Abortion advocate: I love abortion and I don’t want it to be “rare”

posted at 6:50 pm on March 15, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Talk about an all-out advocate for abortion. “Pro-choice activist” Jessica DelBalzo says it all in a new post for RH Reality Check (h/t LifeNews.com):

“I love abortion. I don’t accept it. I don’t view it as a necessary evil. I embrace it. I donate to abortion funds. I write about how important it is to make sure that every woman has access to safe, legal abortion services. I have bumper stickers and buttons and t-shirts proclaiming my support for reproductive freedom. I love abortion,” DelBalzo declares. …

As Delbalzo writes, “And I bristle every time a fellow activist uses a trendy catch-phrase or rallying cry meant to placate pro-lifers. The first of these, “Make abortion safe, legal, and rare!” has been used for decades as a call for abortion rights.”

“Safe and legal are concepts I fully support, but rare is something I cannot abide. I understand the theoretical mindset: it is better for a woman to prevent an unwanted pregnancy than to bear the physical and financial burden of an abortion. While my own abortion involved very little pain and a minimal financial expense, one which my ex-boyfriend was willing to share with me, even I can admit that using condoms or the pill is preferable to eight weeks of nausea and weight gain,” she writes. “However, there is no need to suggest that abortion be rare. To say so implies a value judgement [sic], promoting the idea that abortion is somehow distasteful or immoral and should be avoided. Even with affordable, accessible birth control, there will be user errors, condoms that break, moments of spontaneity. The best contraceptive access in the world won’t change the fact that we are merely human and imperfect in our routines.”

Whew. What she writes makes me a little sick to my stomach — but at least she’s internally consistent. “Safe, legal and rare” has always puzzled me. If life begins at conception and abortion takes the life of an innocent unborn baby, as I believe it does, then why should abortion be safe and legal? If life doesn’t begin at conception and abortion is just some sterile medical procedure to purge the body from some nonhuman parasitical something, then why should it be rare? Population considerations?

DelBalzo admits she has had an abortion and it’s hard not to wonder how much of the vehemence of her position stems from denial — denial of the reality that her own child existed within her and then did not. Either way, if more abortion advocates owned their positions, as DelBalzo does, the abortion debate would grow infinitely easier. More people would see clearly the choice before them: Will they choose to accept the reality that life begins at conception or deny it? Will they choose to protect the right to life or choose to be arbiters of that right?


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

They’re all brutal, godless, hedonists. Attempting to intellectually and morally engage them is a waste of time and effort.

rplat on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Just out of curiosity, does DelBalzo get knocked up every 3 months or so, just so she can run out and get an abortion?

GarandFan on March 15, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Nah, her birth control is provided free of charge by taxpayers.

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

If gay babies could be detected in the womb, those that would have the babies are the Sarah Palin-conservatives of the world, and the first to abort would be the elite liberals that would think it just too much to deal with. What would they think down at the Country Club?

slickwillie2001 on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

It’s never safe for the baby, and always a risk for the mother.

Abortionists have fought tooth and nail against the medical regulation of clinics.

Even when the abortion is carried out in clean facilities by a physician, there can be other negative consequences for the mother.

INC on March 15, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Okay, then, let me restate my question:

As long as it remains a legal medical procedure in this country, shouldn’t it also remain as safe as possible?

MadisonConservative on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

This woman needs pity and compassion, not snide, snarky comments about needing to be “post-birth” aborted; because she’s in for a world of trauma when the reality of what’s she’s done finally hits home.

kenashimame on March 15, 2012 at 7:23 PM

THIS.

I understand the concept of heavy sarcasm to attack the lady’s central argument. But it really accomplishes nothing except a preaching to the choir mentality (because, unlike “Daikokuco,” most of us get that level of humor anyway).

I actually want Ms. DelBalzo to meet Abby Johnson – someone who had that pang of conscience that changed HER life – face-to-face. You wouldn’t see a TV talk show that daring since Geraldo left the air…

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

at least she’s honest… but still, i went and read her whole article and it was so sickening. “i looooooooooooooooooove abortion!!!!!!!!!” well then maybe you should have been aborted. oh, was that mean for me to say? it’s not mean, if abortion is as great and wonderful as you say it is. so maybe you should have been aborted… or your best friend. or one of your siblings. what if they never existed? suddenly abortion is not so great anymore is it? you do realize you’re taking an entire person out of the world right? (pro-choicers don’t want to admit that!!)

and wow there are so many dumb bullcrap statements in the article, i would refute them all but that would take forever.

Sachiko on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Pardon me for assuming you were speaking for yourself. But if you aren’t, then you are speaking for your fellow right-wing faux anti-abortion advocates.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

The preceding post was paid for by the Democrat Party, NOW, Georgetown University law students, Media Matters for America and MSNBC.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:33 PM

I know too many women who pretty much feel this way…they are not moved by accounts of babies being born viable and left to die, or of pictures of pre-born babies still in the womb. Even talk of “just” limiting how late woman should be able to have an abortion has no effect on them. I have a friend who had an abortion at a very early age, and I know she struggled for years to come to terms with it. OTOH, a friend of my cousins’ was going to abort her baby back in the 80s, and my aunt pleaded with her to not do it…she wrote her heart-felt letters asking her to spare the baby…she ultimately decide to have the baby and gave him up for adoption, and while that in itself was very difficult, she felt as though my aunt gave her a gift, and she has never regretted giving birth. At a minimum, abortion should never be sugar-coated, women need to know there is a real risk to their emotional health when they chose to abort.

ellifint on March 15, 2012 at 7:33 PM

I hate people like this woman.

Straight up hate.

blatantblue on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Doesn’t bother me. I’ve never cared how many or how few abortions there are either. In the context of this issue, my concern begins and ends with ensuring that the government encumbers the free exchange of goods and services as little as possible, and regulating abortion to satisfy nanny state holy rollers is such an encumbrance.

Armin Tamzarian on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM The summer of 1996 , I took my then 2 year old son to an anti-abortion rally that was being held in Chicago. The lefties were shouting their usual crap(Racist, sexist, anti-gay, born-again bigots go away.) and I shouted at them One of them pointed to my adorable little boy and and ‘wondered’ want I would have done if I had found out that my son was going to be born ‘gay’.
16 years later he’s a flaming heterosexual-but I would never have aborted him for anything. Since he could never give me permission to murder him in the womb-the issue was off the table.
Get it.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

May God have mercy on her depraved soul, right before He banishes her to Hell for all eternity.

Naturally Curly on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

If gay babies could be detected in the womb, those that would have the babies are the Sarah Palin-conservatives of the world, and the first to abort would be the elite liberals that would think it just too much to deal with. What would they think down at the Country Club?

slickwillie2001 on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Do you have ANY evidence that this is the case, or is this what you tell yourself to assauge your own guilty conscience, that you would abort a child if it was going to end up gay?

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Ah, the outspoken abortion warrior who would abort his own child if it’s gay speaks.
Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:18 PM

It really is funny seeing the reaction of the pro-abortion crowd when the possibility of “gay abortion” rears its ugly little head.

As much as I deplore abortion, it is almost worth it to see the look of dismay on their tiny little faces at the idea that their sacrament might be used for something as “heinous” as that.

(Of course, the “crime” of any other “birth defect” is A-OK as a justificatoin for abortion in their book)

And the best part is that those “intolerant” Pro-Life folks wouldn’t be the ones aborting for a “gay” gene, anyway….

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

The preceding post was paid for by the individual who posted it.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:33 PM

FTFY.

Memo to people who go “durrrr, yur a paid operative”: that line is badly overworn, not funny at all, and childish bullsh!t besides.

MelonCollie on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Saw this story this week: CDC Launching (Even More) Graphic Anti-Smoking Ad Campaign

…and again I’m reminded that the proggies push this very graphic anti-smoking crap at us, but absolutely WILL NOT allow pictures of aborted babies.

slickwillie2001 on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Well gosh I hope Rush doesn’t call her a murderer, imagine what that would start.

angrymike on March 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM

More advertisers? More listeners?

Decoski on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012

You are as dishonest as they come and your kidding yourself if you don’t think most pro abort lefties would not abort their gay babies.

I have talked to enough lefty pro aborts to hear them and their gay jokes and derision. Oh they will pretend they are all open minded but they are as dishonest as you .

See ya liar.

CW on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Same reason you’d want ANY sterile medical procedure to be rare, maybe? Cancer biopsy, heart surgery, hip replacement, etc.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Being pregnant is now a cancer? You people are truly sick.

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:36 PM

I hate people like this woman.

Straight up hate.

blatantblue on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

These kind of people I usually loathe rather than hate. Hate is reserved for human beings.

MadisonConservative on March 15, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Abortion rights? Really? Are you really suggesting that there is a right to abort?

I’m not suggesting it, I’m acknowledging it. The Supreme Court of The United States of America decided this in a little-known verdict in 1973 called Roe vs. Wade. Try the Google for details.

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

moments of spontaneity

Wham bam, thank you maam.

pedestrian on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Central core of the argument:

Roe v. Wade was bad law enacted on a flimsy premise in the Constitution by nine unelected judges. Come to think of it, it NEVER WAS A LAW, nor has it EVER BEEN It simply stripped the states from instituting bans against the practice. Nothing was ever passed that formally legalized the practice; rather, the absence of a ban made it possible.

The humanitarian argument aside, the ruling was duly unnecessary, bad policy, and was/is an attack on the Constitution and our rule of law. Which is enough of an atrocity.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM

kenashimame on March 15, 2012 at 7:23 PM

You seem like a kind person, kenashimame, but I think your kindness and compassion would be wasted on this sociopath.

While my own abortion involved very little pain and a minimal financial expense, one which my ex-boyfriend was willing to share with me, even I can admit that using condoms or the pill is preferable to eight weeks of nausea and weight gain,”

I think we are facing an entire generation of shallow, materialistic narcissists for whom abortion is the reproductive equivalent of LASIK, or a nose job – elective cosmetic surgery, done to make sure one always looks good in that sexy new dress.

Mr. Arkadin on March 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Being pregnant is now a cancer? You people are truly sick.

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:36 PM

How did I know one of you liars would pull that stunt. I also compared to to heart surgery and hip replacement. Convenient that you focus on the cancer, huh, dishonest person?

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Abortion is the least of our worries right now. I HATE how this issue has been used to divert attention from the real problems.

KMC1 on March 15, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Memo to people who go “durrrr, yur a paid operative”: that line is badly overworn, not funny at all, and childish bullsh!t besides.

MelonCollie on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Well, I’m sorry. Unless I’m not. XP

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Really illuminating to see how principled you anti-abortion warriors are. Seriously. You hate abortion, except when you advocate it for the people you disagree with.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I am completely principled in my beliefs. I support the death penalty for all murderers, including abortion doctors and anyone who conspires with them to murder babies.

Siddhartha Vicious on March 15, 2012 at 7:40 PM

If gay babies could be detected in the womb, those that would have the babies are the Sarah Palin-conservatives of the world, and the first to abort would be the elite liberals that would think it just too much to deal with. What would they think down at the Country Club?

slickwillie2001 on March 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Do you have ANY evidence that this is the case, or is this what you tell yourself to assauge your own guilty conscience, that you would abort a child if it was going to end up gay?

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

I have no guilty conscience, and I consider myself a Palin-style conservative, and thus would not suggest abortion for this reason for any child of mine or anyone else.

Obviously I don’t have proof of specifics because it is a wildly hypothetical scenario. Perhaps someday such prenatal testing would be possible.

slickwillie2001 on March 15, 2012 at 7:40 PM

KMC1 on March 15, 2012 at 7:39 PM

If you’re never allowed to be born-everything else kind of pales by comparison.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 7:40 PM

bla bla bla, its not children, its fetuses or embryos. people can make choices, such as, abort now to have child latter(yes the all mighty god of convenience), or have baby now and use better contraceptives latter. so what? good, go for it! take your choice an ignore profilers guilt trips.

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Same reason you’d want ANY sterile medical procedure to be rare, maybe? Cancer biopsy, heart surgery, hip replacement, etc.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Neither one of you scumbags is worth even a fraction of the attention you’re getting here, so I won’t waste more than 10 seconds of my time: You are a couple of Seriously. Sick. F-cks.

Dopenstrange on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

It really is funny seeing the reaction of the pro-abortion crowd when the possibility of “gay abortion” rears its ugly little head.

As much as I deplore abortion, it is almost worth it to see the look of dismay on their tiny little faces at the idea that their sacrament might be used for something as “heinous” as that.

(Of course, the “crime” of any other “birth defect” is A-OK as a justificatoin for abortion in their book)

And the best part is that those “intolerant” Pro-Life folks wouldn’t be the ones aborting for a “gay” gene, anyway….

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

…Right? None of that has anything to do with my point. Which is that its not the lefties having abortions that would cause a spike in abortions of gays. They are having abortions ANYWAYS. Do you not understand this basic concept? If gays were going to be mass aborted it would HAVE to come from people who otherwise wouldn’t have an abortion: right-wing partisan faux anti-abortion nutters. And its that same group that has a problem with gays in the first place. Hmmm.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Now thats some twisted, evil loony bin material.

Valkyriepundit on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

I do not agree with the SoCons on most issues, but this is an exception. Abortion is wrong. Promoting it is just evil.

Also, I don’t get why some say she needs our compassion and pity. She is most likely a true psycopath and monster. She is as bad as an abortionist. Yes, some of the almost violent comments here are not right, but we should not resist calling her an evil woman.

McDuck on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

This is what this gal needs to see:

http://is.gd/RyZoXN

It needs to be shown to every person before they go in for an abortion….

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

In the context of this issue, my concern begins and ends with ensuring that the government encumbers the free exchange of goods and services as little as possible, and regulating abortion to satisfy nanny state holy rollers is such an encumbrance.

Armin Tamzarian on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

You sound like an actual libertarian, unlike Ron Paul, who opposes abortion rights.

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Armin Tamzarian on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

You sound like an actual libertarian, unlike Ron Paul, who opposes abortion rights.

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:43 PM

So it’s fine to go kill unborn babies?
Gotcha.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Armin Tamzarian on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Ohhh, nooooo…this d0uchebag again?

Dopenstrange on March 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM

…Right? None of that has anything to do with my point. Which is that its not the lefties having abortions that would cause a spike in abortions of gays. They are having abortions ANYWAYS. Do you not understand this basic concept? If gays were going to be mass aborted it would HAVE to come from people who otherwise wouldn’t have an abortion: right-wing partisan faux anti-abortion nutters. And its that same group that has a problem with gays in the first place. Hmmm.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

That’s your point? It makes Ted Kaczynski’s manifesto looked reasoned and intelligent.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

You really don’t get it, do you?

Those are the people who WOULDN’T have an abortion. They feel that strongly about it.

My second daughter is gay – and I would never have considered aborting her if I had known ahead of time.

But you might be surprised at how many pro-choice people WOULD have an abortion if they knew that their child was going to be gay.

For all of their talk of “tolerance”, many of them really aren’t.

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM

I do not agree with the SoCons on most issues, but this is an exception. Abortion is wrong. Promoting it is just evil.

I’m pretty much a social conservative…I do break from the crowd on gay marriage, but march in step to the rest of those issues. I’m vehemently against abortion on demand, and the liberal feminists continue to believe abortion is a women’s choice. Unfortunately, the real “choice” was that woman having unprotected sex.

JetBoy on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

The more people have abortions the more she feels okay about killing her own babies.

This is why many pro-choice advocates go nuts when someone even suggests that abortion is wrong, even if that person isn’t in any way attempting to change laws or opinions. If someone says that abortion is wrong then it makes it just a little more difficult for her to supress her self-hatred.

29Victor on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

so maybe you should have been aborted contracepted/”abstinated”… or your best friend. or one of your siblings. what if they never existed? suddenly abortion contraception/abstinence is not so great anymore is it? you do realize you’re taking an entire person out of the world right? (pro-choicers don’t want to admit that!!)

Sachiko on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Weak and feeble argument.

Did you know you were conceived by one sperm in a batch of hundreds of millions? Any and all of those would have resulted in an entirely different person. Yet you denied them that opportunity. Evil, evil/

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Happen to fancy the ladies myself.

Pablo Honey on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

But do you pay for their Birth Control?

Del Dolemonte on March 15, 2012 at 7:48 PM

“However, there is no need to suggest that abortion be rare. To say so implies a value judgement [sic], promoting the idea that abortion is somehow distasteful or immoral and should be avoided.”

Yes, can’t have those pesky little things like values in our life. The horror.

Bitter Clinger on March 15, 2012 at 7:49 PM

The more people have abortions the more she feels okay about killing her own babies.

This is why many pro-choice advocates go nuts when someone even suggests that abortion is wrong, even if that person isn’t in any way attempting to change laws or opinions. If someone says that abortion is wrong then it makes it just a little more difficult for her to supress her self-hatred.

29Victor on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Exactly. You’re effectively preaching blasphemy towards worshipers of their own secular religion.

Daikokuco is one such example. You might as well pull out a crucifix and sprinkle holy water their way; the ensuing reaction would be the exact same.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:50 PM

How did I know one of you liars would pull that stunt. I also compared to to heart surgery and hip replacement. Convenient that you focus on the cancer, huh, dishonest person?

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Okay. So being pregnant is the same as having heart problems or suffering from joint degeneration? Got it. And what exactly am I lying about?

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Weak and feeble argument.

Did you know you were conceived by one sperm in a batch of hundreds of millions? Any and all of those would have resulted in an entirely different person. Yet you denied them that opportunity. Evil, evil/

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Talk about a weak and feeble argument.

Bitter Clinger on March 15, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Weak and feeble argument.

Did you know you were conceived by one sperm in a batch of hundreds of millions? Any and all of those would have resulted in an entirely different person. Yet you denied them that opportunity. Evil, evil/

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Awesome. The more you troll on here, the funnier it gets. Keep digging your own grave…

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Neither do I. I want every democrat possible to abort their hellish offspring.

lorien1973 on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

You sound like an actual libertarian, unlike Ron Paul, who opposes abortion rights.

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Yeah, you peal away the shell of a real libertarian and you get someone who cares about no one but themselve.

pedestrian on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

BTW, as a gay person, let me just say that daikoloco does not speak for me. I support gay rights, including marriage, but this is not the thread to talk about it. This story is about a disgusting woman who promotes the killing of the unborn. No need to talk about the abortion of gay fetuses.

McDuck on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

You really don’t get it, do you?

Those are the people who WOULDN’T have an abortion. They feel that strongly about it.

My second daughter is gay – and I would never have considered aborting her if I had known ahead of time.

I believe you. But then why is it so commonly brought up by so-cons that liberals would be against abortion if there was a way to detect teh gayz, like CW did? The very statement indicates that liberals would have a problem with aborting gays…

But you might be surprised at how many pro-choice people WOULD have an abortion if they knew that their child was going to be gay.

For all of their talk of “tolerance”, many of them really aren’t.

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM

…So why would they ramp up the abortion of gay fetuses? And do you have ANY evidence that pro-choice people would go out of their way to abort a gay fetus over a non-gay one? Or is it projection? Again, its not the “left” that has a problem with gays. It’s the “right”.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

I kind of agree with her. Lots of people out there are unfit to be parents. If you don’t want a baby and are willing to kill it, go for it. I’d rather that child never be born than born to a mother who despises him/her.

Think about it, would you want to be raised by someone who wanted to kill you but didn’t because it was illegal or too expensive or the nearest facility was too far away?

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Neither do I. I want every democrat possible to abort their hellish offspring.
lorien1973 on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that’s what we call a “Thread Winner”…..

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Think about it, would you want to be raised by someone who wanted to kill you but didn’t because it was illegal or too expensive or the nearest facility was too far away?

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

That must be why the Jews were ok with the Holocaust.

pedestrian on March 15, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I wonder if Jessica DelBozo even partially realizes just what a pathetically sad excuse for a human-being she is.

SD Tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Again, its not the “left” that has a problem with gays It’s the “right”. because we simply use them as political pawns, just like African-Americans, women, Hispanics, union workers, etc. etc.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

FIFY

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 7:56 PM

I wonder if Jessica DelBozo even partially realizes just what a pathetically sad excuse for a human-being she is.

SD Tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:54 PM

There is only one difference between her and other abortion rights supporters.

She is honest.

pedestrian on March 15, 2012 at 7:56 PM

You killed your own child that is clear. Your blithering hatred on this blog will not make that reality or the pain that you so want to ignore go away. Facts is fact. Facts scare the pro abort to no end.

CW on March 15, 2012 at 7:27 PM

lol! see, guilt trip right there you emotional troll. there is no facts on your side, just religious motivated gross exaggerations.

I’m not ‘pro-life’-I’m anti-abortion.
If you have your unborn child killed for ANY reason other than to save your life-you are a vicious , blood-thirty, murdering MONSTER!

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

now now, do you feel better after venting like that? i not a murderer but Delbalzo is. so what? your extremist opinion is but a minority in this country, so suck it up!

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

When you consider that everything that is wrong with the world is caused by people, when you consider that almost all suffering is caused by humans, the only moral goal is to reduce the vector of that suffering as much as possible. Short of wars and zombie apocalypses, and mass suicides, the only humane way of doing that is with birth control.

The universe was here long before humans evolved, and it will be here long after. The universe does not require humans and in fact, the universe is no better off with us here. Ergo, there is no moral compunction to reproduce other than some moral idea you create in your own head to justify your own offspring. Once someone is born, social norms obligate that person to continue until natural causes terminate that person. Suicide traumatizes those around you. And in that process of going through the motions of life, suffering takes place, especially towards the end. However, in someone not yet born, that obligation does not exist, and therefore it would make sense to make sure that future births do not take place.

keep the change on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

That must be why the Jews were ok with the Holocaust.

pedestrian on March 15, 2012 at 7:54 PM

WTF? That makes absolutely no sense.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

So what’s wrong with adoption? You would rather the baby was killed than to have been adopted by a couple that would love him/her as their own? Really?

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Really illuminating to see how principled you anti-abortion warriors are. Seriously. You hate abortion, except when you advocate it for the people you disagree with.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

….uh…uh…..uh…..oh….uh….PULL MY FINGER!

KOOLAID2 on March 15, 2012 at 7:59 PM

now now, do you feel better after venting like that? i not a murderer but Delbalzo is. so what? your extremist opinion is but a minority in this country, so suck it up!

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The pro-choice pot calling the kettle black. Love it.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 8:00 PM

WTF? That makes absolutely no sense.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

+1. Textbook case of Godwinning, and a particularly pathetic and incoherent one at that.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

So what’s wrong with adoption? You would rather the baby was killed than to have been adopted by a couple that would love him/her as their own? Really?

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 7:59 PM

You know very well not every unwanted baby is given up for adoption. There are tens if not hundreds of thousands of kids who are abused by their parents every year. Yes, I’d rather have these kids not born at all than live a shitty life.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

The very statement indicates that liberals would have a problem with aborting gays…

I just find it HILARIOUS when the idea is brought up – surprisingly enough, the pro-choice crowd is JUST FINE with abortion, but Heaven forbid someone suggest that a person might want to abort a child if its only “defect” is that it might be gay.

You see, it is perfectly fine with these people to abort a child just because it isn’t wanted.

But they can’t get their head around the idea that someone MIGHT NOT WANT a gay child.

When you tell them “Well, that’s my RIGHT”, they start sputtering.

They say, “But it’s a perfectly healthy baby – there’s nothing wrong with it.”

And they COMPLETELY miss the irony of that statement….

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

keep the change on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

So, why are you here?

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 8:04 PM

angryed, I had absolutely horrible parents, but I am very glad I wasn’t aborted. I find your position disturbing.

McDuck on March 15, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Neither one of you scumbags is worth even a fraction of the attention you’re getting here, so I won’t waste more than 10 seconds of my time: You are a couple of Seriously. Sick. F-cks.

Dopenstrange on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

you are the sick f-cks! every day there are several prolife posts in HA and you guys seem to have your political priority revolving around what is happening in others people uterus.

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I’m not suggesting it, I’m acknowledging it. The Supreme Court of The United States of America decided this in a little-known verdict in 1973 called Roe vs. Wade. Try the Google for details.

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Well then, given your argument then you also agree that there is a right to own another human being as property. The Supreme Court of the United States of America decided this in a little known verdict in 1857. Try the Google for details.

After all, if you are advocating that the Supreme Court cannot make mistakes in its rulings, you have to agree with all Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land.

Really? there was a Supreme Court decision? I had no idea! /s

AZfederalist on March 15, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Well, see, in HER case, she CAN defend herself, unlike the unborn.
She has that ‘right’

pambi on March 15, 2012 at 8:07 PM

More pro-lifers don’t take her stance because people of her beliefs are rare. Most people want it “safe, legal, and rare” because it’s not something that they would prefer to happen, but they recognize the necessity in some cases.

Safe, legal, and rare SHOULD be the approach. This girl is just sickening, crazy, and attempting to cope with her own demons in effectively.

Boomer_Sooner on March 15, 2012 at 8:07 PM

I just find it HILARIOUS when the idea is brought up – surprisingly enough, the pro-choice crowd is JUST FINE with abortion, but Heaven forbid someone suggest that a person might want to abort a child if its only “defect” is that it might be gay.

You see, it is perfectly fine with these people to abort a child just because it isn’t wanted.

But they can’t get their head around the idea that someone MIGHT NOT WANT a gay child.

When you tell them “Well, that’s my RIGHT”, they start sputtering.

They say, “But it’s a perfectly healthy baby – there’s nothing wrong with it.”

And they COMPLETELY miss the irony of that statement….

TeresainFortWorth on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Sounds like an awful lot of strawmen you have rounded up there. Where is your evidence that this is how liberals act?

Again, its faux anti-abortion rightists who have a problem with abortion. They also have a problem with gays. There is NOTHING hypocritical about a liberal pointing out that a right-wing anti-abortion nut will violate their own “beliefs” when it comes to aborting a gay kid. It illustrates that they aren’t quite as anti-abortion as they pretend to be. Calling out the other side for their hypocrisy is nothing new, and it has NOTHING to do with some lefty desire to “save teh gayz”.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM

This woman (I checked her out) is also against adoption. She has a whole blog about it…She seems like a very selfish person and clearly is trying to make excuses for her own behavior. She is single with two children: I feel sorry for those kids. I can’t imagine growing up in a home where your mother is an activist for baby killing and fights against adoption! Sick….

vitaatcaritas on March 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Her take is basically the other end of the extreme that, illegal even in cases of rape and incest is on the other end.

Boomer_Sooner on March 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM

keep the change on March 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Nice try. Last time I checked, the Buddha did not advocate abortion as part of the Noble Eightfold path leading to Nirvana and the cessation of suffering.

Mr. Arkadin on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

This is her sermon should the Republicans “grow a set” and use the free contraception as another reason to stop Planned Parenthood funding.

djaymick on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

But we on the prolife side have to also get rid of the odious (except in the cases of rape and incest) exception.

TiminPhx on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I’m mostly with you but I’d like to know exactly how many abortions are performed due to rape and incest and how many of them are due to far too many shots on a given Saturday night with somebody the female only knows as “Ben.” In other words, the pro-killing side of this debate constantly throws this idea up as justification for all abortions. While there should probably be some provision in the law for these circumstances, I just don’t think it is all that much of an issue. And if these circumstances are rare, they shouldn’t be used as an excuse to justify the killing of life by a slut like Ms. DelBalzo.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

After all, if you are advocating that the Supreme Court cannot make mistakes in its rulings, you have to agree with all Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land.

Really? there was a Supreme Court decision? I had no idea! /s

AZfederalist on March 15, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Did he say that? He said it is the law of the land, which it is. It’s irrelevant if he agrees with it or not.

By the way, it seems you are unaware that case was Scott v Sandford overruled LONNGGGG ago. No such thing has happened with Roe v Wade. So it’s still law of the land. And has been, longer than the Dred Scott decision ever was.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:13 PM

McDuck on March 15, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I also grew up in an abusive household. I’m still glad to be here.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 8:14 PM

You know very well not every unwanted baby is given up for adoption. There are tens if not hundreds of thousands of kids who are abused by their parents every year. Yes, I’d rather have these kids not born at all than live a shitty life.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

So given your argument, all unwanted babies should be aborted. To say that a child should not be born because their parents might abuse them assumes the worst. All humans have the right to life, even if it is not perfect. Many of these so called abused children have grown up to be productive members of society. To assume they won’t is judgmental on your part.

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM

angryed, I had absolutely horrible parents, but I am very glad I wasn’t aborted. I find your position disturbing.

McDuck on March 15, 2012 at 8:06 PM

That’s fine. I don’t expect to get many people in agreement with me at HA. I respect the opinions of pro-life people. I disagree but unlike the majority of pro-abortion people I can respect the pro-life argument.

I’m not advocating every woman who gets pregnant rush out to the nearest PP location and get an abortion. I’m saying, if you want want, I’d rather you get one that give birth to a child that is unwanted.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM

I’m mostly with you but I’d like to know exactly how many abortions are performed due to rape and incest

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Very very few. As in about 1-2%, at most. It is a pathetic and weak excuse, but many Americans agree with having this “condition” (that abortion is okay sometimes) so I guess it’s effective…

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM

This woman (I checked her out) is also against adoption. She has a whole blog about it…She seems like a very selfish person

vitaatcaritas on March 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Isn’t abortion the ultimate act of selfishness? Think about it. What in life is more selfish than killing off the next generation because it is inconvenient?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Boomer_Sooner on March 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Saying it’s okay in cases of rape and incest, is saying that only some of the unborn deserve the right to live. ALL life is precious-regardless of how that life can to be.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

you are the sick f-cks! every day there are several prolife posts in HA and you guys seem to have your political priority revolving around what is happening in others people uterus.

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 8:06 PM

And your side gets off on killing as many babies as you can while bragging about it. It’s rich that you call other people sick fucks. And I’m saying this as someone who is pro-choice, but not to the insane degree you are.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Saying it’s okay in cases of rape and incest, is saying that only some of the unborn deserve the right to live. ALL life is precious-regardless of how that life can to be.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Indeed, no matter how you square it the baby is the most innocent party in the cases of incest and rape. You can’t be credibly anti-abortion but make exceptions for these two circumstances.

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Well, points for honesty…perhaps.

There are people out there who think the same thing but some sense of shame, if not decency, keeps them from firing up the abortion vacuum cleaner in public like this…

CorporatePiggy on March 15, 2012 at 8:19 PM

I’m mostly with you but I’d like to know exactly how many abortions are performed due to rape and incest and how many of them are due to far too many shots on a given Saturday night with somebody the female only knows as “Ben.”

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

I’m no expert, but my friends in the pro-life movement tell me that the number of abortions performed in the U.S. due to rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother is less than one percent.

For the record, Ron Paul, an OB-Gyn, has stated that he has never seen a case where an abortion would be necessary to save the life of the mother.

Mr. Arkadin on March 15, 2012 at 8:19 PM

She and President Infanticide have something in common. they don’t want women to be punished with a baby.

at just 10 weeks, this is what she would have “aborted”.

http://www.i-am-pregnant.com/img/week10-fetus.jpg

PappyD61 on March 15, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Very very few. As in about 1-2%, at most. It is a pathetic and weak excuse, but many Americans agree with having this “condition” (that abortion is okay sometimes) so I guess it’s effective…

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM

The only compelling circumstance for me when it comes to abortion is “saving the life of the mother” concept. At that point, you are dealing with choosing between two lives and if that is true the decision is legitimate on medical grounds. Not so much when “saving the life the mother” means that she would be inconvenienced by giving birth.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:22 PM

And your side gets off on killing as many babies as you can while bragging about it. It’s rich that you call other people sick fucks. And I’m saying this as someone who is pro-choice, but not to the insane degree you are.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

who side? who bragged about it?

nathor on March 15, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Yes, I’d rather have these kids not born at all than live a shitty life.

angryed on March 15, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Well, I’m sure the many kids who endured a crappy life growing up, then struck out on their own and became successful and lived happy productive lives thank you for your decision that they should never have been born. Very enlightened of you

AZfederalist on March 15, 2012 at 8:26 PM

AZfederalist on March 15, 2012 at 8:26 PM
No sh!t.

chewmeister on March 15, 2012 at 8:28 PM

There is no argument for abortion, especially the kind that attempts to place any kind of limit on gestation time before it’s acceptable. Before the first trimester? What happens between two months and thirty days and the following day that suddenly makes the so-called mass of cells a human being?

And sorry folks, rape and incest is no justification. You’re really going to solve this situation by killing the most innocent party in the matter? Is the baby somehow less of a human being because of the violent nature of its conception? Throw the offender’s ass in jail, liquidate any assets he may have to pay for the victim’s medical care as well as labor and delivery, and allow a loving family to adopt the child.

What people don’t understand is, societies do not survive when we lose such respect for human life. It’s been said that the Civil War was God’s punishment for allowing slavery to continue past its appointed time. God have mercy on us when we’re called to account for abortion.

TheMightyMonarch on March 15, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Drew Lowell on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

They also brought us Dred Scott v. Sandford and Plesy v. Ferguson. Once again they were just plain wrong and they turn the concept of rights on its head with Roe v. Wade. What God given right is more important, sacred and fundamental then the right to life? It is the first right because no other rights can exist without it. Thus it trumps all other rights when there is a conflict of rights.

NotCoach on March 15, 2012 at 8:29 PM

For the record, Ron Paul, an OB-Gyn, has stated that he has never seen a case where an abortion would be necessary to save the life of the mother.

Mr. Arkadin on March 15, 2012 at 8:19 PM

I’m no expert either but I’ve read enough to know that, as part of law, there probably should be exception for this circumstance. As to the reality of the situation, Ron Paul is right (can’t believe I am agreeing with him). This really wasn’t an issue until the left started defending partial-birth abortions. The kind that Obama would have the child wheeled away to the nearest janitor’s closet if the abortion didn’t fail to kill the child.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Daikokuco on March 15, 2012 at 7:42 PM

It’s quite an achievement to be the dumbest jackass on this site, but you somehow managed. Congratulations.

hillbillyjim on March 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4