| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Rudy Canoza" |
| Date: |
17 Sep 2007 11:27:55 AM |
| Object: |
Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
By Todd M. Aglialoro
Crisis
http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2004/aglialoro.htm
In that passage from Orthodoxy so familiar that it is
almost now cliché, G. K. Chesterton wrote that there
are a thousand angles at which a man may fall but only
one at which he stands. By this he argued for the
unique, enduring character of orthodox Church doctrine,
of the one, true, upstanding strand of Right Teaching.
Though the same tired heresies may reappear to contest
it—mutated, renamed, warmed-over—the old, wild truth
remains standing, "reeling but erect."
This well-worn lesson takes on a new freshness, I
think, when applied to the culture war. The wild truths
that inform Christian ethics—our insistence on a moral
universe, on a real human nature with its own
teleology, on the transcendent significance of human
acts and human relationships—also reel but remain erect
in the face of perennial challenges. We are not gods.
Moral truth is something we discover, not invent. From
the Garden of Eden to the Supreme Court of the United
States, we have fought the same battle under different
banners.
In what is probably the modern culture battle par
excellence, the fight against abortion, we see
displayed with perfect clarity the principle of a
single upright truth (that directly killing an unborn
child is an evil and a crime) being contested by a
rotation of errors; taking turns or working in tandem,
passing in and out of fashion, each seizing upon the
vocabulary, events, and moods of the cultural moment
until the next comes along to supplant it.
In some cases cultural developments render one of them
obsolete. In the years shortly after Roe v. Wade,
abortion debates inevitably featured three words the
pro-abortion side considered a trump card: "blob of
tissue." This factually empty but sound-bite–perfect
catchphrase made a great impact with its implication
that the fetus was roughly equivalent to a ball of
snot. Which put abortion about on par with picking your
nose: bad form, a messy affair that ought to be kept
private, but nothing to get overly excited about.
Of course, advances in the study of human embryology,
most notably the window to the womb afforded by the
sonogram, all but pulled the teeth from the "blob of
tissue" canard. The 1980 film The Silent Scream, an
ultrasound depiction of an abortion at eleven weeks,
provided a chilling, graphic look at abortion's inner
workings. And today, expectant mothers keep pictures
of their "blobs of tissue" on the refrigerator. They
make copies and stuff them into Christmas cards.
So that particular line was no longer viable. But it
wouldn't be the last. More would follow, and we who are
engaged in the culture have surely heard most of them.
However, even for those who have heard them all, I
think it can be valuable to gather them up and define
them; to identify their originators, exemplars, and
champions; to understand their appeal; and to consider
how to counter them. Let us now look, then, at five (a
nice number, though by no means exhaustive) of
history's most insidious pro-abortion arguments.
1. 'Don't Say the "A" word': NARAL
Names are important to propagandists. One could hardly
imagine, for example, Planned Parenthood enjoying the
status it does had it not in 1942 dropped "American
Birth Control League" in favor of its current
benevolent-sounding moniker. What if Greenpeace had
instead called itself "Vegan Freaks Against Ambergris"?
Would society still look on that organization in the
indulgently tolerant way it does today? Would Bono
still play its benefit concerts? There are some things
we are just never meant to know.
Early last year, in a calculated PR move, the National
Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) changed its name
to NARAL Pro-Choice America. Amazingly, the new name is
even more cumbersome than the old. "NARAL" juts out at
the front like "Nokia" before "Sugar Bowl." But this
name change was not about streamlining signage and
business cards. It was an attempt to deflect notice
from the singular object of NARAL's 30-plus years of
existence—unlimited access to abortion-on-demand—and
toward broader, more high-minded, and less gruesome
concepts of gender equality and personal
self-determination. The change was timed to coincide
with a multimillion-dollar ad campaign depicting the
new-and-improved NARAL not so much as an advocate of
"abortion rights" as a defender of women's suffrage,
satellite TV, and 31 Flavors.
Semantic games have always been part of the battle, of
course. No one—no one, mind you—is "pro-abortion."
Folks are "pro-choice," "pro–reproductive rights," or,
slightly more courageously, "pro–abortion rights." In
each case, even the last, the emphasis is steered away
from the repugnant reality of abortion itself—a sure
loser in focus groups time and time again. Whenever we
debate abortion or write a letter to the editor, we
engage in a struggle for the linguistic high ground.
But NARAL's gambit takes things to a new level. By all
accounts, abortion's popularity is waning steadily.
Recent polls show high school and college students
reporting pro-life leanings in growing numbers. The
pro-life side's rare propaganda advantage in the
partial-birth abortion debate has riveted public
attention with clinically graphic descriptions of the
violence abortion inflicts on the unborn.
Clearly, the long-term survival strategy, from NARAL's
perspective, is to make the abortion debate about
anything but abortion.
It can be wearying sometimes, but the counter-strategy
is continually to return the debate to where it
belongs: the humanity of the unborn child and his right
to life. It may also be effective to ask just why
abortion is so repugnant to so many.
.
|
|
| User: "Edgar A Pearlstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 01:18:52 PM |
|
|
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 01:37:08 PM |
|
|
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
.
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 02:01:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
It is a patient-doctor decision. When the abortion issue is couched in
terms of pro or con, legal or illegal, is moves into the politicians'
craziness. We don't need government getting involved any further than
it has in the doctor-patient relationships.
Just an opinion.
DCI
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 02:05:12 PM |
|
|
<never@million> wrote in message
news:igjte3toaoe4fpr7gpoegtil7dockcpund@4ax.com...
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
It is a patient-doctor decision. When the abortion issue is couched in
terms of pro or con, legal or illegal, is moves into the politicians'
craziness. We don't need government getting involved any further than
it has in the doctor-patient relationships.
Just an opinion.
I fully agree.
.
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 02:38:21 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:05:12 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
<never@million> wrote in message
news:igjte3toaoe4fpr7gpoegtil7dockcpund@4ax.com...
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
It is a patient-doctor decision. When the abortion issue is couched in
terms of pro or con, legal or illegal, is moves into the politicians'
craziness. We don't need government getting involved any further than
it has in the doctor-patient relationships.
Just an opinion.
I fully agree.
Thank you, Scuffy.
And it's not just you and me against the world. The majority of people
hold like or similar opinions despite any claims by a vocal and active
minority.
DCI
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
18 Sep 2007 05:15:20 AM |
|
|
On 17 Sep., 21:01, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruff...@FAM.NET> wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epear...@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
It is a patient-doctor decision. When the abortion issue is couched in
terms of pro or con, legal or illegal, is moves into the politicians'
craziness. We don't need government getting involved any further than
it has in the doctor-patient relationships.
Just an opinion.
DCI
Then what have you been talking about? It is the anti-choice crowd
that has been trying to involve the government.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 04:46:59 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, Scruffy McScruffovitch wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
Most people use "pro-abortion" to mean "being in favor of
a woman's right to chose elective termination of pregnancy without
interference from outside agencies." The phrase "pro-abortion rights"
would be more accurate, but longer.
--
MarkA
(My OTHER sig line is clever)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 06:33:55 PM |
|
|
"MarkA" <toor@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.09.17.21.46.56.846085@nowhere.com...
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:08 -0400, Scruffy McScruffovitch wrote:
"Edgar A Pearlstein" <epearlst@unlserve.unl.edu> wrote in message
news:fcmgec$3v5$1@unlnews.unl.edu...
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Exactly. There really is no such thing in reality as "pro-abortion".
Most people use "pro-abortion" to mean "being in favor of
a woman's right to chose elective termination of pregnancy without
interference from outside agencies." The phrase "pro-abortion rights"
would be more accurate, but longer.
--
MarkA
(My OTHER sig line is clever)
I prefer the term "Step off and mind your own business:", but it doesn't fit
on the billboards.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 01:44:16 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:18:52 +0000 (UTC),
(Edgar A Pearlstein) wrote:
I never heard of anyone being "pro-abortion". That would be like being
pro-tonsillectomy. Either procedure should be a matter to be decided
between patient and doctor.
Ultimate wisdom!
DCI
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
19 Sep 2007 10:41:13 AM |
|
|
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhere in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for the
sanctity of life.
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions would
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where abortion
is banned.
3. Abortion will only stop through education and contraceptive use -
the very thing the pro-life crowd desperately fights against.
Abortions are effectively CAUSED By co-called pro-lifers because of
this.
4. Pro-lifers are more than likely the same Republican religious
right group which imposes the death penalty and which supports the war
in Iraq where ONE MILLION PEOPLE HAVE DIED.
5. Pro-Lifers are hypocrites as this series shows:
http://tinyurl.com/29vzyy
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
19 Sep 2007 11:39:39 AM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1190216473.067030.306690@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhere in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for the
sanctity of life.
Shouldn't it be encouraged so innocent children do not need to suffer the
trials and
tribulations of life on earth but can go straight to Gods beautiful and
bountiful Heaven!
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions would
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where abortion
is banned.
Before abortion was made legal it was still practiced by back alley quacks
who injured and some times killed young girls. And those that declined
illegal
abortion were forced to spend eighteen years of their lives raising a child
they did not want.
3. Abortion will only stop through education and contraceptive use -
the very thing the pro-life crowd desperately fights against.
Abortions are effectively CAUSED By co-called pro-lifers because of
this.
4. Pro-lifers are more than likely the same Republican religious
right group which imposes the death penalty and which supports the war
in Iraq where ONE MILLION PEOPLE HAVE DIED.
90 % of anti abortionists are men or women who are incapable of preganancy.
5. Pro-Lifers are hypocrites as this series shows:
http://tinyurl.com/29vzyy
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
19 Sep 2007 11:53:27 AM |
|
|
On Sep 19, 12:39 pm, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1190216473.067030.306690@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhere in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for the
sanctity of life.
Shouldn't it be encouraged so innocent children do not need to suffer the
trials and
tribulations of life on earth but can go straight to Gods beautiful and
bountiful Heaven!
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions would
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where abortion
is banned.
Before abortion was made legal it was still practiced by back alley quacks
who injured and some times killed young girls. And those that declined
illegal
abortion were forced to spend eighteen years of their lives raising a child
they did not want.
You never heard of adoption?
3. Abortion will only stop through education and contraceptive use -
the very thing the pro-life crowd desperately fights against.
Abortions are effectively CAUSED By co-called pro-lifers because of
this.
4. Pro-lifers are more than likely the same Republican religious
right group which imposes the death penalty and which supports the war
in Iraq where ONE MILLION PEOPLE HAVE DIED.
90 % of anti abortionists are men or women who are incapable of preganancy.
5. Pro-Lifers are hypocrites as this series shows:
http://tinyurl.com/29vzyy
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?R3d5bmXw?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
19 Sep 2007 04:43:31 PM |
|
|
On Sep 19, 11:53 am, wrote:
On Sep 19, 12:39 pm, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1190216473.067030.306690@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhere in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for the
sanctity of life.
Shouldn't it be encouraged so innocent children do not need to suffer the
trials and
tribulations of life on earth but can go straight to Gods beautiful and
bountiful Heaven!
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions would
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where abortion
is banned.
Before abortion was made legal it was still practiced by back alley quacks
who injured and some times killed young girls. And those that declined
illegal
abortion were forced to spend eighteen years of their lives raising a child
they did not want.
You never heard of adoption?
That isn't an alternative to abortion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
20 Sep 2007 09:30:33 AM |
|
|
On Sep 19, 5:43 pm, Gwyne=F0 <bennetwitho...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 19, 11:53 am, wrote:
On Sep 19, 12:39 pm, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1190216473.067030.306690@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhere=
in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for the
sanctity of life.
Shouldn't it be encouraged so innocent children do not need to suffer=
the
trials and
tribulations of life on earth but can go straight to Gods beautiful a=
nd
bountiful Heaven!
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions would
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where aborti=
on
is banned.
Before abortion was made legal it was still practiced by back alley q=
uacks
who injured and some times killed young girls. And those that declined
illegal
abortion were forced to spend eighteen years of their lives raising a=
child
they did not want.
You never heard of adoption?
That isn't an alternative to abortion.
It's an alternative *other than abortion* to being "forced to spend
eighteen years of their lives raising a child they did not want".
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?R3d5bmXw?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
20 Sep 2007 09:33:21 AM |
|
|
On Sep 20, 9:30 am, wrote:
On Sep 19, 5:43 pm, Gwyne=F0 <bennetwitho...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 19, 11:53 am, wrote:
On Sep 19, 12:39 pm, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1190216473.067030.306690@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
1. The fact is that abortion is legal. It is not banned anywhe=
re in
your Bible, nor does your god show any reverence whatsoever for t=
he
sanctity of life.
Shouldn't it be encouraged so innocent children do not need to suff=
er the
trials and
tribulations of life on earth but can go straight to Gods beautiful=
and
bountiful Heaven!
2. The fact is that if abortion were made illegal, abortions wou=
ld
not stop. This is proven beyond contention in nations where abor=
tion
is banned.
Before abortion was made legal it was still practiced by back alley=
quacks
who injured and some times killed young girls. And those that decli=
ned
illegal
abortion were forced to spend eighteen years of their lives raising=
a child
they did not want.
You never heard of adoption?
That isn't an alternative to abortion.
It's an alternative...
..=2E.to parenthood.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Life Dodges |
20 Sep 2007 11:03:24 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:30:33 -0700,
patrick.barnes@standardregister.com wrote:
On Sep 19, 5:43 pm, Gwyneð <bennetwitho...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 19, 11:53 am, wrote:
You never heard of adoption?
That isn't an alternative to abortion.
It's an alternative *other than abortion*
No, carrying to term is NOT a viable alternative to NOT having to
continue an unwanted pregnancy.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Five Pathetic Equivocations of Rudy Canoza |
19 Sep 2007 10:33:41 AM |
|
|
Do you have permission to post a Copyrighted article? Just curious.
But we can deal with your five so-called dodges right here. Not one
of them is a dodge.
1. 'Don't Say the A word': NARAL
Abortion is abortion. There. The word is right there twice. So what
if an organization changes its name? Christian organizations disguise
their dishonesty frequently with misleading names for the endless
organizations they set up. Pro-Life is a case in point. These so-
called pro-lifers are the same people who support the war in Iraq that
has killed OVER ONE MILLION PEOPLE.
They're not pro-life. They're hypocritical assholes as my series on
that very topic in this very news group demonstrated
2. 'Personally Opposed, But...': Mario Cuomo
So what? How is this a "dodge"? So Mario Cuomo disagrees, so what?
He's respecting the law. What do you expect him to do?
3. 'Safe, Legal, and Rare': Bill Clinton
This is as true a statement as you can get.
4. 'Embrace the Guilt': Naomi Wolf
Any guilt is solely induced by so-called pro-life assholes like you
who promote inane unworkable programs like abstinence whilst
desperately trying to ban sex-education and condom use.
5. 'Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice': The Religious Coalition for
Reproductive Choice
Is this the best you can do? Is this how pathetic you've become?
Sad but predictable.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hatter" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pathetic Equivocations of Rudy Canoza |
19 Sep 2007 11:21:25 AM |
|
|
On Sep 19, 11:33 am, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
Do you have permission to post a Copyrighted article? Just curious.
But we can deal with your five so-called dodges right here. Not one
of them is a dodge.
1. 'Don't Say the A word': NARAL
Abortion is abortion. There. The word is right there twice. So what
if an organization changes its name? Christian organizations disguise
their dishonesty frequently with misleading names for the endless
organizations they set up. Pro-Life is a case in point. These so-
called pro-lifers are the same people who support the war in Iraq that
has killed OVER ONE MILLION PEOPLE.
They're not pro-life. They're hypocritical assholes as my series on
that very topic in this very news group demonstrated
2. 'Personally Opposed, But...': Mario Cuomo
So what? How is this a "dodge"? So Mario Cuomo disagrees, so what?
He's respecting the law. What do you expect him to do?
3. 'Safe, Legal, and Rare': Bill Clinton
This is as true a statement as you can get.
4. 'Embrace the Guilt': Naomi Wolf
Any guilt is solely induced by so-called pro-life assholes like you
who promote inane unworkable programs like abstinence whilst
desperately trying to ban sex-education and condom use.
5. 'Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice': The Religious Coalition for
Reproductive Choice
Is this the best you can do? Is this how pathetic you've become?
Sad but predictable.
And not one word you will ever say, no matter how, true, reasonable,
practical, understanding, intelligent, even handed, tolerant, or so
forth, no word will make people such as the orginal poster of the pile
of lies that started these threads, move their viewpoint one
millimeter, or treat others with an ounce of respect. As you say, Sad
but predictable
Hatter
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: bud the dud - plagiarist.........Five Pathetic Equivocations of Rudy Canoza |
19 Sep 2007 04:42:15 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:33:41 -0700, Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Do you have permission to post a Copyrighted article? Just curious.
You yourself plagiarized the words of others in some of your very first
allegations against the biblical flood, bubba dud.
You didn't have permission, plagiarist.
But we can deal with your five so-called dodges right here. Not one
of them is a dodge.
1. 'Don't Say the A word': NARAL
Abortion is abortion. There. The word is right there twice. So what
if an organization changes its name? Christian organizations disguise
their dishonesty frequently with misleading names for the endless
organizations they set up. Pro-Life is a case in point. These so-
called pro-lifers are the same people who support the war in Iraq that
has killed OVER ONE MILLION PEOPLE.
They're not pro-life. They're hypocritical assholes as my series on
that very topic in this very news group demonstrated
2. 'Personally Opposed, But...': Mario Cuomo
So what? How is this a "dodge"? So Mario Cuomo disagrees, so what?
He's respecting the law. What do you expect him to do?
3. 'Safe, Legal, and Rare': Bill Clinton
This is as true a statement as you can get.
4. 'Embrace the Guilt': Naomi Wolf
Any guilt is solely induced by so-called pro-life assholes like you
who promote inane unworkable programs like abstinence whilst
desperately trying to ban sex-education and condom use.
5. 'Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice': The Religious Coalition for
Reproductive Choice
Is this the best you can do? Is this how pathetic you've become?
Sad but predictable.
Budikka
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 03:23:54 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza
<pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
By Todd M. Aglialoro
Crisis
http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2004/aglialoro.htm
Abuse complaint sent.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 06:07:58 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza
<pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
It's none of youir business. Dodge that one, Skippy.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 11:33:38 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I
Troll.
<plonk>
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"How come God gets credit whenever something good happens? Where was he
when her heart stopped?"
- Dr. House
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rudy Canoza" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 11:36:17 AM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I
Troll.
<plonk>
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Larry" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 12:35:32 PM |
|
|
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I
Troll.
<plonk>
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 12:57:55 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:35:32 -0700, Larry <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
wrote:
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
According to authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in their
book "Freakonomics" - publisher Harper Collins, 2005, legal abortions
accounted directly for the decrease in crime rates. The book is a must
read and provides a backdrop to the reasoning behind legislation and
public policy. It's a good read!
Also Jamie Whyte's "Crimes Against Logic - Exposing the Bogus
Arguments of Politicians, Journalist and Other Serial Offenders,"
published by McGraw Hill, 2003, is a fun yet informative read in
regards to public utterance by those who should know better.
DCI
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 03:21:51 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:57:55 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:35:32 -0700, Larry <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
wrote:
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
According to authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in their
book "Freakonomics" - publisher Harper Collins, 2005, legal abortions
accounted directly for the decrease in crime rates.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that when abortion is criminal,
women die of abortion.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 06:14:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:21:51 -0400, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:57:55 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:35:32 -0700, Larry <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
wrote:
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
According to authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in their
book "Freakonomics" - publisher Harper Collins, 2005, legal abortions
accounted directly for the decrease in crime rates.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that when abortion is criminal,
women die of abortion.
I believe you added a wrinkle that is not needed, The cited book
addresses the issue of abortion and subsequent crime rates to the
period of Row vs Wade, i.e. legal abortion, So you are right, your
statement has nothing to do with my statement with a book reference
that you can check out.
DCI
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 08:12:50 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:14:23 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:21:51 -0400, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:57:55 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:35:32 -0700, Larry <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
wrote:
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
According to authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in their
book "Freakonomics" - publisher Harper Collins, 2005, legal abortions
accounted directly for the decrease in crime rates.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that when abortion is criminal,
women die of abortion.
I believe you added a wrinkle that is not needed, The cited book
addresses the issue of abortion and subsequent crime rates to the
period of Row vs Wade, i.e. legal abortion
You responded to Larry's post about women dying from illegal abortions
with a book that has nothing to do with that subject?
You are right, your statement has nothing to do with Larry's statement
that criminalizing abortion kills women.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
| User: "never@million" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 08:53:35 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:12:50 -0400, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:14:23 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:21:51 -0400, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:57:55 -0700, never@million wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:35:32 -0700, Larry <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
wrote:
On Sep 17, 11:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Someone thinks its cleaver to cut and paste.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
In the years since Roe v. Wade was decided, thousands of American
women's lives have been saved by access to legal abortion. It is
estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal
abortions each year and that botched illegal abortions caused as many
as 5,000 annual deaths. Barriers to abortion endanger women's health
by forcing women to delay the procedure, compelling them to carry
unwanted pregnancies to term, and leading them to seek unsafe and
illegal abortions.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Science-Safety-of-Legal-Abortion.pdf
According to authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in their
book "Freakonomics" - publisher Harper Collins, 2005, legal abortions
accounted directly for the decrease in crime rates.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that when abortion is criminal,
women die of abortion.
I believe you added a wrinkle that is not needed, The cited book
addresses the issue of abortion and subsequent crime rates to the
period of Row vs Wade, i.e. legal abortion
You responded to Larry's post about women dying from illegal abortions
with a book that has nothing to do with that subject?
You are right, your statement has nothing to do with Larry's statement
that criminalizing abortion kills women.
This is not the chicken or the egg statement.
DCI
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Ejercito" |
|
| Title: Re: Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I |
17 Sep 2007 11:38:39 AM |
|
|
On Sep 17, 9:36 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:27:55 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Five Pro-Abortion Dodges - Part I
Troll.
<plonk>
Little markee admits he isn't serious. Thanks.
Apparently the concept of an atheist who thinks that abortion might
sometimes be a bad idea is alien to him.
Michael
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
