Video: Abortionist challenges protesters to adopt “ugly black babies”

posted at 12:41 pm on August 8, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

We’re a few days late to this story, which is “ugly” indeed, but not necessarily for the reason some may think.  Pro-life activists challenged Charlotte abortionist Ashutosh Ron Virmani at his door about his practice, which Virmani hotly defended.  As LifeNews and the Washington Examiner both note, Virmani offered up an argument that is not at all unique, but is rarely put so baldly:

Charlotte abortionist Ashutosh Ron Virmani was caught on camera telling pro-lifers to “adopt one of those ugly black babies.” …

Virmani defended his practice of abortion as an effort to save taxpayers money and prevent crime.  “I as a taxpayer do not wish to pay for those babies to be born and brought up; and kill those people in Colorado,” he said in reference to the Colorado theatre killer.

Notably, the Colorado killer who killed 13 and injured 58 moviegoers was a physically healthy white male born to a middle-class couple.

Operation Save America representatives can be heard on the video saying, “We will adopt them.”

There are actually three arguments from Virmani, two of which are often made, and one of which only rarely is.  That’s the inclusion of “black” in Vermani’s emotional retort, a rather interesting inclusion, considering Virmani’s south-Asian accent. Virmani almost certainly is assuming that pro-life Americans are racist by nature.  He’s supporting his position by assuming that conservatives would balk at adopting a child other than a Caucasian, which is not just offensive and presumptuous, it’s a clear sign of another kind of bigotry altogether than what this first looks like – but not the kind of racism that some have imputed to Virmani.

The other two go more to the thrust of abortion support, and they are related.  The first argument is that it rids society of undesirable actors presupposes that all unexpected pregnancies produce evil results, or even that it produces evil results out of proportion to desired pregnancies.  Second, the use of the word “ugly” in connection to the usefulness of abortion underscores the utilitarian approach to human life on which the first argument relies.  If an individual human life is “ugly” in or out of the womb, does that give us the right to snuff it out, regardless of whatever value system is used to make that determination? Connecting the two, are we who have been allowed to live wise enough to judge the potential of these human lives to sanguinely throw more than a million of them away in the trash every year?

The last argument — that no one will want these children — is easily refuted by the lengthy wait times for adoption, even in private adoption organizations.  There are millions of people who cannot have children for medical reasons who want nothing more than an infant to add to their families, and most more than one.  At times, the only hope these people have is that an intervention will take place before an expectant mother goes to see a Virmani or his ilk, who routinely sell despair at a profit while ending lives that may have built a family, found cures for diseases, produced groundbreaking technology, and so on.

Despair is really the true disease at work here, and despair is all that really profits in the end.  The cure is hope, and reaching those who are despairing with that hope before Virmani and his colleagues can make their sale.

Update: I clarified the language a little after the video to make my point more plain.  Also, like some in the comments, I am a little uncomfortable with activists demonstrating at the abortionist’s home — although Virmani didn’t seem to mind enough to ignore them, as he engaged them in debate.  As I recall, we all had a lot of criticism for progressive protesters who staged demonstrations at the homes of AIG execs and such.


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

If you’d link me to an instance of a 10 week old human fetus eventually becoming a fully grown Golden Retriever, maybe I would change my opinion on abortion.

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 2:53 PM

I don’t care what your opinion on abortion is. It’s just that, your opinion.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:06 PM

It’s a pop-culture narrative that saves them from thinking.

batterup on August 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM

So true, and why one will ever have a sensible debate with anyone who supports abortion… such as RBNY…and anyone else who shares that view…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:08 PM

There is no so progressive and advanced in a society as reverting to child sacrifice…

tom daschle concerned on August 8, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Whatever your bible says about it, if it says anything about it. That’s your issue, not mine.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Pat answer… can’t you do better than that? There is no hope to have an honest and open debate with you…

I am done with you, unless I see anything worthy of a response…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

There is no hope of me jumping through your hoops. But I’ve been completely honest and opinion.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I’m so sick and tired of this intellectual dishonesty. Embrace the practice if you must, but at least have the guts to stand for what it really is: the killing of life.

John the Libertarian on August 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM

If you want to call it a life that’s your choice. I disagree.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:37 PM

If it’s not life, what are they snuffing out, a fire?

It’s 100% alive, 100% human, 100% unique and precious, and Obama says after they’re born(by botched abortion) you can still starve it to death, so that is the final word that eliminates the lies about “my body” and “it’s just tissue.”

We have deliberately killed off over 53 million humans –far more than Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and still we pretend that it’s not life. it’s too ugly and cruel of a thing we do to not deny it is life, but Nature’s God won’t bduy into that legal Satanic mumbo jumbo.

Don L on August 8, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I don’t care what your opinion on abortion is. It’s just that, your opinion.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:06 PM

It’s an opinion based on the fact that 100% of abortions destroy an innocent human life. If you have to rationalize your own actions by dehumanizing it as a “glob of cells,” fine, but I’m not going to pretend that abortion isn’t an evil, repugnant practice.

I don’t need God or the Old Testament to know that killing is wrong.

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Is that what a human baby is these days? A tax issue?

JetBoy on August 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Safe, legal, and often.

mythicknight on August 8, 2012 at 3:16 PM

There are those among us that are pro-life to the point we don’t want to kill our children, while being more than willing to let you kill yours. Looking at some of the rabid left I tend to agree with them that their gene pool should not be spread around any more than necessary. The issue with me is the fact that the government continues to try to require me to participate by taking money from me by force or the threat of force to use for this purpose. If you Pro-choicers are serious about it not being any of my business what you do with your children, why do you insist on making it my business to pay for it?

MikeA on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

So in Atheist World, killing innocents is okay?

Cindy Munford on August 8, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Of course not, but a first trimester glob of biomatter isn’t a person to begin with. It has no brain.

In b4 “neither do you, Satan worshiper!!1!”

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Others have addressed the markers that appear well before the end of the first trimester — heart beating at 18 days, and so on — so I’ll jump in here with the principled atheist argument against abortion, as propounded some time ago by a Hot Air commenter whose name I unfortunately don’t remember:

Atheists believe, definitionally, that there is no God, and that only the physical universe is real. From that premise, it follows that no supernatural beings exist, there is no such thing as a “soul” independent of the body, and that there is no place a soul can go after physical death — no Heaven, no Hell, no reincarnation. When biological life stops, the organism ceases to exist.

An embryo is indisputably alive — all the cells in an embryo meet the biological definition of “alive” — and from the moment of conception, the genetic material in its cells has been proven, by examination, to be different from either of its parents’ genetic material. It is not part of the mother, but a separate being. Its genetic material is human; therefore it is human. If left alone, it will normally develop everything needed to function as a human being.

The principled atheist argument against abortion is that this one life, this physical life, is all a person gets. Therefore, it is a great moral wrong, the worst moral wrong, to deprive a human being of physical life. (It’s my understanding that many atheists are against the death penalty for this reason.)


“It’s a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he’s got and all he’s ever gonna have.”
— Will Munny, in The Unforgiven

Mary in LA on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

There is no hope of me jumping through your hoops. But I’ve been completely honest and opinion.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Not asking you to ‘jump thru hoops’…

I want an inside ‘view’ of what goes on in that head of yours that you can deny a life and just kill it cuz it’s inconvienient…

That you feel nothing aborting a living being is beyond my comprehension…

It’s like looking into the mind of a serial killer, we all want to know what’s going on inside!

Sorry, I speak for others, I want to know!

It’s curiosity, that’s all…

How did you arrive at that conclusion when and why? Why do you think the way you do?

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Is that what a human baby is these days? A tax issue?

JetBoy on August 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Sometimes; it’s one less future democrat. And that makes me happy.

lorien1973 on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.
Heck everyone else…right?
Now let’s see…I wonder if there’s anything anyone from the pro-life side has done that we should similarly turn to when trying to understand the mindset of anyone/everyone who is pro-life…there’s gotta be something…anyone?
Anyone?

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Then my wife and I had one about four years ago. We already have three kids and couldn’t afford and didn’t really want another.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:47 PM
I can’t afford a Ferrari so I just don’t buy one. You were aware of birth control or sterilization, right?

Deanna on August 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

I’m not trying to convince you of anything because I really don’t care if you approve of my beliefs. If you want to believe there is a god and that he opposes abortion, go ahead, nobody is stopping you. That’s your business. More power to you.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Well I don’t aprove of you at all or your beliefs although your arrogance and arguments make a strong case for abortion but not in the sense you wish to believe. Your mother should have done the world a favor and aborted you when she had the chance.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Well now that you’re here that makes two.

Deanna on August 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM

shut up verbaluce

go kill some babies or something

Slade73 on August 8, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Is that what a human baby is these days? A tax issue?

JetBoy on August 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

So it would seem, at least for some. :-(

Sometimes; it’s one less future democrat. And that makes me happy.

lorien1973 on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

That was funny — for about a second! Then it just made me sad. For any baby up for adoption, I think the odds are slightly tilted in favor of being adopted by a conservative family, since conservatives generally place a high value on families. What that would actually mean for the future politics of the kid, I don’t know.

Yes, I’ve read about all those adoptions by (presumably liberal) celebrities, but I think those cases are exceptional. Moreover, from what I see on the magazine covers in the supermarket checkout line, it seems to me that many celebrities are treating their children as cute little accessories — yet another item, like a Dooney & Burke handbag, to be checked off the “trappings of success” list.

Mary in LA on August 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Oops..didn’t me to strike it out..

Then my wife and I had one about four years ago. We already have three kids and couldn’t afford and didn’t really want another.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:47 PM

I can’t afford a Ferrari so I just don’t buy one. You were aware of birth control or sterilization, right?

Deanna on August 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Let me put it to you this way, verbaluce: I have been debating this issue with people off and on for some 18 years now, half my lifetime. In all of that time, I have encountered two, exactly two, people who acknowledged all of the following:
a). yes, it’s a living person
b). yes, they are ending that life
c). yes, they have the right to do that

And both of them were HuffPosters, and a rare voice in a sea of irrational arguments.

About the only thing that makes the doctor in the video unique is an overt statement about “ugly black babies”. Every other argument he makes, about burdening the taxpayer, about bastard children becoming the dregs of society, about how WASPs are just a bunch of non-adopting racist hypocrites… I’ve heard it all a million times before.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Your mother should have done the world a favor and aborted you when she had the chance.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

shut up verbaluce

go kill some babies or something

Slade73 on August 8, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Stunning displays of stupidity. Par for course on a thread like this, though.

mythicknight on August 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

You do realize that Go RBNY is some 35 year old liberal that lives in his mom’s basement and has created this make believe life, wife and mom rape story don’t you. He’s never had a job or a women.

All he’s really ever made is that towel next to the computer stiff as concrete after watching his daily internet porn.

acyl72 on August 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Having said that, the point of this debate is the ongoing pursuit of the sanctification and preservation of human life, in whatever form we find it. Several posters here, imo, need to stop, take a breath, and dial it down a notch. You’re not really advancing the cause by wishing death on other people, particularly those with whom you disagree politically, and especially by a means as cruel and brutal as the one we’re debating.

If we’re going to champion innocent life, let’s show a little deference to the ones who made it this far intact.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 3:33 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVvkjuEAwgU

Isn’t She Lovely!!

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I’m not sure what to call myself really. I’m against abortion, but absolutely believe the right of the woman to hold sovereignty over her own body and abort if it’s within the confines of the law.

It’s a horrible practice IMO, but that’s just it, “IMO”= In My Opinion. My opinion should have NO bearing over the sovereignty of another persons body.

When is a human alive? When does it get rights? Well, now that’s a different argument. We can NOT say when a human becomes aware. The estimates for that range from before birth to 6 years old. The trouble is very few have memories that go back to the first year, let alone birth, and nobody can prove the remember time in the womb.

We have no proof of a soul. We aren’t gods, we aren’t privy to that info yet. We cannot prove that awareness isn’t anything more than a biological function of our physical brains, let alone have proof to declare it rests outside our bodies before and after life.

As for the definition of life, that happens even before fertilization actually. The cells that co-mingle to make a zygote are both living cells. Are those cells aware? I doubt it, but again…….

that’s just my opinion, and I’m still against abortion. I’m just not going to protest that which a woman has a right to and is currently legal.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ3L-5o3VuQ

I Just Love You…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Stunning displays of stupidity. Par for course on a thread like this, though.

mythicknight on August 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Your capricious manner towards life is about as base as a human can get. Couple that with your pride and I’d say you are in a very dangerous place.

tom daschle concerned on August 8, 2012 at 3:38 PM

About the only thing that makes the doctor in the video unique is an overt statement about “ugly black babies”. Every other argument he makes, about burdening the taxpayer, about bastard children becoming the dregs of society, about how WASPs are just a bunch of non-adopting racist hypocrites… I’ve heard it all a million times before.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Well we’ve all heard a lot of things a lot of times.
The guy seems to be quite upset and off balance.
Maybe he’s like that all the time, but perhaps getting harassed by a bunch of Jesus mind readers can throw someone off regardless.
If people think what was going on there was a worthy debate/discussion, or in any way should inform one, then what’s anyone gonna say to make them think otherwise.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.
 
verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

 

We also have to suffer though the ‘this will lead to legalization of people marrying pets’ b.s.
 
verbaluce on June 11, 2012 at 1:39 PM

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

If God Made You…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:44 PM

God only made me in that he made the universe able to produce me before he left for greener pastures.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM

I’m against abortion, but absolutely believe the right of the woman to hold sovereignty over her own body and abort if it’s within the confines of the law.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

In one sentence you come out against abortion and for it. Have you also considered the sovereignty of the baby over it’s right to live?

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.
 
verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

 

getting harassed by a bunch of Jesus mind readers
 
verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:44 PM

 
Ha. Well done. And not even a half-hour in between.

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Not asking you to ‘jump thru hoops’…

I want an inside ‘view’ of what goes on in that head of yours that you can deny a life and just kill it cuz it’s inconvienient…

That you feel nothing aborting a living being is beyond my comprehension…

I can live with that.

It’s like looking into the mind of a serial killer, we all want to know what’s going on inside!

Sorry, I speak for others, I want to know!

It’s curiosity, that’s all…

How did you arrive at that conclusion when and why? Why do you think the way you do?

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Probably because I’m not religious. I don’t see it as destroying one of god’s creations. It’s just what it is, a glob of cells and nothingness. No thought, no emotions, not concience of its own existence. It’s about as alive as a tomato plant IMO.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Maybe you have some point you want to make…and maybe you know what that point is.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I’m going to give him some leeway here because I’m sure I would be a little more emotional and on edge if some people showed up at my door with a camera to debate me.
I cant say I’ve always been against abortion and it is a sore point for me. As a man I would never attempt to force my view on a Woman or anyone else for that matter and I’m not against abortion for Religious reasons. I certainly dont think that abortions should be used as a form of birth control and that’s the part I’m against.
To this doctors point, as a Black person I do realize that Black babies are much less likely then their White counterparts to be adopted and so I understand his arguement there, and although it came across kind of crass, I understand what he was trying to say with the “ugly,Black baby” comment.
He’s better then me, no matter my views if you come to my door doing something like this I’m going to tell you to get the **** off my property.
Politricks on August 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Show me a black baby that I can adopt without government red tape and I will show you his/her father

ImageSniper on August 8, 2012 at 3:49 PM

God only made me in that he made the universe able to produce me before he left for greener pastures.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Huh? You acknowledge that God made the universe and then he “left for greener pastures”? If He made the universe, where the heck would He have gone afterward?

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

In one sentence you come out against abortion and for it. Have you also considered the sovereignty of the baby over it’s right to live?

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Sure I have. In weighing the mothers right versus the baby’s right (assuming the court ever gives the unborn a right) the mother has to win. She was there first, she carries the baby. If they can come up with a way to transport the fetus from inside the mother to a waiting pod without so much as cutting the mother once, then I’d say mother and baby have equal rights.

But, that’s not a perfect scenario either. I am aware my feelings about it sit squarely on the fence, that’s why I say I don’t know how to label myself in this respect. I hope science can one day shed a concrete set of proofs in one direction or another, but whoever is on the ‘losing’ side of that proof will still not accept it. This argument will rage forever until one side or another lose rights permanently.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

I’m against abortion, but absolutely believe the right of the woman to hold sovereignty over her own body and abort if it’s within the confines of the law.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

at some point in her life, she got that sovereignty from somewhere. Was it when she became a mother?

ted c on August 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Huh? You acknowledge that God made the universe and then he “left for greener pastures”? If He made the universe, where the heck would He have gone afterward?

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Off to make other universes I’m guessing. “Greener pastures” is just an expression, not a real destination, lol!

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

at some point in her life, she got that sovereignty from somewhere. Was it when she became a mother?

ted c on August 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Do you have sovereignty over your body? When did you get it?

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:53 PM

When it comes to God, one of the hardest things to wrap my finite, little mind around is the fact that He stands outside of Time.

As creatures who are so attached to linear time, it is nearly impossible to discuss this aspect of God, because even the words we use to talk about it—past, present, and future—are all words that are irrevocably linked to linear time.

God is outside of and above all of these things.

This is what I thought about when I encountered the story of how God came to Samson’s mother in Judges 13. He said: “You will become pregnant and have a son. Now then, drink no wine or other fermented drink and do not eat anything unclean, because the boy will be a Nazirite of God from the womb until the day of his death.” (vs 7)

Samson was only a twinkle in his father’s eye at this point, but God knew all about his life—from the womb until the day of his death. Incredible!

To think that God knows us so intimately even before we have been conceived! What comes as a revelation to us (as we’re waiting for the two little lines on the pregnancy test) is no surprise to God.

He knows us inside and out before that sperm and egg ever meet up.

As God said through the prophet Jeremiah: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born, I set you apart.” (Jer 1:5) And again through King David: “For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb.” (Ps 139:13)

It’s clear, isn’t it? The miracle of birth isn’t something that just happens between a man and a woman.

It happens between a man, a woman, and God.

There’s no doubt about it: You are no accident.

Your parents may not have planned on you.

The world may not have planned on you!

But God planned on you.

He knew all about your life before anyone else—from your very first moments in the womb right up until the day of your death.

You are no ordinary person.

God knew that you would be who you are, right where you are…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 3:56 PM

You do realize that Go RBNY is some 35 year old liberal that lives in his mom’s basement and has created this make believe life, wife and mom rape story don’t you. He’s never had a job or a women.

All he’s really ever made is that towel next to the computer stiff as concrete after watching his daily internet porn.

acyl72 on August 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

I’m a Republican, and 37. I also signed up to volunteer for Romney in my state. I’m actually doing something to get rid of Obama rather than just whine about him on this board, although i do plenty of that too. In fact how many of you were part of the gang that swore to stay home on election day because of Romney thus surrendering your precious abortion issue right over The One?

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Oh man…now you’re about to ask me if I’m a Mac user…right?

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

I’m against abortion, but absolutely believe the right of the woman to hold sovereignty over her own body and abort if it’s within the confines of the law.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

at some point in her life, she got that sovereignty from somewhere. Was it when she became a mother?

ted c on August 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

If a person’s right over their body is so precious, how is it that the culture of death folks don’t argue on behalf of the only human whose body is being destroyed? Does helplessness make evil a good?

Don L on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Sure I have. In weighing the mothers right versus the baby’s right (assuming the court ever gives the unborn a right) the mother has to win. She was there first, she carries the baby. If they can come up with a way to transport the fetus from inside the mother to a waiting pod without so much as cutting the mother once, then I’d say mother and baby have equal rights.

But, that’s not a perfect scenario either. I am aware my feelings about it sit squarely on the fence, that’s why I say I don’t know how to label myself in this respect. I hope science can one day shed a concrete set of proofs in one direction or another, but whoever is on the ‘losing’ side of that proof will still not accept it. This argument will rage forever until one side or another lose rights permanently.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

This whole crap about a mother’s rights a a false argument at best. Yes the mother has rights, like the right to keep her legs closed and not run the risk of becoming pregnant. It’s called responsibility as in taking responsibility for ones actions, something sadly lacking in our society today and a main reason the country is in the shape it’s in.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Probably because I’m not religious. I don’t see it as destroying one of god’s creations. It’s just what it is, a glob of cells and nothingness. No thought, no emotions, not concience of its own existence. It’s about as alive as a tomato plant IMO.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Well, a 3 month old baby is a lot less ‘alive’ than my 11 year old cat. Why is it okay to kill one but not the other, RBNY, if the only part of life you find precious is thought, emotions and consciousness?

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 3:59 PM

I am aware my feelings about it sit squarely on the fence, that’s why I say I don’t know how to label myself in this respect.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

I understand that you’re conflicted on this and hope that at some point your thoughts on it will evolve to the point where you recognize the sovereignty of all human life and its right to life. In the meantime, as you deal with the issue and since you believe that abortion is a “horrible practice”, might I suggest that you come down squarely on the side of the right to life of both the mother and the unborn child? If for no other reason than to hedge your bets with God who, believe me, did not abandon you to go off to greener fields.

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Do you have sovereignty over your body? When did you get it?

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Yup, I sure do, but that sovereignty doesn’t give me the right to take another human life.

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 4:01 PM

It’s just what it is, a glob of cells and nothingness.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM

I’m sorry, but again, your marginalization of the issue by using the term “glob” is both inaccurate and unscientific.

In weighing the mothers right versus the baby’s right (assuming the court ever gives the unborn a right) the mother has to win.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

But you’re not weighing the two sides on the same terms. You are weighing the baby’s right to be alive versus the mother’s “right” to kill it if she feels like it.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Do you have sovereignty over your body? When did you get it?

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Sovereignty requires responsiblity and assuming responsibility for ones actions. Taking the easy way out by murdering your unborn isn’t it. Nice try though.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Of course, by all means use this single example of some a$$hole on the pro-choice side of the issue to suggest it somehow is at all representative of anyone else on that side of the issue.
 
verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

 

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

 
Oh man…now you’re about to ask me if I’m a Mac user…right?
 
verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

 
First rule of holes.

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Off to make other universes I’m guessing. “Greener pastures” is just an expression, not a real destination, lol!

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Well, since the universe is defined as the totality of everything that exists or has existed, it’s highly unlikely.

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM

This whole crap about a mother’s rights a a false argument at best. Yes the mother has rights, like the right to keep her legs closed and not run the risk of becoming pregnant. It’s called responsibility as in taking responsibility for ones actions, something sadly lacking in our society today and a main reason the country is in the shape it’s in.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Absolutely. I believe in individual freedom and personal responsibility. That’s why I’m against abortion, I just can’t tell someone else that their opinion has to mirror mine in that regard. Well, not yet anyway ;P

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 4:07 PM

In fact how many of you were part of the gang that swore to stay home on election day because of Romney thus surrendering your precious abortion issue right over The One?

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

More of that respectful opinion-mongering, I see.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 4:08 PM

rogerb on August 8, 2012 at 4:05 PM

I can’t understand why Ed doesn’t let you write posts here.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 4:09 PM

At the risk of getting flamed from here to tomorrow, the man has somewhat of a point. Some people shouldn’t have children and are too _____ (fill in the blank) to give up the child for adoption. Killing it in the womb shouldn’t be an option but sometimes I wonder if some children might not have been better off seeing some of the abuse that they go through and knowing BEFORE the mother had the child that it would not go well.

The other is that the doctor makes the point of only wanting **”good” (insert your definition here of good) babies and one way to take that as a reality is looking at all the women that abort Trisomy 21 babies. Extrapolate that to the population and the reaction/behavior of people who see and interact with those children.

I’m glad the man said it and in the manner he did. Some things need to be said and sometimes in a raw manner in order to get discussed and perhaps some introspection.

**used good because I could not think of a better word to counteract his “ugly black baby”, which is a shortened version of all the unwanted babies like the sick, the physically deformed, the ethnic, etc.

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:11 PM

I can’t understand why Ed doesn’t let you write posts here.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Why should roger waste his own words when you guys do such a good job of destroying your own arguments?

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Well, since the universe is defined as the totality of everything that exists or has existed, it’s highly unlikely.

Trafalgar on August 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Not exactly. It might actually depend on who you’re trying to get a definition of the universe from. Many scientists (I can’t say all, or most because I don’t know that) define this as a multiverse now because the definition of THIS universe is based on it’s constraints within it’s own space/time.

Speak to theoretical physicists and I think you’ll find that many of their theories depend on there being an infinite number of universes.

Sovereignty requires responsiblity and assuming responsibility for ones actions. Taking the easy way out by murdering your unborn isn’t it. Nice try though.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Uh oh, now you have fetuses assuming responsibility for themselves.

Really, I’m not “trying” anything, except to work out in my own mind how much one is supposed to supress the rights of one over the rights of another, and at what time that is appropriate if at all.

Bottom line, I’m against abortion. I wish people would take responsibility for their actions by exercising caution, abstinence, rubbers, snipping off their testes, whatever. Anything other than killing prospective babies. I don’t like abortion, and when my first wife and I had the decision to make we could not go through with the abortion. My third kid lives today.

Today I will create no new life, my choice. IF god is still hanging around, he may be pissed off with me for it too, one never knows.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 4:16 PM

A little personal history.

I gave birth to a healthy baby boy many years ago, afterwards I was pregant 9 times in 12 years, desperate to have another child, but God in His Wisdom, took every pregnancy in the first trimester…

Only He knows why…

He knew that my darlings wouldn’t have made it for what ever reason.

God will give us what we want and take from us the things that could burden us…

God gives and we receive…

My babies will be in heaven when I get there…if I am worthy to go there…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Why should roger waste his own words when you guys do such a good job of destroying your own arguments?

Good Solid B-Plus on August 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Oh…is that what he thinks he’s doing?
Well leave him be, then.

verbaluce on August 8, 2012 at 4:22 PM

If you want to call it a life that’s your choice. I disagree.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:37 PM

And when you meet an expecting mother who is talking about the baby she is about to have; do you correct her and clarify it’s still a clump of cells and not a life growing inside her?

Or does she get to decide the baby she is going to have is in fact a baby without your patronizing disagreement?

i.e. it is a baby if it is desired by the mother and only a “clump of cells” if it isn’t desired? Is that the criteria we’re using now?

I’m curious because it seems a lot of the definition exists not in fact or science; but in the mind of the mother… which is an odd place to house the definition of something in her uterus.

My opinion doesn’t affect the status of my planter’s wart, or a cyst; why does a mother’s opinion determine the specifications of her fetus/baby/clump of cells/growth/etc.?

gekkobear on August 8, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 4:22 PM

I’m so very very sorry to read this. You will be reunited one day.

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:26 PM

“Killing it in the womb shouldn’t be an option but sometimes I wonder if some children might not have been better off seeing some of the abuse that they go through and knowing BEFORE the mother had the child that it would not go well.”

I don’t really think we’re in the position to judge that a person’s life is so miserable that it’s a worse situation for them than not being alive AT ALL. If that’s the judgement we now get to make, what we need, then, is a “mercy squad”, going across the ghetto from house to house, judging the life-worthiness of the child in question, and putting him out of his misery.

The other is that the doctor makes the point of only wanting ”good” babies

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Which brings us back to the eugenics argument and the throwing off of the disadvantaged for the greater good of society. To hear this argument among progressives is especially baffling to me, as they constantly use the handicapped and the ill-to-do as a shield for their policies, trumpeting the magnanimous nature of their cause, and the evil cruelty of those who would deign to reduce the funding for their pet projects by even one dollar. But hey, if we get a chance to kill them off BEFORE they become the cherubs of the welfare state…

I have a friend who exemplifies everything about the abortion debate that tries to turn the issue into a “mercy killing”: she’s black, she was born premature, has cerebral palsy, would need multiple surgeries to survive and probably still would not live to age 2… basically the “perfect” candidate for aborting an unwanted, handicapped baby of color.

Except she was adopted. By a white couple. Super conservative/religious. And she wasn’t the first handicapped adoptee in that family either. She turns 38 this month, if I’m doing my math correctly. And I am completely gobsmacked by any notion that she is/would have been better off dead.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 4:37 PM

We’re a few days late to this story

Another glaring example of the double standard by the media. I live in Charlotte and this is the first time I’ve heard about it at all.

mike_NC9 on August 8, 2012 at 4:39 PM

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Thank you so much!

I just wanted to make a point that only God can take…and give as He sees fit to do…

And to try and make a comparision between a man made concept (abortion) and He in His infinite wisdom!

Sometimes He allows a child to be born imperfect, and once that child is born, the parents love that child as tho it is perfect! There are exceptions tho…

There are things we need to learn from everything that happens to us, but just aborting a child because it’s inconvienient, I am sorry, it is wrong!

Someone way up thread mentioned Eugenics, and having abortion on demand is a form of Eugenics… but used as a form of birth control, so wrong…

I can only inform, I cannot judge someones opinion, just discuss it. And hope that person sees the light of day down the long dark tunnel (vision) they have…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Maybe its above his Pay Grade. If your not sure when or how life begins wouldnt you err on the safe side? Plenty of rape victims do have the child. I volunteer for Special Olympics Equestrian. We have four riders this year. Three are adults all three have paying jobs and volunteer. They have all touched so many lives at our farm. They are a wonderful part of so many lives and their parents are the best. All people can make a difference. Lastly It is a long wait to adopt any baby here in the US. Those children are wanted. Wouldnt the energy and money spent in abortion be better spent on helping women and adoption? Giving up and throwing children away is nit the right thing to do.

ldbgcoleman on August 8, 2012 at 4:42 PM

“Killing it in the womb shouldn’t be an option but sometimes I wonder if some children might not have been better off seeing some of the abuse that they go through and knowing BEFORE the mother had the child that it would not go well.”

I don’t really think we’re in the position to judge that a person’s life is so miserable that it’s a worse situation for them than not being alive AT ALL. If that’s the judgement we now get to make, what we need, then, is a “mercy squad”, going across the ghetto from house to house, judging the life-worthiness of the child in question, and putting him out of his misery.

There have been some abuse cases, like the ones who are quite literally starved or beaten to death and have had a horrible, life of pain and misery until they die at the hands of their “parents”. Some people should not have children and this is obvious before they have them.

I don’t have the answer. Just something I think about sometimes when these discussions come up.

The other is that the doctor makes the point of only wanting ”good” babies

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Which brings us back to the eugenics argument and the throwing off of the disadvantaged for the greater good of society. To hear this argument among progressives is especially baffling to me, as they constantly use the handicapped and the ill-to-do as a shield for their policies, trumpeting the magnanimous nature of their cause, and the evil cruelty of those who would deign to reduce the funding for their pet projects by even one dollar. But hey, if we get a chance to kill them off BEFORE they become the cherubs of the welfare state…

I have a friend who exemplifies everything about the abortion debate that tries to turn the issue into a “mercy killing”: she’s black, she was born premature, has cerebral palsy, would need multiple surgeries to survive and probably still would not live to age 2… basically the “perfect” candidate for aborting an unwanted, handicapped baby of color.

Except she was adopted. By a white couple. Super conservative/religious. And she wasn’t the first handicapped adoptee in that family either. She turns 38 this month, if I’m doing my math correctly. And I am completely gobsmacked by any notion that she is/would have been better off dead.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 4:37 PM

I wish there were more people like your friend and a way to make it much easier for people to adopt.

This idea was coming from a doctor who is obviously pro-abortion and thinks in that mindset. It is how liberals feel – that only the white, blue eyed and healthy get adopted. That meme needs to be challenged and changed. That’s why he tossed out the “ugly black baby” – it was the rawest way he could use that meme.

And no, I don’t think she (your friend’s child) would have been better off dead, just as I don’t think the Trisomy babies should be aborted. Sorry if I gave off the impression that I do.

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Thank you so much!

I just wanted to make a point that only God can take…and give as He sees fit to do…

And to try and make a comparision between a man made concept (abortion) and He in His infinite wisdom!

Sometimes He allows a child to be born imperfect, and once that child is born, the parents love that child as tho it is perfect! There are exceptions tho…

There are things we need to learn from everything that happens to us, but just aborting a child because it’s inconvienient, I am sorry, it is wrong!

Someone way up thread mentioned Eugenics, and having abortion on demand is a form of Eugenics… but used as a form of birth control, so wrong…

I can only inform, I cannot judge someones opinion, just discuss it. And hope that person sees the light of day down the long dark tunnel (vision) they have…

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 4:40 PM

You are most welcome. I wish I could say something profound, but can’t so only that I’m sorry for your losses.

I’m glad you’ve found peace with it. And yes, I honestly do believe that things happen for reasons just as you do. :)

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM

This whole crap about a mother’s rights a a false argument at best. Yes the mother has rights, like the right to keep her legs closed and not run the risk of becoming pregnant. It’s called responsibility as in taking responsibility for ones actions, something sadly lacking in our society today and a main reason the country is in the shape it’s in.

bgibbs1000 on August 8, 2012 at 3:58 PM

What about a mother whose unborn child has been determined to not be viable, due to an abnormality, or a debilitating disease. Should she have the right to choose to terminate the pregnancy under that circumstances? I don’t know the exact statistics, but I’d imagine most abortions taking place after the 20th week are for this reason. I don’t think any mother should be forced to endure additional trauma or pain to carry a child to term and watch said child die a painful death. Situations like this put me somewhat on the fence.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 4:55 PM

I have or I couldn’t have in all sense of sanity, coped with it…

Thank you and God Bless YOU!

I am signing off til later… Have a good evening one and all!

Scrumpy on August 8, 2012 at 4:57 PM

There have been some abuse cases, like the ones who are quite literally starved or beaten to death and have had a horrible, life of pain and misery until they die at the hands of their “parents”. Some people should not have children and this is obvious before they have them.

Progressives (particularly those who pretend that no election fraud takes place anywhere ever) decry the notion of (allegedly) disenfranchising “millions” of legitimate voters for the sake of stopping a few “thousand” (some go way lower than that number) illegal votes. In honor of them, I offer an analogous question with much higher stakes: do we end the lives of a million unborn children every year to spare a handful of abused children from a situation that no one disputes is intolerable?

And no, I don’t think she (your friend’s child) would have been better off dead, just as I don’t think the Trisomy babies should be aborted. Sorry if I gave off the impression that I do.

kim roy on August 8, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Not to worry; I made it a point not to single you out for criticism because this is more about exploring the logical ends of some of these considerations, and not intended to marginalize your efforts to be fair to all sides of an issue.

What about a mother whose unborn child has been determined to not be viable, due to an abnormality, or a debilitating disease.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 4:55 PM

To prevent the abortion of a terminal child is not going to save its life. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever about leaving the procedure open if the child is terminal or if the delivery will kill one or both of the patients.

My proposal is, let’s do away with the 98% of abortions that have nothing to do with life-or-death situations, and then we can sit down and have the hard talk about how to handle the 2% that do, rather than using the extremes to define the middle.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Bottom line, I’m against abortion. I wish people would take responsibility for their actions by exercising caution, abstinence, rubbers, snipping off their testes, whatever. Anything other than killing prospective babies. I don’t like abortion, and when my first wife and I had the decision to make we could not go through with the abortion. My third kid lives today.

Wolfmoon on August 8, 2012 at 4:16 PM

For what it’s worth, I feel the same as you. The problem is that however simple it is for me to be against it (having lived a responsible life thusfar), it isn’t always that simple for someone else. (See my prior post re: pregnancy complications, etc). I believe that the number of people who have abortions non-nonchalantly and “boast” about it is extremely small. I don’t think any woman is in that position because they want to be.

I don’t know what the answer is, but since approx 50% of the population doesn’t even consider the unborn baby to be a life (I disagree), an outright ban is not going to happen. So I think the effort is better spent educating women, encouraging them to choose life, etc. I would even be [grudgingly] OK with Planned Parenthood if they TRULY treated abortion as a last resort, having exhausted other all other viable options.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 5:06 PM

My proposal is, let’s do away with the 98% of abortions that have nothing to do with life-or-death situations, and then we can sit down and have the hard talk about how to handle the 2% that do, rather than using the extremes to define the middle.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 5:04 PM

I think that’s a fair point, but some of the fetal pain laws that have been passed do not include exceptions like this, and that is a deal-breaker for someone like me who is somewhat on-the fence. I’ve had friends in that situation where, had this law been in place in their state, they would have had to carry a terminally ill child for MONTHS and, in effect, watch it die. I don’t wish that pain on anybody, any more than i wish the regret that comes with a misguided abortion on anybody else.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 5:08 PM

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Another god wannabe.

The abortionist is an ill racist and some of you are just ill.

CW on August 8, 2012 at 5:48 PM

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Another god wannabe.

CW on August 8, 2012 at 5:48 PM

I’m sorry, I really don’t understand this response at all.

The Schaef on August 8, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Has anyone made a comment yet about how ‘honorabl’ it is to abort ‘defectives’ like Downs, Trisomy, and probably someday autistic Aspergian babies?
*Glares and grits fangs*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 8, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I think that’s a fair point, but some of the fetal pain laws that have been passed do not include exceptions like this, and that is a deal-breaker for someone like me who is somewhat on-the fence. I’ve had friends in that situation where, had this law been in place in their state, they would have had to carry a terminally ill child for MONTHS and, in effect, watch it die. I don’t wish that pain on anybody, any more than i wish the regret that comes with a misguided abortion on anybody else.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 5:08 PM

There were always exceptions that involved the life of the mother-even before Roe v. Wade.

There have been a lot of babies that have been misdiagnosed as terminal and live a good life for years. Then again, you are getting into quality of life and that puts you on an evil slippery slope. Many people don’t have a good quality of life and that gauge difers on who you ask. Who decides?

melle1228 on August 8, 2012 at 7:02 PM

There were always exceptions that involved the life of the mother-even before Roe v. Wade.

There have been a lot of babies that have been misdiagnosed as terminal and live a good life for years. Then again, you are getting into quality of life and that puts you on an evil slippery slope. Many people don’t have a good quality of life and that gauge difers on who you ask. Who decides?

But I’m not talking about the life of the mother, I’m talking about the health/viability of the child — and from what I had read, there were no exceptions for that. When it’s such a gray-area/slippery-slope kind of situation, I ere on the side of freedom and believe it should be the individual family’s individual decision to assess.

That being said, you have a fair point on misdiagnosis, misinformation etc. People are sometimes scared out of raising a special-needs child. So I’d rather have a more lax law, but work on making sure that people have the appropriate information & support system when faced with such a heart-wrenching scenarios.

Violina23 on August 8, 2012 at 7:40 PM

The problem when debating abortion is that the pro-abortion crowd already knows that it’s morally indefensible. The debate always ends up with the pro-aborter stuffing his fingers in his ears and singing la-la-la-la.

They don’t care that he’s 100% human.
They don’t care that he’s 100% genetically unique.
They don’t care that he’s 100% viable.

They just don’t care. Their answer is to kill him before he grows too big.

For my pro-abort Christian friends (that always makes my brain explode) I would ask them when Jesus became Jesus. When the Holy Spirit conceived him or when he was born?

Mojave Mark on August 8, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Of course not, but a first trimester glob of biomatter isn’t a person to begin with. It has no brain.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 1:24 PM

So you’re opposed to second- and third-trimester abortions, since they have brains?

Or is this just the old switcheroo: talk about the most extreme cases to cover up the fact that you wouldn’t oppose abortion in any case?

Besides which, it’s factually incorrect.

tom on August 8, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Do you have sovereignty over your body? When did you get it?

Wolfmoon

I don’t know, do you? Can you inject heroin into your body, or inhale marijuana smoke into your lungs? Can you have sex for money? Can you legally attempt to end your own life if you decide you don’t want it?

Depending on the state, that would be no on all 4…..4 things that only directly affect the person or persons consenting to the act, unlike abortion which affects a second party that has no say whatsoever in the decision that will kill them.

Give me a break. It’s not a complicated issue.

xblade on August 8, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Personhood is a philosophical concept that is entirely subjective.

Which is exactly why they suddenly pull up and start talking about “personhood.” Rationalization needs its excuse.

Biologically, the unborn are alive. Indisputably so.

DRPrice on August 8, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Indisputably. The pro-abortion crowd always wants to focus on the vague and subjective and ignore the hard and indisputable.

Like the fact that all abortions end a heartbeat. That a baby can be killed a day before birth with no penalty at all. That for all the talk about “blastocysts,” current abortion laws allow it up to the very moment of birth without legal consequence.

tom on August 8, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Um, Mr Abortionist, if the pro-lifers take you up on your challenge, chances are they will raise their “ugly black baby” up to be a pro-lifer. Just sayin’

Knott Buyinit on August 8, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Abortion is bad

Accosting an abortionest at his home is also bad

ArthurMachado on August 8, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Re: the “Throwaway society” tagline: I completed some training today on a new job, which involves handling radioactive/ nuclear medicines. Naturally, the training stressed all sorts of precautions about exposing oneself to the least bit of radiation – and it’s not hard to do. One point that was specifically stressed was the fact that pregnant women needed to take extreme caution and limit themselves to something like a tenth of the monthly and/or annual amounts of radiation any other adult should be exposed to. Why? Young, still-developing humanoids – fetuses included – are harmed by low levels of the stuff.

I know some of the sharpies out there will satisfy themselves with the argument that this is only a CYA for greedy Big-Pharma firms, and/or that it’s a way to discriminate against women while pretending to seem concerned about their health, and the health of their child. Think about it, tho: Why would one otherwise accept the destruction of a nascent life, and at the same time hyperventilate over workplace safety for the downtroden workers, to the point where a mom’s pregnancy must be protected at great lengths and great cost (and I’m all for that!) Many lefties and libbies are in both ‘groups’ – so why can’t they see the dissonance? It’s almost palpable.

ronco on August 8, 2012 at 10:24 PM

i.e. it is a baby if it is desired by the mother and only a “clump of cells” if it isn’t desired? Is that the criteria we’re using now?

It’s a clump of cells when it’s literally just a clump of cells. Obviously those cells will eventually form a baby.

I’m curious because it seems a lot of the definition exists not in fact or science; but in the mind of the mother… which is an odd place to house the definition of something in her uterus.

gekkobear on August 8, 2012 at 4:24 PM

It’s not odd. The mind is the correct location for housing definitions, thoughts, ideas etc.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 11:00 PM

I have seen a lot of great young Black Mormon missionaries. Raising them with God keeps them away from the Obama entitlement culture.

Mormontheman on August 8, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Virman will be the next winner of Planned Non-Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award.

Hey, the Revs Jackson and Sharpton will be out there protesting with those pro-lifers in a flash, no? “No justice no life!” “Abort we much!” No? Oh.

curved space on August 9, 2012 at 7:53 AM

I think we should look upon the issue of one of individual responsibility. Law the allows it for now. We might oppose it, in anyway possible, but that does not change the fact that it is legal.

Then we should view the decision as personal, then remind ourselves that if there is a sin it is on the heads of the people who do it, and not ourselves because we can’t stop it, at least now, in detail.

I also have real problems with people placing burdens on others by their personal decisions. Removing support for those decisions would reduce their number.

Now, for a moment of candor: nothing anybody does in any way shape or form of this issue has anything to do with me. All both sides have done, so far is exercise their self-pity pretending to be compassion.

Denver Bob on August 9, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Show me a black baby that I can adopt without government red tape and I will show you his/her father

ImageSniper on August 8, 2012 at 3:49 PM

—-

Can you adopt ANY baby with out Government red tape? Or are you saying that to adopt a Black baby is MORE Government red tape then usual? Is it different for example, for a White person to adopt a baby depending upon the race of the baby? Is the process for adopting a White, Black, Asian, Indian, Samoan, etc baby not the same? I’m asking honestly because I dont know.

Politricks on August 9, 2012 at 5:46 PM

It’s a clump of cells when it’s literally just a clump of cells. Obviously those cells will eventually form a baby.

Go RBNY on August 8, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Every time you open your mouth about the child, you reveal how unscientific is the view of someone who claims to revere science over the hooby-jooby of religiosity.

Within five weeks of gestation, the “clump of cells” has discernible human features, a nervous system including a functioning brain stem, a beating heart, is at or near the beginnings of respiration, and shows signs of spontaneous movement.

In short, by the time one even finds out that one is pregnant, it has advanced much too far in its development to be marginalized as a mere “clump of cells”. At least, no more than you or I are a “clump of cells”.

The Schaef on August 9, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3