Video: Scozzafava accepts Margaret Sanger Award

posted at 11:38 am on October 26, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

How much of a “Reagan Republican” is Dede Scozzafava, running as the endorsed Republican candidate in the NY23 special Congressional election? Maybe Newt Gingrich should have done a little more research before jumping into this race with both feet — or better yet, that’s what the county GOP officials who put their heads together to come up with Scozzafava in the first place should have done. It’s one thing to be pro-choice out of a sense of libertarianism, but another entirely to be a Margaret Sanger acolyte … and March 2008 award winner:

As Kathryn Jean Lopez says, Congress hardly needs another Sanger fan. After the Mona Lisa Project exposed so many of these Planned Parenthood offices as lawbreakers and exploiters of potentially abused young girls for profit, this connection should have been a red flag to the GOP.

Update: This got covered by Michelle last week, and by Madison Conservative in our Green Room.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Who is railing against sex? My wife and I have plenty of sex. We’re in our 20s.

And with your point of view and your want for limitless abortions does not bring life.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:27 PM

No, I’m not at all about limitless abortions.

However, Bush blocked the day-after pill, blocked even birthcontrol.

It’s a political issue that has long out=lived its usefulness.

Those who make Catholic values the center of their politics need to understand that they are truly a minority today.

It’s absurd.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM

I am amazed that you people are hitting the “Tar Baby” from Uncle Rhemus’s tales just like Brer Rabbit did. Anninca is a tar baby that doesn’t care what you say or do she just asks you to hit her. Now you are all stuck and no matter how hard you try you are not going to insult her or change her mind. Don’t you understand who she is and why she is on conservative web sites? Some people are trolls and she is that but she is also a masochist. The more you hit her the softer her responses become,which make your responses more passionate and vitriolic and you start looking desperate. Always ignore a tar baby!

inspectorudy on October 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Sex is absolutely a gift.

It results in love and life.

I couldn’t even begin to agree with those here who are against this.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:23 PM

There you go dragging God into it when it seems fit.

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM

I agree, but I think that’s got to do with commitment and security.

Just my 2 cents. Casual sex simply isn’t very satisfying.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:27 PM

I’ve never had casual sex. All of the women I had sex with, I ended up being with for at least 2 years. I had been with my current wife for almost 2.5 years before we got married and we’re going on 2 years of marriage at the end of November.

And our sex was better after we got married.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:33 PM

It is the snow job given to the stupid by liberals that allows them government funded ‘population control’ by people who walk into clinics by their own volition.

I need to get a clue.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Pardon me for observing, but I don’t see minority populations shrinking. If anything, Latino and African-American populations are increasing.

Abortion as a retroactive birth-control measure is an utter failure, even as widely available as it is now, even in Western clinics with Western-quality medical tools and staff.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:33 PM

I believe I’m a true feminist.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 12:42 PM

No your not.

Sarah Palin is a true feminist. She has 5 kids, one of them being down syndrome. Married to a MAN. Works hard.

And…She’s good lookin’

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Bye Dede– get off the stage. No money for you.

ted c on October 26, 2009 at 1:36 PM

No your not.

Sarah Palin is a true feminist. She has 5 kids, one of them being down syndrome. Married to a MAN. Works hard.

And…She’s good lookin’

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:35 PM

What? I thought the definition of a feminist was a female who wasn’t defined by:

1. Her looks,
2. Being tied to a man,
3. And by her ability to reproduce.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM

inspectorudy on October 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Exactly right. She hijacks the thread by making herself the center of attention.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM

Newt Gingrich: Doug Hoffman support a ‘mistake’

Mistake for you to fail to support it.

ted c on October 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM

What? I thought the definition of a feminist was a female who wasn’t defined by:

1. Her looks,
2. Being tied to a man,
3. And by her ability to reproduce.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Rush desribes it best about liberals.

“The puropose of Feminism is to get ugly women into the mainstream”

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:40 PM

However, Bush blocked the day-after pill, blocked even birthcontrol.

How did President Bush block the “morning-after” pill? Is it not available, or is that you just don’t want to pay for it?

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Those who make Catholic values the center of their politics need to understand that they are truly a minority today.

Understand. We’ll give up then because the way things are going now are the way things will always be.

That was the spirit of your beloved 60′s, correct?

So you’re against “making a difference” now?

And you used to be cool.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 1:42 PM

I so oppose anit-abortionists. I do not want see women pushed back to back-alley abortions.
AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Ann, there are more than 7,000 “crisis pregnancy” or “pregnancy care” centers in this country, and they are staffed by the people whom you dismiss as “anti-abortionists.” I’ll bet there is one in your area — why not look under “abortion alternatives” in your phone book and go ask them why they do what they do? What have you got to lose?

One of the pregnancy care centers in my area was established by a young woman who was forced to abort her baby some years ago. Today, she dedicates her life to helping other women in similar situations. Approximately six out of every ten mothers who abort their babies are under pressure from other people (e.g. the baby’s father) to go to the abortuary. In fact, murder is one of the leading causes of death, and sometimes the leading cause of death, for pregnant mothers. So much for “choice.”

Concerning women “pushed back to back-alley abortions,” according to the Centers for Disease Control, there were only 36 deaths from illegal abortion in the year before Roe v. Wade. However, even “safe and legal” abortionists kill mothers today — google “Synthia Dennard” and “Lou Ann Herron” to read about two of them. And an average of 3,000 babies are killed by abortion in America every day — that’s like a new “9/11″ every day.

By the way, Ann, if you are so concerned about mothers dying in back-alley abortions, why haven’t you anything to say about the babies who were being killed at the same time? Why don’t theirdeaths bother you?

You say you’re a feminist; then you should know that Susan B. Anthony called abortion “child-murder”; Elizabeth Cady Stanton said that it is “degrading to women”; and Simone de Beauvoir called it a “disowning [of] feminine values.” Visit the Web site of Feminists For Life to learn more.

Almost half of all black pregnancies end in abortion. Although black women make up only about 14% of the U.S. female population, they have 32% of the abortions. Abortion is the leading killer of black babies, with more than 14 million having been aborted since 1973. That’s a tremendous loss of black teachers, artists, leaders, athletes, businesswomen, engineers, etc.

Abortion is the most common medical procedure in the U.S. So much for making it “rare”!

Every mother deserves better than abortion, and every child deserves a chance. Don’t you agree?

KyMouse on October 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Rush desribes it best about liberals.

“The puropose of Feminism is to get ugly women into the mainstream”

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:40 PM

What an inaccurate, petty, childish description. Rather typical for Flush Lame-baugh and those of his ilk, both on the left and on the right.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM

No your not.

Sarah Palin is a true feminist. She has 5 kids, one of them being down syndrome. Married to a MAN. Works hard.

And…She’s good lookin’

b1jetmech on October 26, 2009 at 1:35 PM

What? I thought the definition of a feminist was a female who wasn’t defined by:

1. Her looks,
2. Being tied to a man,
3. And by her ability to reproduce.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Was it Rush that said the “feminism” movement is for ugly women?

Maybe the ugly women are just so upset that the pretty women are having so much sex so they want to tell them to get rid of their babies so there isn’t the reminder of them not having sex and also to keep the creation of attractive people down to a minimum?

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Then why do they need government money?

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 1:45 PM

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Look, if anyone wants an abortion then let them pay for it with their own dime. Quit using taxpayer money and get the damn government out of it.

I don’t care if low income women get pregnant and can’t get an abortion. Let touchy feely liberals pay for it. Let liberals set up a touchy feely national fund to pay for abortions.

You screw unprotected … you have the baby or pay for the abortion. Problem solved.

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Then why do they need government money?

Cause gobmint sugar is the sweetest!

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 1:49 PM

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 1:47 PM

The same people who want the government out of the bedroom want them in the abortion clinic.

And every other clinic, for that matter.

And in our checkbook, in our bathroom, in our garage, etc.

Just not the bedroom.

The only place that’s off limits, everywhere else imaginable is hunky-dorey.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 1:47 PM

But Ann thinks screwing is fun and fun is good and the government should pay for fun things because after all, what else is government for? But fun?

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Then why do they need government money?

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 1:45 PM

???

For what? Sorry if I’m having a blonde moment…

Was it Rush that said the “feminism” movement is for ugly women?

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Apparently. Check the comment made by b1jectmech. I’ll have to assume his comment was accurate as I listen to radio very little.

Maybe the ‘ugly’ women are just so upset that the ‘pretty’ women are having so much sex so they want to tell them to get rid of their babies so there isn’t the reminder of them not having sex and also to keep the creation of ‘attractive people’ down to a minimum?

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:43 PM

_ ~
o_0

Are you sure you’re feeling okay? Haven’t hit your head on something today, or perhaps you’re on some strong medicines? Been reading Infowars a bit too long?

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Are you sure you’re feeling okay? Haven’t hit your head on something today, or perhaps you’re on some strong medicines? Been reading Infowars a bit too long?

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 1:52 PM

I was being a little tongue in cheek. Liberals are stupid enough to think like that.

They think being against abortion is the same as being against sex.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 26, 2009 at 1:58 PM

Scozzafava has some more problems. I think she either needs to drop out or become a Dem, she obviously has all the credentials, maybe a czar of something.

And Newt is finished.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/10/23/scozzafava-declares-herself-part-of-abramoff-wing-of-gop-funnels-campaign-cash-to-family/

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 1:59 PM

But Ann thinks screwing is fun and fun is good and the government should pay for fun things because after all, what else is government for? But fun?

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Well in that case I think shooting is fun … with a variety of calibers. I want the gubmint to pay for my guns and ammo.

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Overall, AnninCa is probably the best concern troll I’ve ever seen. She even fools me some of the time.

But not even the best amongst them can conceal their true nature when it comes to abortion. The instinct to luxuriate in the murder of children is just too strong for them to resist.

Kensington on October 26, 2009 at 2:08 PM

No, I’m not at all about limitless abortions.

However, Bush blocked the day-after pill, blocked even birthcontrol.

It’s a political issue that has long out=lived its usefulness.

Those who make Catholic values the center of their politics need to understand that they are truly a minority today.

It’s absurd.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Ann: you don’t even know the statistics: “The 2008 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, a statistical listing of major religious bodies published by National Council of Churches, reports over 67,515,016 registered members of the Roman Catholic Church.”

That’s in America. So we Catholics are not exactly insignificant. What’s your thing about murder? That’s what abortion is.

chai on October 26, 2009 at 2:11 PM

First order of business: Mandatory Drug testing for the NY GOP leadership. What the (*&^% were these people thinking?

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Also, when did George W. Bush become Catholic?

Kensington on October 26, 2009 at 2:14 PM

It’s a political issue that has long out=lived its usefulness.

Those who make Catholic values the center of their politics need to understand that they are truly a minority today.

It’s absurd.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:30 PM

What is insulting, my rabid liberal friend, is the fact that you are telling people with a fundamental ethical belief that abortion is a sin to STFU and get out of the way of those who advocate murder-on-demand. Killing as a convenience may not bother you but it bothers many and to be telling them to shut up because they are in the minority shows zero respect for fundamental religious beliefs of many. How dare you!

It’s a life not a political issue no matter how much you claim otherwise and you should be ashamed of yourself for not at least recognizing that much.

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Oh, she’s one of those eugenics-loving Republicans. Well, I guess that she shoudl get our vote then, right Newt?

Nothing says GOP quite like being a champion for abortion.

hawksruleva on October 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM

This is just a START.

LET’S CARRY HOFFMANN TO THE FINISH LINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GO CONSERVATIVES! GO!

TheAlamos on October 26, 2009 at 2:23 PM

The locals in NY are whacking Newt
http://www.gouverneurtimes.com/

njpat on October 26, 2009 at 2:26 PM

Ann: you don’t even know the statistics: “The 2008 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, a statistical listing of major religious bodies published by National Council of Churches, reports over 67,515,016 registered members of the Roman Catholic Church.”

That’s in America. So we Catholics are not exactly insignificant. What’s your thing about murder? That’s what abortion is.

chai on October 26, 2009 at 2:11 PM

–The stuff I’ve read suggests that Catholics overall are not that different from the rest of the US population on their views about abortion. There may be 67 million registered Catholics, but that doesn’t mean that all–or even a majority–of them support the Church’s position.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Conservatives and Democrats must both oppose and condemn anybody who receives this award:

Planned Parenthood is a scam. No planning, just pure exploitation of “confused” pregnant young women who didn’t know what to do with their pregnancy.

Instead of helping and inspiring their “supposed” beneficiaries (pregnant young women), Planned Parenthood USE THEM … AND ABANDON THEM.

Planned Parenthood has the same modus operandi with ACORN.

TheAlamos on October 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM

Dede approached the Dems to see if she could get on their ticket, if the repubs rejected her?
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/10/26/hiding-under-the-ceiling

njpat on October 26, 2009 at 2:37 PM

The stuff I’ve read suggests that Catholics overall are not that different from the rest of the US population on their views about abortion. There may be 67 million registered Catholics, but that doesn’t mean that all–or even a majority–of them support the Church’s position.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Beat me to it. Out of 67 million ‘Catholics’, I’d be surprised if half that number held true to the core tenets of Christianity itself, never mind them and those of the Catholic church as an institution.

America is still a majority Christian nation…but only if you count checking little boxes on surveys.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Sex is God-given.

Trust that.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM

So is life. Trust that!

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 2:39 PM

Beat me to it. Out of 67 million ‘Catholics’, I’d be surprised if half that number held true to the core tenets of Christianity itself, never mind them and those of the Catholic church as an institution.

America is still a majority Christian nation…but only if you count checking little boxes on surveys.

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 2:37 PM

–Especially when you consider that the Catholic official position is that abortion is never justified, even when the life of the mother is at stake.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:42 PM

Sex is God-given.

Trust that.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM
So is life. Trust that!

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 2:39 PM

–So are brains to make appropriate decisions.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM

America is still a majority Christian nation…but only if you count checking little boxes on surveys.

The number of climate change cultists are alarming.

When they burn witches it will be with carbon offsets though.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:44 PM

–So are brains to make appropriate decisions.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM

Deciding to murder one’s own offspring is not an appropriate decision.

Unless one is a heartless, gutless, ignorant animal that is.

Then it’s OK.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:46 PM

Then I am a heartless, gutless, ignorant animal, No Donkey.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:48 PM

–Especially when you consider that the Catholic official position is that abortion is never justified, even when the life of the mother is at stake.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:42 PM

Yes, and your point is…?

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 2:49 PM

You know the bumper sticker? You can’t be catholic and pro choice? imo you can’t be Catholic either and be a MMGW believer.

I just read about Dede’s husband trying out the Dem party as well. Maybe if the elites, like Newt, can’t figure out that a Margaret Sanger Award winner and a supporter of card check do not a good candidate make, they can figure out that a politician that just wants to be a politician is not a good candidate.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 2:51 PM

My point is that probably no more than 20 percent of registered Catholics support the official Catholic church on abortion.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:48 PM

Then it’s OK for you.

I’m all about tolerance.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:53 PM

Yes, and your point is…?

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Reading comprehension FTL.

The stuff I’ve read suggests that Catholics overall are not that different from the rest of the US population on their views about abortion. There may be 67 million “registered Catholics”, but that doesn’t mean…[they] support the Church’s position.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 2:54 PM

I assume you mean salvation?

thomasaur on October 26, 2009 at 12:37 PM

If god can save me and saint Paul, he can save AnninCA.

But it would be solely by the grace of God and not of AnninCA’s doing.

shick on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

My point is that probably no more than 20 percent of registered Catholics support the official Catholic church on abortion.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:52 PM

The best way to settle moral questions of great magnitude is to always take a poll.

Or ask a lawyer.

Both equally effective.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

You do know that Jimbo03 is a corporate lawyer, don’t you?

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM

Dark-Star on October 26, 2009 at 2:54 PM

I was responding to the comment that “that the Catholic official position is that abortion is never justified, even when the life of the mother is at stake”

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:00 PM

The best way to settle moral questions of great magnitude is to always take a poll.

Or ask a lawyer.

Both equally effective.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

You do know that Jimbo03 is a corporate lawyer, don’t you?

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM

–I think No Donkey meant that as a joke.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM

You do know that Jimbo03 is a corporate lawyer, don’t you?

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM

How could I not?

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Yeah. You’re right. Carry on.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Planned Parenthood is a scam. No planning, just pure exploitation of “confused” pregnant young women who didn’t know what to do with their pregnancy.

TheAlamos on October 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM

No pretense of doing anything but aborting the life. In theory they are supposed to talk about “options” but that isn’t the reality. This award should have been enough to stop the GOP from endorsing Scozzafava.

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 3:07 PM

But it would be solely by the grace of God and not of AnninCA’s doing.

shick on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

Now don’t go throwing that reformation stuff into the mix… It will only confuse her.

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM

The best way to settle moral questions of great magnitude is to always take a poll.

Or ask a lawyer.

Both equally effective.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 2:57 PM

Or ask the filthy lying coward in the White House. He’s got a law degree, governs by poll numbers, and doesn’t hesitate to voice his opinion on things of which he has no knowledge (morality being at the top of the list)

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 3:10 PM

Sex is God-given.

Trust that.

AnninCA on October 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM

So is life. Trust that!

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 2:39 PM

+1

–So are brains to make appropriate decisions.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM

+2

Unfortunately it’s Ann’s heart that is getting in the way of her brain.

shick on October 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Now don’t go throwing that reformation stuff into the mix… It will only confuse her.

highhopes on October 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM

Truth doesn’t cause confusion but offends.

This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve,
“THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED,
THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER stone,”

and,
“A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE”;
for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed. – 1 Peter 2:7-9

shick on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

I don’t understand.It’s the 21st century. There should be no way a women gets pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

My point is that probably no more than 20 percent of registered Catholics support the official Catholic church on abortion.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 2:52 PM

No, the statement that I responded to was:

–Especially when you consider that the Catholic official position is that abortion is never justified, even when the life of the mother is at stake.

I was asking if you were trying to make some kind of point with that statement, and if so, what was it?

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:25 PM

Look, if anyone wants an abortion then let them pay for it with their own dime. Quit using taxpayer money and get the damn government out of it.

I don’t care if low income women get pregnant and can’t get an abortion. Let touchy feely liberals pay for it. Let liberals set up a touchy feely national fund to pay for abortions.

You screw unprotected … you have the baby or pay for the abortion. Problem solved.

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 1:47 PM

You don’t get what economic conservatives like me want. We want the government not to spend so much money. If we don’t pay for abortion for low income women, then we have to pay for welfare under the current system. Also, we too often have to spend money to incarcerate the kid when he’s an adult. If you don’t want pay for abortion, pretend all the tax going to the abortion is mine and remember I’m saving you a lot of money.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

There should be no way a women gets pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

I think you meant to say “there’s no way a woman gets an abortion unless she is raped”??? We can have that discussion too.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

I don’t understand.It’s the 21st century. There should be no way a women gets pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

Jeff, obviously the aids epedemic didn’t resonate with the masses. Every day I see a PSA about STD’s on TV. I must be the only one watching these days.

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

You can fund abortions until the chickens come home to roost (thanks to Rev Wright) and you won’t touch the underlying issues, which are irresponsibility, lack of accountabilty, ignorance and amorality.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Oh, she’s one of those eugenics-loving Republicans. Well, I guess that she shoudl get our vote then, right Newt?

Nothing says GOP quite like being a champion for abortion.

hawksruleva on October 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM

As the sole person here has actually read anything that Margaret Sanger has written, besides the cherry picked quotes that the Pro-Life movements spews without giving any context, let me point out that Margaret Sanger in her mature years was a Republican and that much of early support was from Republicans.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

If we don’t pay for abortion for low income women, then we have to pay for welfare under the current system. Also, we too often have to spend money to incarcerate the kid when he’s an adult.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

So in your world, reducing welfare rolls and prison populations is justification for the slaughter of millions of children? I’d rather not live in that world thank you.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

REVISED: There should be no way a women gets “accidently” pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Jeff, obviously the aids epedemic didn’t resonate with the masses. Every day I see a PSA about STD’s on TV. I must be the only one watching these days.

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

A point well made

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:34 PM

As the sole person here has actually read anything that Margaret Sanger has written, besides the cherry picked quotes that the Pro-Life movements spews without giving any context, let me point out that Margaret Sanger in her mature years was a Republican and that much of early support was from Republicans.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

An anarchist Republican?

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Jeff, thanks for the revision. I withdraw my response to you initial post.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Three times she repeats the verse; some background:

Boswell’s Life of Johnson, Vol. 2

‘Johnson’s Court, Fleet-street, January 14, 1766.’

I returned to London in February, and found Dr. Johnson in a good house in Johnson’s Court, Fleet-street, in which he had accommodated Miss Williams with an apartment on the ground floor, while Mr. Levett occupied his post in the garret: his faithful Francis was still attending upon him. He received me with much kindness. The fragments of our first conversation, which I have preserved, are these:

I told him that Voltaire, in a conversation with me, had distinguished Pope and Dryden thus:–’Pope drives a handsome chariot, with a couple of neat trim nags; Dryden a coach, and six stately horses.’ JOHNSON. ‘Why, Sir, the truth is, they both drive coaches and six; but Dryden’s horses are either galloping or stumbling: Pope’s go at a steady even trot.’ He said of Goldsmith’s Traveller, which had been published in my absence, ‘There has not been so fine a poem since Pope’s time.’

And here it is proper to settle, with authentick precision, what has long floated in publick report, as to Johnson’s being himself the authour of a considerable part of that poem. Much, no doubt, both of the sentiments and expression, were derived from conversation with him; and it was certainly submitted to his friendly revision: but in the year 1783, he, at my request, marked with a pencil the lines which he had furnished, which are only line 420th,

‘To stop too fearful, and too faint to go;’

and the concluding ten lines, except the last couplet but one, which I distinguish by the Italick character:

‘How small of all that human hearts endure, That part which kings or laws can cause or cure. Still to ourselves in every place consign’d, Our own felicity we make or find; With secret course, which no loud storms annoy, Glides the smooth current of domestick joy: The lifted axe, the agonizing wheel, Luke’s iron crown, and Damien’s bed of steel, To men remote from power, but rarely known, Leave reason, faith, and conscience, all our own.’

He added, ‘These are all of which I can be sure.’

So she’s quoting Johnson. But why?

Is she saying that abortion is a personal matter beyond the reach of kings? That’s a little odd given that the kings on the Court imposed their one-size-fits-all view on all 50 states. Even if we wanted to adopt a single national policy, the Court prevented that political discussion.

Noel on October 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM

If we don’t pay for abortion for low income women, then we have to pay for welfare under the current system. Also, we too often have to spend money to incarcerate the kid when he’s an adult.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

So, we allow illegal immigration to provide the low income and prison population. Brilliant!

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Oh, I don’t care what party Sanger was from. What does that have to do with anything? You sound like a Sanger supporter and pro abortion person yourself.
Killing people is never OK.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM

An anarchist Republican?

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM

And clairvoyant too. He knows what everyone else here has read or not read.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM

Every day I see a PSA about STD’s on TV.

Ah, the nanny state PSA.

I wish the would make PSA to teach people HOW TO DRIVE, since apparently it’s not required prior to issuing licenses.

Unless everyone is now taught to drive in the left lane and pass on the right.

Because if that’s true, it’s extremely effective.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM

pretend all the tax going to the abortion is mine and remember I’m saving you a lot of money.
thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

How much is a human life worth? That sure is not a puppy growing in there.

kingsjester on October 26, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Oh, I don’t care what party Sanger was from. What does that have to do with anything? You sound like a Sanger supporter and pro abortion person yourself.
Killing people is never OK.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Well stated

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Thanks, this whole topisw is annoying me to no end. For lib Ann from LaLa land it is all about sex. For this thuja it is all about how many undesirables we can kill and how much money it will save.

Gross, both ends of the spectrum. This is about conservative vs liberal values and an utter lack thereof and a woman is NY who just wants to get elected, the end justifying the means.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 3:43 PM

An anarchist Republican?

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM

And clairvoyant too. He knows what everyone else here has read or not read.
Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM

Sorry Jeff. Brain went out of gear for a second. I was referring to ‘thuja’

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:44 PM

You can fund abortions until the chickens come home to roost (thanks to Rev Wright) and you won’t touch the underlying issues, which are irresponsibility, lack of accountabilty, ignorance and amorality.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

When I was an undergrad, one of my good friends was an anti-killing devout Buddhist girl. She was vegan and opposed abortion. Then one day, she got pregnant and suddenly she became pro-choice. She was going to good school and became a lawyer. I doubt that many people outside of the pro-life movement including about all nominal “pro-lifers” would consider her irresponsible or amoral–except those who really hate lawyers. At least among the people I know, the people likely to be viewed as irresponsible or immoral because of unintended pregnancy are women from lower income families. How much of these moral judgments about women having abortions are routed in classism?

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM

My opposition to abortion is that I am opposed to the evisceration of infants and the terminating of a 70+ years of productive, happy, loving life.

Abortion is a vile practice that should be utterly unthinkable regardless of legality.

It’s as sick and abhorrant as slavery.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM

So, thuja, your friend’s ambitions were enough to allow her to kill a child but not enough to make her keep her legs closed.

We are supposed to learn what? from this?

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Birth control must have been out of the question, eh thuja?

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 3:57 PM

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 3:50 PM

My lesson learned is that we have one more lawyer and one less child enjoying life.

I would have preferred one less lawyer and one more child, but that’s just me.

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:58 PM

When I was an undergrad, one of my good friends was an anti-killing devout Buddhist girl. She was vegan and opposed abortion. Then one day, she got pregnant and suddenly she became pro-choice. She was going to good school and became a lawyer. I doubt that many people outside of the pro-life movement including about all nominal “pro-lifers” would consider her irresponsible or amoral–except those who really hate lawyers. At least among the people I know, the people likely to be viewed as irresponsible or immoral because of unintended pregnancy are women from lower income families. How much of these moral judgments about women having abortions are routed in classism?

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM

So much to deal with here!

1) She did not just suddenly “get pregnant”. Prior to that she made a bad decision to have unortected sex. So yes, she was irresponsible.

2) She did not become “pro-choice”. She made the decision to murder her baby. So yes, she was amoral. (BTW “Pro-choice” is a red herring. If you favor abortion you are “pro-death”.)

Irresponsible or amoral behavior is not exclusive to any particular class or socio-economic status. As for your moral high-ground position that “the people likely to be viewed as irresponsible or immoral because of unintended pregnancy are women from lower income families. How much of these moral judgments about women having abortions are routed in classism?”, aren’t you the one who suggested that we should pay for abortions for low-ncome women because their children ad to the welfare rolls and are likely to end up in prison? Talk about classism!

There is but one moral judgement in this matter…killing is wrong!

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:59 PM

Who has time for those pesky condoms? Damn the STD’s! I want hot monkey sex now!

mossberg500 on October 26, 2009 at 4:00 PM

NoDonkey on October 26, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Yep!
As I said this is irritating. I have practiced what i preach and I am absolutely sick of killing for convenience and then blaming it on something else. Or better yet, denying that PP is about population control.
Tell it like it is friend. These absolutely retarded individuals are killing or advocating killing and they don’t even really know why.

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 4:11 PM

I don’t understand.It’s the 21st century. There should be no way a women gets pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

–Birth control doesn’t work sometimes. Look at http://www.contracept.org/risks.php. This is from a pro-life site and says that the pill fails in actual use 8% of the time and rubbers fail 15% of the time.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:19 PM

Birth control fails, even surgical. If you screw, you might end up with a kid. Even my teenager can grasp this concept why can’t a woman going to law school?

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 4:22 PM

–Birth control doesn’t work sometimes. Look at http://www.contracept.org/risks.php. This is from a pro-life site and says that the pill fails in actual use 8% of the time and rubbers fail 15% of the time.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:19 PM

Yes, but I think Jeff’s point was that abortion should not be used as a form of birth control, even if the failure of other forms of birth control led to the pregnancy. And I agree with him.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 4:23 PM

2) She did not become “pro-choice”. She made the decision to murder her baby. So yes, she was amoral. (BTW “Pro-choice” is a red herring. If you favor abortion you are “pro-death”.)

Irresponsible or amoral behavior is not exclusive to any particular class or socio-economic status. As for your moral high-ground position that “the people likely to be viewed as irresponsible or immoral because of unintended pregnancy are women from lower income families. How much of these moral judgments about women having abortions are routed in classism?”, aren’t you the one who suggested that we should pay for abortions for low-ncome women because their children ad to the welfare rolls and are likely to end up in prison? Talk about classism!

There is but one moral judgement in this matter…killing is wrong!

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 3:59 PM

–Bull. Killing a 8 week old fetus which can’t think or feel pain isn’t necessarily wrong–especially if you’ve birth control and it failed–and just because some of us don’t consider those fetuses to have the same rights as fully developed human beings doesn’t mean we are amoral (have no moral beliefs of any kind).

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Pretty much it does, killing a life is killing a life

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 4:27 PM

You don’t get what economic conservatives like me want. We want the government not to spend so much money. If we don’t pay for abortion for low income women, then we have to pay for welfare under the current system. Also, we too often have to spend money to incarcerate the kid when he’s an adult. If you don’t want pay for abortion, pretend all the tax going to the abortion is mine and remember I’m saving you a lot of money.

thuja on October 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM

Oh I get your point alright, but shoving the responsibilty onto the public hasn’t worked in the past and it won’t work now. All it does it encourage even more irresponsible behavior because people know the government will take care of it.

The problem isn’t having children, the problem is the destruction of the family unit … especially the black family unit. Familes used to stick together and take care of their own, when there’s no family … because decades of liberal policies have destroyed it … you get skyrocketing out of wedlock births and juvenille crime rates.

People must deal with the consequences of their actions … positive and negative.

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 4:28 PM

REVISED: There should be no way a women gets “accidently” pregnant unless she is raped. Don’t kill babies for birth control. Just because the two people were too stupid to figure out a way to NOT get pregnant.

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM

Jeff from WI on October 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM

–I read Jeff’s post (especially given the first sentence) to mean something different, Trafalgar, but I won’t put words in his mouth. I do disagree with you about the failure of birth control, as you can tell.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:28 PM

–Bull. Killing a 8 week old fetus which can’t think or feel pain isn’t necessarily wrong–especially if you’ve birth control and it failed–and just because some of us don’t consider those fetuses to have the same rights as fully developed human beings doesn’t mean we are amoral (have no moral beliefs of any kind).

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Double bull. Killing an 8-week old human being isn’t just wrong, it’s evil. At what stage is a human being ‘fully-developed’? Only post-birth? By that arguemnt, infants aren’t fully developed, nor are pre-adolescent children. You ok with killing them too? I will amend my comment on amorality (I used it in thuja’s context). Those who advocate for the killing of innocent life are immoral on that issue, although they may have other redeeming qualities.

Trafalgar on October 26, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Pretty much it does, killing a life is killing a life

ORconservative on October 26, 2009 at 4:27 PM

–So you’re saying that anyone who is a pro-abort would necessarily steal, shoot “real” human beings, lie, etc. just because of their position on abortion? Do you have any support for that? It’s tough for me to believe that because, depending on the poll, at least half of the US is pro-abort and I don’t see the general crime rates anywhere near that level.

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:31 PM

Killing a 8 week old fetus which can’t think or feel pain isn’t necessarily wrong–especially if you’ve birth control and it failed–and just because some of us don’t consider those fetuses to have the same rights as fully developed human beings doesn’t mean we are amoral (have no moral beliefs of any kind).

Jimbo3 on October 26, 2009 at 4:24 PM

What you’re saying is any life that isn’t wanted, or may cause a hardship or inconvenience on someone should be terminated.

darwin on October 26, 2009 at 4:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4