound bad' position. Do you know anyone who has had an abortion? Are you one of those people out to stop the new pills that can terminate a pregnancy early on with no medical procedure at all?

7. Do you think people who kill abortion providers are morally justified? Is that not the logical conclusion of your beliefs? 

8. The frequency of abortions is at an all time low, yet most people, outside of the south, who need or want one can get one safely and legally. It seems like a settled issue. Which gets back to the Chimera woman, people want fix the economy and talk progress, not jabber about something most people have made peace with. Except for the occasional blogger and single issue activists I guess.

9. Oh, and just curious, but does the anti-abortion movement all get back to the belief that someone might abort the second coming of Jesus? Isn't that where it all starts out? Can't ever get an answer on this.

 

Bryan Dubois

Pundit,  shall we settle on using the term "human being?"

After all, in your own words, the fetus becomes a person during week 22 of gestation.

In all my experiences sitting in on ultrasounds I've never heard an ultrasound tech refer to our children as "fetuses."  They referred to them as "your baby."

The abortion defenders use the term fetus to de-personalize/de-humanize the baby.  It's easier to kill a fetus than a baby.   Of course, you know this - and that's why you're nitpicking the terminology I used.  As I said, the reality of abortion troubles most people - you included.  That's why it's tough to acknowledge that a human being is being snuffed out during an abortion.

To me, an unborn child is a beautiful thing - full of wonder, beauty and potential.  To you, an unborn baby is just a "fetus" - easily forgotten, easily terminated.  Just a mass of tissue to be discarded in a medical procedure.

Pundit

 Bryan,

Semantics are a key part of your argument so don't disavow "nitpicking". I could go on about how substituting one word for another can change the meaning of an argument, but I'm not teaching freshman Philosophy here. I could lecture you on how inaccurate paraphrasing makes you look amateureish, but I'm not teaching freshman Journalism either. 

Just so long as you do not advocate changing current abortion law I will let it go. Feel free to try and change the culture to meet your moral beliefs, as long as it doesn't cross into making your morals into secular laws. If you do, you must be refuted.

Preemption: let's not respond with definitions of laws or morals, or questions about 'aren't laws based on moral", thanks.

Cross

Pundit,

First, did you really compare a child in utero to a lance or boil? Dude.

Second, there is nothing regarding abortion in the constitution. This issue was not legislated or discussed, but decided by judicial review in a partisan manner, like so many other contentious issues.

Third, are you ok with banning partial birth abortion and other second and later procedures? By your own words post 22 weeks a baby is viable, and yet it's very simple to get this procedure past that time frame.

I personally wish we'd follow the lead of the area the progressives love so much, Europe, where in most places abortions past 10 weeks are illegal. This would be a good middle ground to push for. The militant pro-choice and pro-life groups won't be happy with any limits, but I think this is a good legal middle ground.

Bryan, this was fun. As an encore let's discuss separation of church and state and how those crazy Muslim's are such a peaceful people, and as friendly as Brutus and Chung!

Chung Lee

Funny how the conservatives are so concerned about these "babies" before they born but once they born....then they can hate them for being black, mexican, gay and etc.  Apparently science stands corrected because the great educator without credentials says there are no fetuses just babies..... does that mean there are no catepillars...... just butterflies without wings?  Only a person who believes the earth is 6,000 years old would believe that nonsense.

Chung Lee

Pundit you are wasting your time speaking at a college level when you are debating a person with the mentality of a child.  Apparently, giving this guy a column is like giving the village idiot a job as the town crier.

Bryan Dubois

Hussein, you hang on my every word.  I own you.

My bet is that you'll change your screen name again and come back another few hundred times.

So much for the boycott, eh?

And I think we know what Chung's beef is...

Obsession and envy can be a scary mix.

Bailey

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained personal attacks. Discussion Guidelines

Chung Lee

Obsession and envy...... must be the issue that this hack have with Obama?

Bryan Dubois

[Laughing]

Pundit

 "Who owns who?" - an editorial blog post.

by Pundit

Aw Bry, Bry don't cry,

Switching to personal attacks? You don't even stay on the subject you started or want to discuss it anymore (it was abortion remember?). I was still discussing it, but if you want to go there, by all means. 

Bryan, you put yourself in the public eye. You choose salacious topic to write about. You set yourself up to be commented upon. So it's envy and jealousy when we play your game? Or only when we beat you at your own game? I bet you wish this was your own website so you could just delete my posts.

Yes, people express astonishment that the Register gives your poor writing, shallow arguments, and zero original reporting a platform. Chung Lee was clearly being sarcastic (see what I mean about cherry picking), but as most people can do what you do, we wonder why the Register employes you. Or do you do it for free? That would make sense. 

I notice your posting frequency is down so maybe they want less of you. Has the Dubois experiment failed? Has Westerhold noticed that anything you write about becomes a debate on you with the same four commentators (guilty as charged)? You don't provoke debate about issues, you provoke outrage about your tactics. What's the next topic? You won't know until Tom Jackson files a story. 

You are responding to me because I dismantle your arguments and make you look bad. You can't leave it alone, professionally, which is sad because not responding was the only tactic you had to appear superior. Who owns Who?

You think everyone who writes circles around you is called Hussein? Paranoid much? If you block people's screen names then I imagine they change them. Yes, I love taking you down, so I keep responding. It's a good writing exercise for my real business, which is not commentating on the Register, by the way, I expose your lack of writing ability for fun.

I saw the suggestion from "Bryan Dubious" that we boycott your comment section. However, very few other people saw the proposed boycott because you deleted it! Of course it didn't work. That's you triumph?  

So anyway, was "Bryan Dubious" blocked, or did he follow through with his boycott? We are playing in your sand box, don't act like this market place of ideas is objective.

Bryan Dubois
Lucius

I must agree with Mr. Dubois.

Pundit,

Your responses are too long for a post. Keep them short because no one wants to read the multi-paragraph responses that you spend hours on.

I am not impressed by your ability to use a dictionary or write in coherent sentences--although your last post even brings this achievement into question. If you really want to be profound then I think you need to find another forum other than the comment section on the SR website.

Bryan Dubois

It's a little creepy if you ask me.  (Why the obsession with me, I'm wondering.)

Anyway, the point was made before that the left is supposedly about defending the helpless.  Curiously, most left-wingers defend abortion which should be a crime against the most helpless in our society.

"A society can be judged by how it treats its weakest members."  -- Undoubtedly spoken by an intellectually inferior member of the non-thinking class (as Chung Lee would describe them.)

Chung Lee

Thank you Pundit for recognizing Chung Lee's sarcasm which was lost on the creator of "insight" or should we start calling it "incite".  Dubois method seems to be like yelling fire in a crowded theater where the method is to make arguments that are so outlandish (many intellecually disproven) and intended to be offensive to the thinking class and appeal to the talking point parrots and dispersing agents of misinformation.    The Register has set the bar so low...... Chung Lee have no interest in attaching Chung Lee ideas to such rubbish. Anyway, Chung Lee is overqualified for such type of "journalism".

brutus smith

 buff, another one I missed in the Constitution about the requirement to be married to have a baby. You would be better off to stop trying to apply your morals on other people. Stop judging other people, especially women, since you and bryan seem to pick on women. 

Buff

I never said a woman must be married to have a baby, you did.  You brought up "unwed" mothers.  I simply stated that one way not to be unwed is to get married.  We should focus more on the word mother.  A woman who has an abortion may be unwed, but she certainly is not a mother. 

How about your answer to why not adoption rather than abortion?

Lucius

It is rather simple. A woman's choice not to have a baby ends with the use of contraception. Once she is pregnant she does not have the right to kill her baby.

I do not see how liberals can justify not protecting a helpless baby. Doctor's take an oath to do no harm. Any doctor who respects life would not perform an abortion.

 

Bryan Dubois

I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why adoption is not pushed as an alternative to abortion. 

Lucius

Pundit,

I read through your post again, and I must say that your pretentious tone is not supported by your ineloquent statements. I feel that you have begun to take this comment section too personally, and your ability to be objective is now compromised--as is evident by your frustration.

I am not making the claim to be intellectually superior to anyone because I am not--I am quite the opposite in fact. However, I do ask you to employ reason and intellectual curiosity in order to reach your conclusion on a topic, not your emotions. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Lucius

 

man4451

 

hey now, this is a CAPITALIST society, ABORTION is a BUSINESS just like any other CAPITALIST VENTURE. Just like the current medical system, its just a REALLY late, and I mean REALLY LATE Term Abortions. It appears anyways?

brutus smith

 Pundit, you must realize using more than 2 words in a sentence confuses right wingnuts.  Their attention span is about as long as the end of their fingertip. Throw in pictures every so often too.

brutus smith

 Like I previously stated, if men were the ones having babies, this would be a non issue. We would have abortion clinics on every corner. It's all about control, nothing else.

brutus smith
Chung Lee

Lucius say:  However, I do ask you to employ reason and intellectual curiosity in order to reach your conclusion on a topic, not your emotions. Thank you for your time.

but before that he say:

I don't expect you to understand the nuances of human embryology, but life begins at conception. Abortion is murder. You do not have the right to kill anyone and neither do I. So why should a pregnant woman have the right to kill her baby?

So Chung Lee wonder why he don't take his own advice even though it is clearly worthless.  Abortion is murder?  Really?  Is that a fact?   Sounds like an emotion.  Chung Lee pretty sure there was a court case on that one that some may have heard about called Rowe v Wade.  Chung Lee pretty sure that the ruling was not "abortion is murder"  Thank you for your time and your OPINION.

Sincerely,

Chung Lee

 

 

Lucius

Abortion is murder. That is a fact Mr. Lee, not an opinion.

My "opinion" shows logic not emotion. Murder is illegal. Abortion is the killing of a fetus (a growing baby). Therefore, abortion is murder and illegal (based on this arguement).

Lucius

Life is taken for granted by anyone who has or promotes abortion.

Bailey

Chung, your not only a racist buy your post have become TROLL STATUS.

To say that because people arn't arrested for murder while performing abortions determines if its murder or not is the DUMBEST statement I have EVER read!  So, Hitler was never charged with murder so we can all go out and cook 7 million Jews and Christians because the definition of murder is based upon a government charge?  WOW, the mentality of you liberals have sunk to a new low.......... you disgust anyone and everyone who has ANY moral standing, and your logic would insult the most ignorant.

Chung Lee

If abortion is murder then has anybody been charged with abortion?  Abortion is legal so it is not murder.  Get it?  If it is legal it is not murder?  Saying otherwise is an opinion because it is not true.  Once again Chung Lee wonders how one can accuse others of being closed minded and biased and yet come to the table with false statements and a lack of understanding and inability to determine the difference between opinion and fact.

Chung Lee

So by your "logic" our soldiers are not heroes but murderers because they are killing our enemies?  Why do conservatives hate our troops?

Ridin' Dirty

 ...and Prohibition worked really well back in the day also.  That was another "moral" subject.  The fact is you can say it's murder all you want but it's never ever going to stop.  People are going to have babies, planned or unplanned.  In a best case scenario there would never be such thing as "unwanted".  The bottom line is that there are and always will be.  I'm a realist.  We need to teach sex education in our schools.  We need them to know about contraceptives, std's, etc.  It's usually the ones who like to pretend it doesn't exist that get surprised when their son or daughter tells them they or their "loved one" is pregnant.  Sarah Palin anyone?

Bailey

 

My posts are considered 'personal attacks' while the register turns a blind eye towards the truth and supports the  carving of babies for the convienence of those who are  irresponsible..... ?

If the Register removes this post then its obvious they do NOT desire truth to be told but they instead side with political correctness and their journalist values are worth nothing.

You ask how the Register sides with the liberals and politcal correct Hitler mentality of murder? 

1. Lets see them actually post ONE picture of an aborted fetus.

2. Lets see them actually post ONE article on an abortion mill process.

3. LETS READ THEIR ARTICLE THAT TELLS THE TRUTH OF WHO AND WHY AND THE PLANS of Planned Parenthood, and how they PLANNED to exterminate races by abortion of the poor!

4. Lets see them kick Chung off the boards for insulting every Asian decent? S.R, would you allow people to post messages that sound like a southern black on this board? YOU KNOW YOU WOULD NOT but you allow Chung to MOCK Asian? 
Is this the type of paper you run? YES, and this is why you lost me and my wife as a subscriber, and I told your advertising lady to stop calling us, I will NOT support your paper via adds until I see a change in your unfair and unbalanced stance.

 

Raoul Duke

I'm all for better birth control, and providing it to the lowest income people, along with education, for free. Because actually, I think that even worse than killing an unwanted baby, is allowing a person to come into this world unwanted. And I include adoption in that, because someday you will realize that your real parents didn't want you. Being an unwanted child is the most devestating feeling anyone could ever have.

Kottage Kat

Hope that the statement was not based on personal experience. I was adopted at 5 yrs. old, my bio mother fought valiantly to keep me, and due to circumstances beyond her control she was unable to do so. My adoptive parents always told me that she did not put me up for adoption because she did not want me. I was so blessed to be twice loved. I cannot speak for all adopted children, just know that in my case it was never a question of being unwanted.

stormy

I don't like to debate abortion, since I have a better chance of becoming Pope than I do of changing anyone's mind, but there have been things posted on here that are screaming for rebuttal.

Is abortion murder?  As legally defined, the answer is no.  However, if the Supreme Court got it wrong, and human life starts at conception, then morally speaking, it IS murder.  I'm not referring to Christian morals, but to CIVILIZED morals.

Meowmix argues that men have no right to a role in deciding this issue.  By that logic, people who don't own real estate should not vote on school levies that will raise property taxes, and people without income shouldn't vote at all, lest they improperly have an impact on working people's taxes.  Sorry, meow, but that's not how a republic works.

Pundit states that humanity starts at viability.  That is your opinion; don't state it as a fact.  Logically, human life must have a starting point that is not arbitrary, and not dependent on outside factors like technology.  My uncle was a pediatrician; many of the "preemies" that he couldn't save in 1960 would be easily saved today.  Were they less human because the technology to save them didn't exist yet?

Brutus claims that outlawing abortion would make this nation a theocracy.  Rubbish.  If a fetus, embryo or zygote is a human being, then purposely killing it is wrong, regardless of whether God exists or not.  Civilized people do not kill people, and that is that.

The "theocracy" argument is just one example of how those who call themselves pro-choice try to marginalize the pro-life movement.  We are not all Christian fundamentalists.  I am a modern-day deist.  For those who are unfamiliar with it, deism is not a religion but a belief, based on reason, in the existence of a supreme being who does not interfere in our everyday lives, and who doesn't require any ritualized worship or prayer.  Many of the Founding Fathers were deists.

While the pro-life movement is mostly Christian, many of its members are not fundamentalists.  Its ranks include many Roman Catholics, members of the Eastern Orthodox Church and "mainstream" Protestant denominations, and probably some Jews, Muslims and seculars like me.  Are we all equally active and vocal?  Of course not, but it doesn't mean we don't exist.

Likewise, where is it written that all pro-lifers must be politically conservative on all or most issues?  I don't know Ms. Chimera (state prez of Dems for Life).  For all that you and I know, she may be liberal on other issues like social spending, etc.  Yet one commentator went so far as to label her not a "true" Dem, because she isn't active enough in the party.  Funny; I thought a registered Dem was a Dem.  Is it REALLY because she isn't active enough, or because she refuses to CONFORM with every last item on the party's agenda?  So you have to drink ALL of the Kool-Aid to be in the club?  Interesting.

Well, this has been fun, but I have work to do, and football to watch later, so I'm signing off in a moment.  Maybe I'll check back in later, to see how many have attacked me as a "right wingnut."  Funny;  6079 Smith would call me a lib; I guess it's all a matter of perspective.  And one more thing; I haven't attacked anyone, just their arguments, but I'm betting that the opposition won't have any qualms about taking the low road.  Bye, y'all.

brutus smith

 stormy says, "Civilized people do not kill people, and that is that." What about WWII, Iraq, Afghanistan? And the term "Pro-life is an oxymoron. They are pro-birth, because after they are born, they vote (Repub) to make their lives miserable.

And just because you declare your self something, modern day Deist, doesn't mean you are. Just like some of the right wingnuts saying they are Independents. No, they are the far right wing of the Republican party. 

And the thing about Ms. Chimera is that she is a one issue person, just like a lot of others on here. 

You say the Supreme Court got it wrong. That's your OPINION, which is not based on fact.

Lucius

So you would rather have the baby killed than worry about what to do with it once it is born? That seems like a rather cold statement Mr. Smith.

brutus smith

 So rather than address the issue of not supporting them once they are born, you choose to attack me. Typical right wing nut Repub.

Cross

Very nice post, Stormy. Unfortunately abortion is a tough discussion to have, even without political operatives chiming in with their talking points. It's easy to see who has an opinion and who is interjecting politics here,

Unfortunately the comments section is like USA Network. Characters are welcome, however outlandish and false they may be. :)

meowmix

Stormy--yawn.  Your post was way too long.  Had to wipe the drool off my chin when I fell asleep reading it.

Short point of the matter is this--I don't agree with aborting a fetus past 16 weeks unless results prove that child is severely handicapped.  I'm not so high and mighty that to admit that if I had to raise a child with special needs I would go bonkers.

To put the responsibility solely on a woman for her reproductive habits is nonsense.  I was lucky in my younger years to have not gotten knocked up by some sweet talkin guy when I was "in heat" and damn the torpedo's full steam ahead.  Stupid yes, but anyone out there who can proclaim they've never had sex and got lucky are a dime a dozen.

I've never had a abortion, never will have the need for one.  But, damn it, it want it there for my daughter and her daughters---safely.

 

meowmix

By the by Brian--you are insistant upon answers to your questions regarding late term abortions from several posters. 

Please answer my question.   How many children have you adopted or fostered.    If the answer is none.  Then why not?

Pundit

 "Passive Aggressive Posting" an Infotainment Blog Post.

Brought to You By Pundit

This personality disorder originates in childhood: a child who feels that he is inferior to his peers will make a provocation in an attempt to get the attention of the popular kids. It may take the form of repeatedly mocking a tougher kid and then when he responds with force the PAPer asking through sobs, "why are you hitting me?". 

When it comes to blog posting, PAP often begins with taking the ideas or work of another author and slightly tweaking it or combining someone else's work with yet another person's opinions. If this draws a response that logically refutes the PAPer's position then he or she switches to a related positions that appear to be the same, but always change the subject. If this apples to oranges tactic is pointed out and the position again shown to be weak the PAPer suffer switches to ad hominen attacks. If the PAPer is then responded to in kind, then we see the final step, the PAPer will ask something along the lines of, "why you so obsessed with me?". This gives the PAPer a feeling of superiority, as if people are communicating with him without any prompting, when in fact he initiated the entire exchange. Further, it allows the PAPer to feel that the exchange matters more to the other person involved, when in fact the only kind of attention the PAPer can get is negative attention gained through the original provocation. In short, it is all the PAPer has: petty aggression and delusional victimhood. 

brutus smith

 ROFLMAO Pundit.

stormy

Brutus, Brutus, Brutus.  You knew that I would be gone for hours.  I disclosed that I had work to do and football to watch.  You had ample time to write a more cool-headed, logical response, but you went off half-cocked.  Tsk, tsk.

You take issue with my statement that civilized people don't kill each other, and bring up the subject of war.  OK, you got me there; it was a poor choice of words on my part, so I'll rephrase:  civilized people don't MURDER each other.  Killing in the service of one's country is a soldier's duty; it isn't murder.  So much for comparing abortion to war.  Maybe when the unborn start shooting at the post-born, the comparison will have some relevance.

And I did not write that the Supreme Court got it wrong.  I wrote "IF they got it wrong...."

For the record, I DO believe that they got it wrong, and that human life begins at conception.  I freely admit that this is my OPINION; I never claimed that it was a fact.  It is, however, based on reason.  YOUR opinion appears to be based upon ideology, and a desire to reach the "right" conclusion.

Logically, human life should have a starting point that is uniform, regardless of whether the nearest medical care is a state-of-the-art hospital or a witch-doctor's hut.  Viability is not uniform; conception is.  At the moment of conception, a new, living entity is formed, with its own unique genetic pattern, separate and distinct from the mother.  Though contained within her, it is not a part of her.  That is the basis of my belief.  Yes, it is a belief; I don't know for a fact that a zygote is a human being, but I prefer to err on the side of caution.  Until someone can give me a starting point that is more logical, my opinion will not change.

It is true that calling myself a deist doesn't make me one.  Holding deist beliefs DOES make me one.  Gets your knickers in a twist that not all pro-lifers are fundamentalist Christians, doesn't it?  Well, it's a fact, so get used to it.

Likewise, not everyone who disagrees with you is a right-wing republican.  I've been a D, and an R, but I have serious disagreements with both parties (albeit on different issues), and so I am NEITHER.  I've been an Indy for several years.  Don't believe me?  Hell, I don't care.  As your old nemesis used to say in the cartoons, I yam what I yam.  What you think I am is unimportant.

And meow, I doubt that you would've criticized the length of my post if it had been pro-choice.  If you couldn't get through it without falling asleep, you must take years to finish a book.

Bryan Dubois

First off:  Hussein,  I still own you.   Did you have a nice weekend hitting refresh every few hours?

Stormy,   enjoyed your two posts today.  You don't see fair much around here, so it was a refreshing read. 

Meow,  you asked how many kids I've adopted.  The answer is zero.  My wife and I have five children.  I can guarantee that if we had problems conceiving, we'd be looking to adopt though.  I hope that you don't believe our decision to raise our own kids precludes me from sharing my opinion on the issue of abortion.  After all, we've decided - on four different occassions - not to have abortions.   We believe it's a travesty that the US Supreme Court decided to legalize abortion.  (Chung,  abortion is the killing of an unborn child.  If you'd like to call it 'legalized murder' that's fine - because that's what abortion is.)

Regarding word choice:

Abortion defenders like to use the phrase "pro-choice."  The reason being who would be against the idea of 'choice'?

Anti-abortion activists like to call themselves "pro-life."  The reason being who would be against the idea of life?

Abortion defenders call unborn babies "fetuses."  

Abortion opposers call them "babies."

One side tries to hide/twist/mislead the public.  The other side tries to show the truth.  Who do you believe has the best interest of society at heart?

Loved this statement by stormy:

Can any abortion supporters here rebut this idea?

Cross

Raoul Duke

A rigid view of morality seems to be based solely on the fear of retribution from God. Otherwise, you would be constantly questioning your beliefs, allowing you to change your mind, which is a prerequisite to learning and growth. Try asking yourself, “why do I believe what I believe…”

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy,

Do you believe in God?

Raoul Duke

At some point, we have to realize that our planet is itself alive, and that it in fact supports our “precious” human life that we think is so much more important than anything else. Yet human life is just one part of the Universe, no more or less special than any other part. While caught up in this irresolvable argument over abortion, we go on thoughtlessly damaging our host, the living planet Earth. We can kill a million human beings in a variety of ways, yet replenish the supply virtually with no effort. But if we kill our host, all hope for humanity is lost.

Bryan Dubois

That's a pretty depressing outlook.

Why promote social responsibility at all then?   If mother earth is more important than man, and man's existence is inconsequential, who cares what happens?  Why don't we promote nihilism?

Why don't you commit suicide if your life isn't important?  (I'm being completely serious here.)  Why don't you kill your neighbors if they have something you want? 

Don't say it's because we're "civilized" without explaining where society's need for order comes from, because our need for societal order comes from somewhere.

Any idea where it comes from?

And yes, I'd say your creator believes in you.  After all, He created you.

Raoul Duke

The question is, does God believe in me.

Raoul Duke

Bryan, you are a good example of why these comments are just a waste of time. How you reached those conclusions from my post is beyond me.

 

Raoul Duke

Either you're not very smart, or it's in your job description to comment in a way that gets people back here, thus increasing the internet advertising revenue. Either way, I guess I can see now why the SR has never hired ME.

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy,   Okay, let me ask my questions in another way:

At some point, we have to realize that our planet is itself alive, and that it in fact supports our “precious” human life...

You don't believe life is precious?   You just placed the word in quotes.  Why? 

...that we think is so much more important than anything else.   Yet human life is just one part of the Universe, no more or less special than any other part.

So I guess I'll have to guess what you mean by this:  You believe that balancing our care for mother earth is just as important as caring for human beings?  That we're in some kind of eco balancing act with all that is around us and that we need to be "one" with the universe in order to survive?  Is that it?

While caught up in this irresolvable argument over abortion, we go on thoughtlessly damaging our host, the living planet Earth. We can kill a million human beings in a variety of ways, yet replenish the supply virtually with no effort. But if we kill our host, all hope for humanity is lost.

Okay, so you're saying that our energy must be spent on conserving the earth.  Don't worry about human beings because we're like a virus that just replenishes over and over.  Earth is our host - and if we're truly worried about survival...

Is that what you're trying to say?

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

 Atheist…  A True Story


By Professor John Powell, Loyola University, Chicago

Some twelve years ago, I stood watching my university students file into the classroom for our first session in the Theology of Faith. That was the first day I first saw Tommy. My eyes and my mind both blinked. He was combing his long flaxen hair, which hung six inches below his shoulders.

It was the first time I had ever seen a boy with hair that long. I guess it was just coming into fashion then. I know in my mind it isn’t what’s on your head but what’s in it that counts; but on that day I was unprepared and my emotions flipped. I immediately filed Tommy under “S” for strange—very strange.

Tommy turned out to be the atheist in residence in my Theology of Faith course. He constantly objected to, smirked at or whined about the possibility of an unconditionally loving Father/God. We lived with each other in relative peace for one semester, although I admit he was for me at times a serious pain in the back pew.

When he came up at the end of the course to turn in his final exam, he asked in a slightly cynical tone, “Do you think I’ll ever find God?”

I decided instantly on a little shock therapy. “No!” I said very emphatically.

“Oh,” he responded, “I thought that was the product you were pushing.” I let him get five steps from the classroom door and then called out, “Tommy! I don’t think you’ll ever find Him, but I am absolutely certain that He will find you!” He shrugged a little and left my class and my life.

I felt slightly disappointed at the thought that he had missed my clever line, “He will find you!” At least I thought it was clever.

Later I heard that Tommy had graduated and I was duly grateful. Then a sad report. I heard Tommy had terminal cancer. Before I could search him out, he came to see me.

When he walked into my office, his body was very badly wasted, and the long hair had fallen out as a result of chemotherapy. But his eyes were bright and his voice firm for the first time, I believe. “Tommy, I’ve thought about you so often. I hear you are sick,” I blurted out.

“Oh, yes, very sick. I have cancer in both lungs. It’s a matter of weeks.”

“Can you talk about it, Tom?” I asked.

“Sure, what would you like to know?” “What’s it like to be twenty-four and dying?”

“Well, it could be worse” he replied.

“Like what?”

“Well, like being fifty and having no values or ideals, like being fifty and thinking that booze, seducing women and making money are the real ‘biggies’ in life.”

I began to look through my mental file cabinet under “S” where I had filed Tommy as strange. (It seems as though everybody I try to reject by classification, God sends back into my life to educate me.)

“But what I really came to see you about,” Tom said, “is something you said to me on the last day of class.” (He remembered!) He continued, “I asked you if you thought I would ever find God and you said, ‘No!’ which surprised me. Then you said, ‘But He will find you.’ I thought about that a lot, even though my search for God was hardly intense at that time.” (My clever line. He thought about that a lot!)

“But when the doctors removed a lump from my groin and told me it was malignant, that’s when I got serious about locating God. When the malignancy spread into vital organs, I really began banging bloody fists against the bronze doors of heaven. But God did not come out. In fact, nothing happened. Did you ever try anything for a long time with great effort and with no success? You get psychologically glutted, fed up with trying. Then you quit. Well, one day I woke up, and instead of throwing a few more futile appeals over that high brick wall to a God who may or may not be there, I just quit. I decided I didn’t really care about God, about an after life, or anything like that. I decided to spend what time I had left doing something more profitable.

I thought about you and your class and remembered something else you said: ‘The essential sadness is to go through life without loving. But it would be almost equally sad to go through life and leave this world without ever telling those you loved that you had loved them.’ So, I began with the hardest one, my Dad. He was reading the newspaper at the time when I approached him. ‘Dad. “Yes, what?” he asked without lowering the newspaper. ‘Dad, I would like to talk with you.’ “Well, talk.” ‘I mean it’s really important.’ The newspaper came down three slow inches. “What is it?” ‘Dad, I love you. I just wanted you to know that.’

Tom smiled at me and said it with obvious satisfaction, as though he felt a warm and secret joy flowing inside.

“The newspaper fluttered to the floor. Then my father did two things I could never remember him ever doing before. He cried and he hugged me. We talked all night, even though he had to go to work the next morning. It felt so good to be close to my father, to see his tears, to feel his hug, to hear him say that he loved me.

It was easier with my mother and little brother. They cried with me and we hugged each other and started saying real nice things to each other. We shared things we had been keeping secret for so many years. I was only sorry about one thing; that I waited so long. Here I was, just beginning to open up to the people I had actually been close to.

Then, one day I turned around and God was there. He didn’t come to me when I pleaded with Him. I guess I was like an animal trainer holding out a hoop, ‘C’mon, jump through. C’mon, I’ll give you three days, three weeks.’

Apparently God does things in his own way and at his own hour. But the important thing is that he was there. He found me. You were right. He found me even after I stopped looking for him.”

“Tommy,” I practically gasped, “I think you are saying something very important and much more universal than you realize. To me, at least, you are saying the surest way to find God is not to make him a private possession, a problem solver, or an instant consolation in time of need, but rather by opening to love. You know, the Apostle John said that. He said, ‘God is love, and anyone who lives in love is living with God and God is living in him.’ Tom, could I ask you a favor? You know, when I had you in class you were a real pain. But (laughingly) you can make it up to me now. Would you come to my Theology of Faith course and tell them what you have just told me? If I told them the same thing it wouldn’t be half as effective as if you were to tell them.”

“Ooh, I was ready for you, but I don’t know if I’m ready for your class.”

“Tom, think about it. If and when you are ready, give me a call.”

In a few days Tom called, said he was ready for the class, that he wanted to do that for God and for me. So we scheduled a date. However, he never made it. He had another appointment, far more important than the one with me and my class. Of course, his life was not really ended by his death, only changed. He made the great step from faith into vision. He found a life far more beautiful than the eye of man has ever seen or the ear of man has ever heard or the mind of man has ever imagined.

Before he died, we talked one last time. “I’m not going to make it to your class,” he said.

“I know, Tom.”

“Will you tell them for me? Will you tell the whole world for me?”

“I will, Tom. I’ll tell them. I’ll do my very best.”

So, to all of you who have been kind enough to read this simple statement about love, thank you. And to you, Tommy, somewhere in the sunlit, verdant hills of heaven, I told them, Tommy, as best I could.


Bryan Dubois

Mime,   great story.

This part right here...

is pretty awesome.

I believe that all good comes from God.  I respect Stormy's deist worldview, but I think God is active in our lives, and not just an uninterested creator.

brutus smith

 mime, why do a majority of Repubs go through life being greedy, profits at any cost mentality, have hate and disdain for poor unfortunate people, but when confronted with imminent death, they all of a sudden want to repent and find God?

Bryan Dubois

Is Mime any more qualified to answer that question than Brutus is qualified to explain why the majority of Democrats don't believe in God?

Is either question fair?

 

Chung Lee

Gee, Chung Lee wonder why the Jews and Muslims in the Democratic Party are not Christians? Funny that it is pointed out that a minority of Democrats claim to be Christian, but it appears that Democrats prefer to live by actions and not words.  Chung Lee seems to remember where Jesus healed people and Republicans only want to heal people if they can pay.  Anybody who reads the Bible will find that Capitalism as we have it now is not supported by the teachings of Christ.  Chung Lee remember some story about a camel and a needle.   Apparently this was a self declaration.  It is easy to claim one thing but actions speak louder than words.

brutus smith

 bryan, since you felt the need to jump in, where did you get your info on that?

Raoul Duke

Bryan: It ok to question your own belief in God.

Raoul Duke

That's---it IS ok to question your belief in God. Try it sometime.

Bryan Dubois

Brutus, information on what?   The idea that most Democrats don't believe in God? 

I'll make you a deal:  I'll show you my source right after you show me your source for the following statement you made:  "Most Republicans go through life being greedy, profits at any cost mentality, have hate and disdain for poor unfortunate people, but when confronted with imminent death, they all of a sudden want to repent and find God."

Jimmy,  I question my belief in God every single day.  Just like I question the theory of evolution every day.  I look at the wonder of my children, the fascinatingly complex world around me, people caring for one another, supporting one another, sacrificing for one another and it inevitably leads me back to the idea that I am not God and that there is so much I am not meant to understand.

Creation, for instance.  Whether you believe this universe was created in a "Big Bang" or 7 days as described in the bible, or through Darwin's theory of evolution, there must be a creator somewhere.

Some scientists have concluded that all of life originated from a single protoplasm living on a rock hurtling through space a billion years ago.  That might be true - but I'm still going to question:  Who created that rock?

Or am I expected to believe that it just "exists" and that nothing created it?

Bottom line:  Human beings are not the final authority on all things - therefore we should not presume that we have the authority to end the life of a baby just because we think that baby will be inconvenient.

Chung Lee

Job learned the hard way not to question God.   Seems strange that a person would be punished for questioning and looking for proof...... but Chung Lee now understands why these people will blindly follow.

meowmix

Bryan Dubois wrote:

"My wife and I have five children.  I can guarantee that if we had problems conceiving, we'd be looking to adopt though.  I hope that you don't believe our decision to raise our own kids precludes me from sharing my opinion on the issue of abortion.  After all, we've decided - on four different occassions - not to have abortions".

Does this mean that you have five children and yet four of them were unplanned or "mistakes" that you decided on four occassions not to have abortions?

Just curious.

Bryan Dubois

No Meow.  It means we have a set of twins.  Four pregnancies, five kids.

Raoul Duke

How do you know that God didn't have a plan for all of these aborted babies, that they are teaching us something? To save you the trouble of asking...what are they teaching? My answer would be, "what do you need to learn?"

Raoul Duke

BTW, Bryan. I'm totally opposed to abortion. I’m also opposed to someone telling me that abortion is wrong because they think that they know what God is thinking, and that God thinks it’s wrong. The best argument you could give me against abortion is that you have five kids, and you can’t imagine your life without any one of them. Why not just leave it at that?

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy, if you're totally opposed to abortion, why do you liken mankind to a commodity?

God does think it's wrong.  God gave us the ten commandments, one of which is "Thou shall not kill."  Abortion kills an innocent human being.

I believe that abortion cheapens life and it's a cancer on the respect that we should have for life.

And yes, you're right:  I love my five children and don't even want to imagine my life without them.  I care about the society they'll have to live in and I believe the issue of respecting life is worth speaking up to support.

Pundit

Bryan does this history of "hitting refresh every few hours" look familiar to you? (it's yours, i know i have to spell it out sometimes for ya)

You can keep referring to me as "Hussein" if you like. Is that some sort of slur? I've seen you use it against others you disagree with. Yes, it's all a great conspiracy, but you outsmarted me, tracing it back to someone more articulate than thou, screen named Hussein... maybe he was born in Kenya.

Anyway, like I said, pointing out your logical fallacies is fun for me, so I guess you "own me" about 15 minutes a day. Its a warm up writing exercise for me and you just keep coming back. I wish Tom Jackson would write something new though, so you could cut and paste it. Then we'd have a new topic. I've refuted your abortion dogma ad nauseam, to the extent I could just repost old arguments, but where is the fun in that?

 SEP 16, 2010 

09:16 AM 

09:17 AM 

06:13 PM

06:15 PM

06:33 PM

SEP 18, 2010 

05:38 AM

05:45 AM

09:28 AM

10:09 AM

12:43 PM

02:03 PM

03:37 PM

04:22 PM

05:55 PM

06:12 PM

06:53 PM

SEP 20, 2010 
12:19 AM

12:11 AM

12:42 AM

08:04 AM

08:19 AM

09:03 AM

10:39 AM

11:06 AM

Bryan Dubois

Pundit,  in case you didn't realize:  This is my blog.  I monitor it and respond often in the commenting section.   The time you spent on the cyber-sleuthing isn't really necessary to point that out.

Stay on topic please!

Pundit

Is this on topic enough for ya? Bryan, you never did answer any of these thoughtful questions about your position on abortion before taking it personal. But like you say, it is your blog. Saying god is great and children are wonderful is fine, but we live in legalistic society where those positions don't codify well, outside the bible anyhow.

Please just answer the questions, don't avoid them talking about how we should make laws out of the 'god is great' sentiments. 

1. All the jurisprudence surrounding abortion is tied to the right to privacy found mainly in the 4th amendment, and to a lesser extent in the 9th and 14th. Thus, legally anyhow, abortion is a personal/privacy issue. I don't see any analogy with drug prohibition, but I'll let you flesh that out. 

 

2. A fetus is not a person until at the very least the 22nd week of pregnancy, it is at this point when it attains viability, i.e. it can live outside the womb with medical care. This is well within the general agreed upon time period when most abortion happens, the first trimester. If you want you may persist in your dogma that all abortions are the same, that there is no distinction by time and reason, but most people not writing for high school newspapers are able to understand the difference. Are you opposed to birth control? Do you believe life begins at penetration?

3. I don't have a scale of morals for medical procedures. Neither do doctors. Which is more morally valid lancing a boil or freezing a wart? Abortion can be to save the life of the mother, still opposed? This is the reason for your personal goblin, the extremely rare late term abortion, to save a life. And yes the life of the living breathing mother is more valuable than the fetus.

4. Women do take precedence in this debate for obvious reasons.

5. Do you seek to legally ban abortion Brian? Or is this just about moral condemnation? If so I can live with that, but don't impose your moral worldview on other peoples wombs. 

6. Glad to see you backed away from your 'abortion sound bad' position. Do you know anyone who has had an abortion? Are you one of those people out to stop the new pills that can terminate a pregnancy early on with no medical procedure at all?

7. Do you think people who kill abortion providers are morally justified? Is that not the logical conclusion of your beliefs? 

8. The frequency of abortions is at an all time low, yet most people, outside of the south, who need or want one can get one safely and legally. It seems like a settled issue. Which gets back to the Chimera woman, people want fix the economy and talk progress, not jabber about something most people have made peace with. Except for the occasional blogger and single issue activists I guess.

9. Oh, and just curious, but does the anti-abortion movement all get back to the belief that someone might abort the second coming of Jesus? Isn't that where it all starts out? Can't ever get an answer on this.

 

Bryan Dubois

Pundit,  you obviously really want my opinion.  So here are my answers:

1.  Basing a legal opinion in support of abortion on the privacy clause is ridiculous.  Abortion cannot be justified by the right to privacy any more than drug abuse, murder, robbery or any other illegal act.  The idea of abortion is not found in the Constitution.  This fact has caused much legal debate among constitutional experts.

2.  Life begins at conception.

3.  There is no moral dimension to "lancing a boil" or "freezing a wart."  There is however, a moral dimension to taking a baby's life.

4.  Women take precendent.  Ask Norma McCorvey (aka 'Roe' in the Roe V. Wade case) how she feels about abortion.  She's against abortion even though her case was used to legalize it.

5.  I don't seek to legally ban abortion, although it would be an eventual result.   I seek social change that I believe would happen if the issue were brought to the forefront of public debate in this country.  An eventual result would that the law would be changed.  Social change first though.  Laws change when social landscapes change.

6.  Yes, I know people who have had abortions.  Each one regrets having the procedure.  I've never met anyone who is proud to have had an abortion.   Yes, I oppose the 'morning after' pill  (RU-486), as it is abortifacient. 

7.  No, I don't support the murder of abortion doctors.  That's an idiotic conclusion because it's obviously contrary to respect for life.  Those who support murdering doctors are as morally twisted as those who support abortion.  They just don't realize it.

8. Most people have made "peace" with abortion?  I'm sure that's correct since you described the topic as a "hot button" topic.  [eye roll]  Abortion is such a major issue, a supreme court justice nominee's position on abortion is used as a litmus test when the executive and legislative branches of our government  wrestle through the confirmation process. This nation is not "at peace" with abortion.

9.  No, the  anti-abortion movement does NOT all get back to the belief that someone might abort the second coming of Jesus.  The reason you probably don't get an answer on this is because it's a loony idea that I - and most people - have never heard.

Raoul Duke

With that kind of logic, you would have to think that someone who doesn't believe in your religion couldn't possibly be a good person, because they don't hear the words of your God. Countless innocent people have died because of that kind of thinking, and not from abortions.

Pastor Ron

There is only one true God......... The Christian God and all others are not only wrong but evil so sayeth the Lord Jesus Christ.

TheScientist

What is this?  No one wants to talk about high fructose corn syrup VS. corn sugar?  Pffft, I'm outta here!

Chung Lee

Interesting that Bryan will use The Ten Commandments as a reference and justification for his abortion stance, but Chung Lee wonders how he can misconstrue facts without breaking the 9th Commandment- Bearing False Witness? .  Many of his topics for his column are nothing more than a one sided misrepresentation  of the facts or outright lies.  Is it not sin to say something which you know to no be the truht?  One must also ask if the 10 Commandments are so sacred....does it not say not to "work" on Sunday since that is the Sabbath?  For some reason Chung Lee is pretty sure that he do work on Sunday.  Chung Lee must ask...... why do he ignore the Commandment that affects his wealth and want to apply a Commandment that affects another persons choice?

Mr. Dubois continally equates murder with kill even when the legal community makes a distinction between the two.  Chung Lee wonders if that is bearing false withness or just a lack of reading comprehension skill by an aspiring "journalist"?

Cross

Nice post, Mime.

 

stormy

Ron, the Christian God is also the Jewish God and the Muslim God, is he not?

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

Cross..thank you. Good to see you posting on the blogs once again.

Bryan:  I have 4 friends who had abortions when they were young. Two were forced by their mothers to abort.  All had years of mental anguish over it...one is a recovering alcoholic...all regretted their decision. All gave their hearts to Christ and found peace. 

 

 

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

 An invasion of privacy by a camera in the womb.  Mime

 

Bryan Dubois

Mime, that's awesome that your friends found Christ.  Or maybe He found them?  :)   Awesome pics, by the way!

meowmix

I found christ in my eggo this morning........

I really hate when self-proclaimed christians want to interfere in the rights of others and dictate to them just what is moral and what in their eyes is not.

Why can't you just mind your own business?  Go by the credo "live and let live"?  It just may save you some sleepless nights worrying about gays, muslims, pro-choice advocates and all the other people you view as sinners.

Cross

Nice to see you, too, Mime. Great pics, also.

I find a bit of humor in a pro choice person saying why not 'live and let live'. That's somewhat our whole point in this thread, you know. :)

brutus smith

 So bryan's position is you are looney if you disagree with him.

Raoul Duke

My point, that Bryan didn't seem to want to consider, is that ALL living things have the same importance, not just unborn babies. As a Christian, you should be vocally opposed to abortion sure, but also to our military presence in Iraq and elsewhere. Every day on the news we are told the number of Americans killed in Iraq. But do they ever tell you how many Iraqies have been killed? It's THEIR country!!! Bryan, are you letting your elected officials know that as a Christian American,  you don't agree with what's happening over there? Search your inner Jesus for the answer. If the answer is anything but that ALL life has value, then that's YOUR voice, and not the voice of Jesus.

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy, not everything is my responsibility.  What happens in Iraq is the responsibility of those we put in office to run foreign policy.  I don't have access to the intelligence gathered by those who made the decision to go to war in Iraq.  You'll notice that Obama didn't immediately end the war, like he said he would.   Is that because on the day of inauguration, he had access to all the intelligence and decided - along with his advisers - that it was not a good idea to simply withdraw the troops?  At some point you must trust those you put in office.  If you don't trust them, work through the political process to remove them.

Abortion, on the other hand, is a decades long social problem created through the erosion of respect for life.  Every American has a responsibility - if they understand why we should respect life - to speak out against it.  

Meow,  You have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Those rights are given to you by your creator - not the government, your neighbor, or a piece of paper.  Your rights end when they infringe on the rights of others.   Cross said it nicely:  "I find a bit of humor in a pro choice person saying why not 'live and let live'. That's somewhat our whole point in this thread, you know. :)"   You have the right to bear children, and you have the right to not bear children.  You don't have the right to kill babies.  (That would infringe on the child's right to life.) 

Brutus,  what are you talking about? 

Chung Lee

Jimmy Ego don't forget the 50 million people in the US that are without healthcare that many on the religious right are against.  Thousands die every year due to lack of adequate care.  One has to ask "What would Jesus Do?

Raoul Duke

But didn't our government make the law that says abortion IS legal?

Bryan Dubois

Yes.  Our courts made the wrong decision.  I'm speaking out against it, as is my right. 

Chung, Brutus, and yourself believe that Bush made a mistake when he went to war in Iraq and you speak out against that, as is your right. 

I choose to focus on domestic issues where I have all the information to make a sound decision on the issue.  I choose to remain silent about the Iraq war because I feel that I do not have enough information to make a sound decision.  There is too much information, too much classified intelligence I don't have access to in order to form a reasonable opinion.

Raoul Duke

I respect you views on abortion. But leave Jesus out of it, because you and I both know that Jesus would be opposed to ANY kind of killing of human being, andywhere in the world, for any reason. And if you don't agree with that, then you haven't found Jesus like you think you have.

Pages