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.




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.



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.


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



 "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

I must agree with Mr. Dubois.


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. 


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?


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. 



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.






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.


Chung Lee




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).


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


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?



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.