They didn’t read the post thoroughly, or they are a lib troll trying to make a point about how it was a “sting” operation and there were no actual men involved. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the PP employees would have behaved the same regardless.

I am getting tired of Hot Air covering up for these men. If you know who they are you need to report it. and stop using victimized young girls to do your reports. This sort of thing is an outrage. I want to see those men escorted to jail in handcuffs, and the girl put in foster care.

Observation on March 19, 2009 at 1:37 AM

WTF?

As long as the liberal doesn’t call whatever he’s killing “alive,” he can ever feel even the tiniest bit guilty of anything, ever.

logis on March 18, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Beautiful analysis. Well done, Sir.

Funny, the Amish don’t seem to have any trouble keeping their children from understanding that Abstinence before marriage is best for creating a family, that if you were going to “have a Baby” (notice it’s not “have a fetus”) you got married and raised the child. It is the destruction of this moral imperative, the feeling that living growing children in the womb are disposable, that has killed respect for life. Also a loss of respect for Chasity, Innocence, Chivalry, Duty, Honor, Loyalty.

I truly don’t believe that it’s murder.
radiofreevillage on March 18, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Interesting. Where (when) do you draw the line, and how fuzzy is it?

Count to 10 on March 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM

The line is easy to draw because ‘murder’ has a clear
definition, namely: premeditated unlawful killing.

Abortion is killing and it is premeditated but so long as it is done as the law permits it to be done then it is not unlawful and therefore, by definition, cannot be murder.

This has no bearing, of course, on whether abortion is moral or immoral, good or evil, etc … ‘murder’ is a legal term, not a moral term.

After all, we live in Bizarro World©

If they commit crimes, prosecute those responsible. As it stands now, it’s clear that your agenda is to outlaw abortions.

P.S. I have no problem with Churches or Planned Parenthood run as private enterprises with no government subsidies.

radiofreevillage on March 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM

At least there’s consensus here — in this particular case, a crime was committed.

As for the rest of it, sure — we want to outlaw abortions just as 150 years ago we wanted to outlaw slavery. Anything whose business plan depends on classifying a human as less than human should be outlawed.

So there we are.

People just don’t seem to be built for abstinence.
thuja on March 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM

We are not brutes. We have free will. The choice to have sex outside of marriage carries consequences, not just pregnancy but also disease. Still, it is a choice.

If you want to be a slave to your basest urges, then by all means have sex with whomever and whenever you like, but don’t expect murder to solve the problem later without more consequences.

I find it very silly that liberals are all about “self-esteem” (as opposed to dignity) but also think we should do as we please, when we please, with whomever we please. Nothing kills one’s dignity as fast as acting like an animal. Self-control is directly linked to dignity, which is much superior to narcissistic “self-esteem.”

I cannot claim that thuja thinks this way from that statement above, but it appears to be the rationale behind trying to normalize bad behavior.

And isn’t the entire idea of Conservatism to accept people as they are and not propose some unattainable, utopian scheme?

thuja on March 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM

Isn’t liberalism by its very definition some unattainable, utopian scheme?

If they commit crimes, prosecute those responsible. As it stands now, it’s clear that your agenda is to outlaw abortions.

P.S. I have no problem with Churches or Planned Parenthood run as private enterprises with no government subsidies.

radiofreevillage on March 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Yes, it is.

People just don’t seem to be built for abstinence. And isn’t the entire idea of Conservatism to accept people as they are and not propose some unattainable, utopian scheme?

thuja on March 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM

So lets go back to crapping in the fields, beating women with clubs, and letting the weak and afflicted die a slow death of starvation. God forbid, we certainly don’t want a Utopian society.

You liberals surly are psychologically damaged.

An organization as either hostile towards or incapable of following the law should not get a single dime of taxpayer money.

This goes for PP and ACORN.

People just don’t seem to be built for abstinence. And isn’t the entire idea of Conservatism to accept people as they are and not propose some unattainable, utopian scheme?

As I also said, birth control is easy to get and easy to master. Nice the way you just ignored that whole part. Very liberal of you.

Bingo. Define away the conflict.

I’ve heard it said that only the mother gets to decide when the fetus becomes a baby. That idea should be abhorrent to anyone who loves liberty and respects the basic human rights.

TheUnrepentantGeek on March 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM

Lots of parents have smothered their own children rather than take care of them. I’d go so far as to say that it must have crossed the mind of nearly every parent at one time or another.

I don’t really know how any of them “defined” their murders, and I could not possibly care less. With the possible exception of cancer, children are the biggest pain in the ass that God ever created.

Killing children is like robbing banks; the fact that it’s so incredibly tempting makes it MORE important to punish it, not LESS.

That the default position in an unplanned pregnancy should be an abortion is the logical conclusion from Ann Coulter’s discussion of the social ills that result from unwed mothers having kids.

I believe the logical conclusion is don’t get pregnant, either by abstaining from sexual intercourse or by using birth control. Birth control just isn’t that difficult to obtain or use properly.

mchristian on March 18, 2009 at 2:22 PM

Congratulations on proposing the one social engineering scheme with more empirical evidence against it than socialism! People just don’t seem to be built for abstinence. And isn’t the entire idea of Conservatism to accept people as they are and not propose some unattainable, utopian scheme?

Did you see the movie Silence of the Lambs? Where the serial killer keeps saying “IT puts on the lotion; IT does what it’s told….” That’s actually what true sociopaths do. It is utterly impossible to justify their actions within any moral code that has ever existed — so they simply define away the conflict altogether.

Liberals don’t know – or particularly care – where the line is drawn; all they know is that they are unquestionably on the right side of it.

All but the very craziest moonbats realize that killing a “baby” is the most heinous crime imaginable. But letting an unfertilized egg pass is unavoidable. So, to any normal person there is a huge dilema there, and any sane person would want to err only on the non-baby-killing side of it — the point of decision; what any adult understands to be the act of “making babies.”

But the liberal doesn’t even acknowledge that there is any potential moral issue at all. Whether it’s first trimester, third, or (as per Barak Obama’s official position) very early into the fourth trimester of pregnancy… Where any individual liberal draws the line is utterly irrelevant. All that matters is that he knows that there IS a line, and he will always be on the right side of it. As long as the liberal doesn’t call whatever he’s killing “alive,” he can ever feel even the tiniest bit guilty of anything, ever.

logis on March 18, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Bingo. Define away the conflict.

I’ve heard it said that only the mother gets to decide when the fetus becomes a baby. That idea should be abhorrent to anyone who loves liberty and respects the basic human rights.

thuja on March 18, 2009 at 2:11 PM

Dude. A 15 year old girl lacks the maturity to make decisions of that sort, which is why no man should ever, regardless of attraction, have sex with someone of that age.

The choice to do so is a choice to prey upon another’s vulnerability and innocence … which is why we have mandatory reporting laws. It’s not consensual at all – it’s an adult manipulating a kid.

That the default position in an unplanned pregnancy should be an abortion is the logical conclusion from Ann Coulter’s discussion of the social ills that result from unwed mothers having kids. It’s sad to me that more conservatives don’t figure this out.

thuja on March 18, 2009 at 2:14 PM

No, the conclusion of that would be that women should not get pregnant when unmarried, and should look to become married if they do.

Interesting. Where (when) do you draw the line, and how fuzzy is it?
Count to 10 on March 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM

I doubt he/she has actually ever thought it out that much, either because an actual decision would have to be made and a resulting moral position would be required…
AubieJon on March 18, 2009 at 2:06 PM

Did you see the movie Silence of the Lambs? Where the serial killer keeps saying “IT puts on the lotion; IT does what it’s told….” That’s actually what true sociopaths do. It is utterly impossible to justify their actions within any moral code that has ever existed — so they simply define away the conflict altogether.

Liberals don’t know – or particularly care – where the line is drawn; all they know is that they are unquestionably on the right side of it.

All but the very craziest moonbats realize that killing a “baby” is the most heinous crime imaginable. But letting an unfertilized egg pass is unavoidable. So, to any normal person there is a huge dilema there, and any sane person would want to err only on the non-baby-killing side of it — the point of decision; what any adult understands to be the act of “making babies.”

But the liberal doesn’t even acknowledge that there is any potential moral issue at all. Whether it’s first trimester, third, or (as per Barak Obama’s official position) very early into the fourth trimester of pregnancy… Where any individual liberal draws the line is utterly irrelevant. All that matters is that he knows that there IS a line, and he will always be on the right side of it. As long as the liberal doesn’t call whatever he’s killing “alive,” he can ever feel even the tiniest bit guilty of anything, ever.

That the default position in an unplanned pregnancy should be an abortion is the logical conclusion from Ann Coulter’s discussion of the social ills that result from unwed mothers having kids.

I believe the logical conclusion is don’t get pregnant, either by abstaining from sexual intercourse or by using birth control. Birth control just isn’t that difficult to obtain or use properly.

Does anyone else ever get the feeling that abortion is a sacred thing to liberals? It isn’t really about women having a choice because if it were, they would respect the choice not to have an abortion – in fact, they would see to it that women knew all the choices.
AubieJon on March 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Choice has nothing to do with it. “Tolerance” is an adult concept; it means to abhor something, but to put up with it anyway.

And no child or other liberal can ever do that. They can only worship or revile – absolutely nothing in between.

(BTW, that’s why I thought it was such a hoot back during the brief period when liberals tried to pretend that they “respect” US soldiers. All they could do was wildly vacillate between calling the troops “Nazis” and bragging about their own unquestionable “patriotism.” And they had no freakin’ clue why everybody kept looking at them like they were crazy.)