One can never soundly argue that a choice, or privacy, trumps a life.
Squarestate on May 10, 2008 at 11:07 AM

That’s precisely why no liberal has ever tried to make that argument. And no liberal ever will. Remember, liberals publically pride themselves on never making any moral choices whatsoever. Instead, they treat everything as an absolute.

Liberals never tolerate anything. No liberal has ever said that homosexuals annoy the Hell out of Him, but he’s willing to put up with them anyway. Instead, liberals have to re-define that singularly pestilent fetish as a “lifestyle,” at least as wonderful as mom and apple pie – if anything, even MORE deeply cherished than that.

Likewise, no liberal has ever admitted that abortion is – at best – morally repugnant, but that it is worth it to rid himself of a lifetime burden. And no liberal ever will.

Snail darters; banana slugs; convicted mass murderers and terrorists… It is always worth every effort and expense (on the part of others, of course) to preserve the Holy Lifeforce of all of Planet Gaia’s infinitely beloved brothers and sisters.

But an unborn baby? What? How could anyone even IMAGINE that such an utterly inhuman lump of worthless protoplasm might be deserving of a second’s consideration – let alone protection?

The video above is very instructive in that is highlights the way liberals define freedom of speech, which is basically that they are allowed to speak but conservatives are not.

According to Mr. Robert Eugen King, Sophomore and student government…..

One can never soundly argue that a choice, or privacy, trumps a life.

I’m pro choice and I find this to be deplorable.

beefytee on May 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
You are a contradiction.

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 8:02 PM

And apparently, beefytee, now you’re too liberal. Hard to please everyone, huh? I feel your pain.

I’m pro choice and I find this to be deplorable.

beefytee on May 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM

You are a contradiction.

Why can’t more liberals be like me? You know I was posting on some liberal blog and I got run outta town for being to conservative when seriously all I was being was reasonable.

That’s why I have being labeled a liberal, for that, and for stuff like this video.

JeffB. on May 8, 2008 at 1:14 AM

Was it not the pro-abortion student, that was making the angry protest?

I understand, there is speculation about when an unborn is a complete human being, but there were no anti-abortion laws at the time of Jesus and surely there were abortions at His time, but I guess He didn’t seem necessary to talk about that issue.

Indy Conservative on May 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM

Proverbs 6:16-19

16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Your claim is inconsistent with the Bible. Try again.

logis on May 7, 2008 at 6:25 PM

Brilliant.

I agree, if the woman is 2 or 3 months pregnant. But if she is 6 or 7 months pregnant then it’s a different matter altogether.

MB4 on May 8, 2008 at 12:25 AM

Talk about a specious argument. What, because there aren’t any stretchmarks yet it’s okay to “end the pregnancy”?

We are justly judged by the way we treat the helpless. May God grant us a national awakening.

1 – I think killing the unborn is a crime. No unborn child deserves to die unjustly, unless as a Catholic, the Church approves it in extreme circumstances such as saving the mother’s life.

Huh? I don’t find any exceptions in my Catechism of the Catholic Church. I find “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.” and that procurement of an abortion “incurs excommunication” (even formal cooperation is considered a “grave offense”). Practically speaking, it means the utmost effort is made to protect both mom and baby at all times during pregnancy. The Catholic Church never “approves” abortion.

Thuja – aren’t you glad your mom was one of those “fetalidolaters”? I am a proud fetalidolater and I’m sure my pregnant patients are glad that I am.

Ladies its not about you, its about your baby.

2) The privacy argument is absurd.
Should people be allowed to cannibalize each other in the privacy of their homes?
Should terrorists be allowed to develop nuclear technology (with which to destroy the people of this country) in the privacy of their own homes?
Should fathers and daughters–uurrrrpp!!–in the privacy of their own homes? (I guess there’s nothing wrong with that guy in Austria.)
(The bedroom: aka, get-out-of-jail-free card!)

3) If men don’t have a say in abortions because it’s “not their body”, then why do gays have any say in the matter? (Whether this guy is gay or not has little to do with the present argument–except inasmuch as he is offended by any notion of morality, since his conscience is already seared.)

4) DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!!

Interestingly this is described as a fairly common abortionists’ dream in the book Lime 5 (studies have been done on the effects of abortion on the providers killers and their staffs: they deliver a baby and a crowd gives them a thumbs up or down and they are forced to drown it in a bucket if down.

inviolet on May 8, 2008 at 12:42 PM

Oh, the humanity. Lime 5 should be required reading, along with Nathanson’s The Hand of God, which gave me hope that even a “celebrated” abortionist can have an epiphany and emerge from the dark side.

I think that if abortion is a right, and paid for with public funds, then it should be performed in public, in a stadium environment, and we can cheer or jeer, just like the Romans.

Let the doctor hold the fetus, still tethered with an umbilical cord, in the air. the head of the govt can thumbs up or down the fetus’ fate.

AZCON on May 8, 2008 at 1:50 AM

Interestingly this is described as a fairly common abortionists’ dream in the book Lime 5 (studies have been done on the effects of abortion on the providers killers and their staffs: they deliver a baby and a crowd gives them a thumbs up or down and they are forced to drown it in a bucket if down.

I just saw the ultrasound of my granddaughter, due to be born this fall. Looks pretty darn human to me.

Yes, that “mass of tissue” is rather unlikely to be a fish, or a cow or anything other than human, is it?

I’m confused by people who are upset because an environmental project may endanger fish eggs, but consider abortion to be anything other than murder. They have no problem considering the eggs to be fish, but consider the in vivo child to be something other than human.

Abortion Exposed Part 1 of 2

Part 2 has been flagged by Youtube as inappropriate for some users, so you can watch it here without having to login.

Abortion Exposed Part 2 of 2

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often….

I understand, there is speculation about when an unborn is a complete human being, but there were no anti-abortion laws at the time of Jesus and surely there were abortions at His time, but I guess He didn’t seem necessary to talk about that issue.

Ultrasound pretty much put the end to the human being argument.
If that “thing” in the womb is not a human being, what is it? If it’s human why is it legal to kill it? More over, why is it a Constitutional right? Is the “right to choose” guaranteed by God? Is it inalienable, or is it a man-made right that can be taken away at any time?
Is the “thing” in the womb alive? If not what is it? If it’s alive, why is it legal to kill it?
So, if the “thing” in the womb is human and alive, when why is it legal to kill it, why is that not murder? Medical science has shown beyond a doubt the unborn is human AND alive.
Jesus talked about loving your neighbor as yourself. I wouldnt kill my neighbor, I wouldnt kill myself and I certainly wouldnt kill a child in the womb. Then there’s that old saying about you will not commit murder. It’s in Exodus, I believe along with nine other “suggestions.” And depending on who you say Jesus is, then He was the one who handed out what our society calls the “Ten Suggestions.” So He plainly talked about the taking of an innocent life even if He did not call it a “right to choose.” Who gets to “choose” for the life in the womb?
Is the taking of an innocent life murder? If not what is it?

Um, right. ;-) That uptight lib is as straight as a boomerang. Don’t deny the obvious for the sake of political correctness.

cannonball on May 8, 2008 at 12:30 AM

If only it were that simple to get them to stop.

logis on May 8, 2008 at 12:36 AM

I’m pretty far from pc or a lib, but what the hell does his being gay or not have to do with the argument.
Aside from some using it as a way to criticize him.