Ramirez, Crowder on Gosnell

posted at 10:41 am on May 3, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

While we wait for the jury to finish its deliberations in the Kermit Gosnell trial — which, as I wrote on Tuesday, will take quite a while — we can continue to look at the meaning of the issues that the trial raises.  At least, we can do that among those paying any attention at all to the trial.  Steven Crowder returns with a new vox populi video that shows people well informed about the Boston Marathon attack (with one hilarious exception), less so about the explosion in West Texas, and utterly ignorant of the Gosnell trial:

All right, so people aren’t paying attention to the Gosnell trial, despite JD Mullane’s excellent reporting from the courtroom.  Hey, at least we’re paying attention to Jodi Arias — doesn’t that count for something?  After all, what does the Gosnell trial really mean or say about our society, anyway?  Michael Ramirez, the Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist for Investors Business Daily, put the Gosnell trial in stark, uncompromising terms earlier this week:

ramirez-gosnell

Too much?  No, says my friend Fr. Marcel Guarnizo, the theologian and philosopher.  In a lengthy essay for CNS News, the Gosnell horror and the widespread practice of late-term abortion is just another reminder of the banality and ubiquity of evil, this time aimed at unborn but viable children:

As I have related before, Leroy Carhart had to install his own personalincinerator at his abortion mill to burn the cadavers of his victims. This, after a journalist took a picture of a dog consuming the body of one of the aborted babies in the public incinerator (where Carhart previously disposed of the infants’ corpses).

This should be the image that comes to mind when we think of Planned Parenthood and the abortionists-not fancy dinners and flowing glasses of champagne with President Obama. No, rather a ravenous beast consuming our children.

We have an equally vivid image of Gosnell dealing with the same “problems.” In Gosnell’s house of horrors, babies were stuffed down the toilet, put in shoe boxes, decapitated, and dismembered. There were body parts, blood, and death everywhere. What else do we need, to recognize that abortion is but the whole-scale massacre of an unprotected group of Americans (for they are born on our soil)?

Someday, future generations will gaze in amazement at pictures which will be shown publicly for the record, of bishops and cardinals gleefully socializing with politicians engaged in keeping the abortion industry alive and well in America. The complete silence of so many, the open door policies of our churches to those who openly call “good evil and evil good,” the easy distribution of Holy Communion to such people, and the hollow rationalizations, will all come back to haunt us, some day. Future generations will then ask of us, “What were you thinking? What were you doing after 1973?” These are precisely the same questions that haunted so many Germans when their children and grandchildren asked, “What were you doing during the war?”

Unfortunately, those who have fought valiantly for the abolition of abortion, may not be remembered so easily. And so much of the complicity of the media and their political cohorts, will one day be left bare for all to see how systematic was the effort to keep a nation in darkness and ignorant of the real horrors of abortion.

Be sure to read it all.

Also, be sure to check out Ramirez’ terrific collection of his works: Everyone Has the Right to My Opinion, which covers the entire breadth of Ramirez’ career, and it gives fascinating look at political history.  Read my review here, and watch my interviews with Ramirez here and here.  And don’t forget to check out the entire Investors.com site, which has now incorporated all of the former IBD Editorials, while individual investors still exist.

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

I still laugh out loud when I see that part, by the way. :) I would have paid real money to see your expression when you saw that little puff of snoot.

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 12:54 PM

I still laugh at your post about staring at the screen.

Reminds me of Kevin Bacon’s look when Col. Jessup let loose at the end of “A Few Good Men “

Jabberwock on May 3, 2013 at 1:20 PM

This nonpartisan dude has got to be joking. No one can be this dense dumb.

gina4 on May 3, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Its nom s/b nobrain.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:21 PM

The sign under “Gosnell Clinic” should also have

Arbeit Tod macht frei, as Axe offered yesterday, or offered to explain what it meant.

This version is more apt for Gosnell.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:24 PM

which has now incorporated all of the former IBD Editorials, while individual investors still exist.

with incredible shrinkage

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:28 PM

I still laugh at your post about staring at the screen.

Reminds me of Kevin Bacon’s look when Col. Jessup let loose at the end of “A Few Good Men “

Jabberwock on May 3, 2013 at 1:20 PM

It was true, too. That wasn’t schtick. There must of been a lot of us feeling that way. :)

Ah, good times, good times. HA comes through. :)

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Keepthechange and thuja, I’m looking at you creepshows.

Bishop on May 3, 2013 at 10:57 AM

nonpartisan
Armin

…and a few so-called-good-ones on HA, who support them…

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:29 PM

It was true, too. That wasn’t schtick. There must of been a lot of us feeling that way. :)

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 1:28 PM

‘Tis true. It was like watching someone in do something that you told him is going to end badly and it ends exactly like you warned. It was slo-mo train wreck that then just suspended itself in time momentarily.

nobrain = stun grenade

Resist We Much on May 3, 2013 at 1:32 PM

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:08 AM

You executioner, why don’t you then kill most all babies? or the girls, like they do, without reprimand, in India and China today?

You are not human. You are no different than an Adolf capo.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM

“It” is a moby.

Time to clean house.

Ban Hammer please, Mr. Pundit.

BobMbx on May 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM

So Resist We Much; totally off topic but do you come down on one side or another on the gay rights putsch?

Vanceone on May 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM

Ah, good times, good times. HA comes through. :)

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Ya ! And then nonpartisan comes back to this thread supporting eugenics. Without realizing it !!

I’m thinking Harvard would offer his tuition back if he’d stop associating with them.

Jabberwock on May 3, 2013 at 1:39 PM

think about it, the tsarnaevs used $100k of taxpayer money…wouldn’t the world have been much better had the tsarnaev brothers just been aborted at birth

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Dummy, the problem wasn’t that they were born. The problems lie in your party:

- why were they here?
- why were they on welfare?
- why, as refugees, did they go back to ‘hell’?
- why were they not monitored, after all the clues and warnings?
- on and on, but not that they were born.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Time to clean house.

Ban Hammer please, Mr. Pundit.

BobMbx on May 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM

NO:

1. The right believes in freedom of speech, especially for the incredibly stupid and offensive.

2. It generates lots of HA Capitalism.

3. It exposes the ‘progressive’ thought, ‘brilliantly’.

Each of the trolls have offered rogerb invaluable mining data of foolishness.

4. Not on this topic, but in general, they do entertain. It’s Harvard degree, followed by “I have to get dinner now” will live in HA entertainment infamy.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:46 PM

It’s = Its

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:47 PM

4. Not on this topic, but in general, they do entertain. It’s Harvard degree, followed by “I have to get dinner now” will live in HA entertainment infamy.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:46 PM

I think my favorite of recent months is the guy who thought the police were heavy-handed in the attempt at aprehending that multiple cop killer they treed in Big Bear after a massive manhunt. According to this guy the cops didn’t have to keep the cabin where he was holed up surrounded, they could have just left a couple cops there in a tent to watch the cabin and everybody else would stand down so as not to spook the cop killer into doing anything rash.

Happy Nomad on May 3, 2013 at 1:52 PM

To all the Gosnell apologists:

If what Gosnell did was indeed morally wrong, it can not be justified by “a greater savings to society.” Either a human life, born or unborn, has an intrinsic human dignity, or it does not. This is not a matter of incrementalism, it is a matter of inherentism or utilitarianism. You’ll be just fine with utilitarianism until it’s your own ox being gored someday.

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM

4. Not on this topic, but in general, they do entertain. It’s Harvard degree, followed by “I have to get dinner now” will live in HA entertainment infamy.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:46 PM

rogerb had to get a larger hard drive after that thread.

Jabberwock on May 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

4. Not on this topic, but in general, they do entertain. It’s Harvard degree, followed by “I have to get dinner now” will live in HA entertainment infamy.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:46 PM

“Ah. There it is. Now a clean question for a clean answer so he can’t wiggle, and bake him forever.”

– “yes” –

“Ha! All done. He’s cooked. Nice work, Axe. Like old times.”

“Ah, there’s Munford. She’s played before. Tightening it up.”

– “yes to both” –

“I just . . . can’t believe what I’m seeing.”

“O God. There she is. She’s snorting. My executioner. So hot. She’s going to skew him now. Wait for it.”

“Oops! Der it is!”

– “I have nothing to prove and need my dinner. g’night!” –

“lol — g’night!”

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Vanceone on May 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM

I am for getting government out of the marriage business. Government’s involvement in marriage, a religious institution, is a relatively recent development in the history of civilisation. In the West, it wasn’t until Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage Act in 1753 that England started regulating some marriages in an attempt to stop ‘Fleet (prison) marriages.’ The law didn’t apply to the royal family, the aristocracy, Jews, Roma, and some other groups. In the US, there were still places at the turn of the 20th century where marriage licences were not issued and the church (or other religious institution) kept the records.

I would prefer a system that allowed consenting adults to enter into contracts controlling their property, benefits, liabilities, privileges, etc, with a non-binding religious service to follow for those that seek it. Since the state would no longer be in the ‘marriage business’ and ‘marriages’ would be ceremonial, the argument that discrimination exists would be eviscerated.

In Europe (in predominantly Catholic countries), there is a civil ceremony that is binding, which is followed (for many) by a religious wedding. The church wedding is like icing on the cake. Something similar occurred when Charles and Camilla were wed, their marriage was the civil ceremony at Windsor Guildhall, but they had a ‘blessing’ that followed at St George’s Chapel. The blessing was religious, but not binding in any way.

So, I have no problem with gay unions and I support SSM, BUT my support does comes with a caveat that I have made clear to gays on many occasions: If the question comes to which trumps: SSM or religious freedom, then I’m going with religious freedom…even though I am an atheist. There is no constitutional right to marry…for anyone. Yes, marriage is a fundamental right, but it has always been a right burdened throughout history in canonical, common, and civil law. And, most of importantly of all, NO ONE IS ENTITLED TO BE MARRIED IN AND BY A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION. If I wanted to marry a Catholic, the priest would likely make me go through premarital classes. A Catholic cannot walk into a synagogue and demand to be married. So, why should a homosexual be able to walk into a Baptist church and demand to be married?

While the state can ban human sacrifices and other extreme forms of ‘religious rite,’ it cannot dictate religious doctrine, which the Supreme Court has held over and over and over again, as recently as last year in Hosanna-Tabor v EEOC, which Obama lost 9-0.

If you are looking for a common thread to tie my views together, I think that you will find that I believe that individuals should have as much freedom as possible without causing societal anarchy and government should not pick winners and losers. There are ground rules set forth in the Constitution and, as it pertains to marriage, religion has Federal (and state) constitutional protections while marriage is still a state matter, as the Court has ruled in the past. States cannot ban interracial marriages, but that doesn’t, necessarily, mean that Loving applies to homosexual marriages (Disclosure: I believe that Loving does likely apply, but it is far from clear and the recent oral arguments have made me question whether the Court didn’t make the matter murkier). Nevertheless, there has NEVER been a case where the Court has ruled that a religious institution must change its official religious doctrine.

Resist We Much on May 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM

You’ll be just fine with utilitarianism until it’s your own ox being gored someday.

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM

They honestly don’t get that. The baby has the right to live, and you do. Or the baby doesn’t, and you don’t. There’s nothing special about you. They can’t see it.

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 2:06 PM

To all the Gosnell apologists:

If what Gosnell did was indeed morally wrong, it can not be justified by “a greater savings to society.” Either a human life, born or unborn, has an intrinsic human dignity, or it does not. This is not a matter of incrementalism, it is a matter of inherentism or utilitarianism. You’ll be just fine with utilitarianism until it’s your own ox being gored someday.

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM

To all the Gosnell apologists.

How can you say that Adam Lanza did evil if you don’t think Gosnell did any harm?

Happy Nomad on May 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Ya ! And then nonpartisan comes back to this thread supporting eugenics. Without realizing it !!

I’m thinking Harvard would offer his tuition back if he’d stop associating with them.

Jabberwock on May 3, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Supporting eugenics without realizing it is the only evidence I have seen that corroborates the claim of Harvard education.

Lily on May 3, 2013 at 2:10 PM

Resist We Much: Have you ever studied what happened to the Mormons in the 1800′s? From the federal government, of course? Mormons lost the right to vote, spousal immunity privileges, property seized without compensation, and others.

Since you seem to be on top of it: why couldn’t todays SSM people claim that THEY are the “norm” now and apply Reynolds and its progeny, plus the corresponding federal laws, against religions that don’t endorse SSM?

Maybe not now, but with the silencing of Broussard and others, isn’t this coming?

Vanceone on May 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Bbbwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Resist We Much on May 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Resist We Much on May 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM

Taxes s/b added in there, but they could fit under your “liabilities”.

How many people will understand what you typed? It w/b fun to field this, not on HA, in the land/world.

You should lecture, alas…I know, I know, it would pay, then taxes,…gulching, protesting, Utopia and all that :)

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 2:17 PM

How can you say that Adam Lanza did evil if you don’t think Gosnell did any harm?

Happy Nomad on May 3, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Or that McVeigh should have died, which he should have, fast-tracked, but Tsarnaev shouldn’t…

Yes, yes, I know one killed more…but the intent was the same.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Vanceone on May 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Yes, I am aware of the evil done to Mormons in the 19th century, including Missouri Executive Order No 44 a/k/a the Mormon Extermination Order.

Since you seem to be on top of it: why couldn’t todays SSM people claim that THEY are the “norm” now and apply Reynolds and its progeny, plus the corresponding federal laws, against religions that don’t endorse SSM?

Reynolds didn’t make the Mormons change their doctrine. It held that religious duty was not a defence to a criminal indictment and upheld the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act signed into law by President Lincoln, which applied to US territories only. The religious duty is not a defence wasn’t new. As I said earlier, citing a religious duty would not have been a defence to a murder indictment brought against those that sacrificed a human being.

There were many cases in the 19th century and 20th century that are frightening and are ugly marks on this country’s history: Dred, Plessy, Buck, Goldstein, Korematsu, Frank, etc.

Maybe not now, but with the silencing of Broussard and others, isn’t this coming?

One hopes that we are not headed back in – well, sort of in – that direction, but I am afraid that I cannot assure with 100%, which is part of the reason that I would love to see a separation of church and state when it comes to marriage. Of course, I don’t know that anything is going to save the people of this country from themselves.

It is said that socialism is the equal distribution of misery, but I would argue that it is also the equal distribution of stupidity. Since we cannot ‘redistribute’ intelligence and knowledge, we have to dumb down everyone else to the level of the least-common denominator. We hire stupid teachers, give them tenure, and they teach our kids to be stupid. Success is punished. Failure is noble. Work is frowned upon. Mooching is promoted. Real education, enlightenment, and intelligence are passé. American Idol, ‘The Preezy of the United Steezy,’ Honey Boo-Boo, Girls, the Kardashians, etc, is where it’s happening. Pot is good. Responsible gun ownership is bad.

While I hate to compare what has been happening culturally in the US in the last couple of decades to that of the Woodrow Wilson fascist/progressive Era here and that of Weimar and Nazi Germany, there are undeniable parallels. No, I am not some FEMA camp/Ovens! conspiracy theorist, but just recognise the budding of tyranny when I see it. When Chris Matthews, Joe Klein, and Governor Deval Patrick seriously claim that any criticism of President Obama is seditious, well, we’re almost back to the Woodrow Wilson era and are on the road to the same type of tyranny imposed by authoritarian states throughout history.

Resist We Much on May 3, 2013 at 2:41 PM

I belong to no party sir

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:15 AM

One of two reasons for this if you are telling the truth (probability of that <20%):
1) You are too young to vote, thus cannot be registered to a party. That would be consistent with your postings as they have that naiveté and cruelty of youth — someone young enough to be educated on topics but not yet mature enough to have wisdom or compassion.

2) The communist party is not taking new members where you are an you believe the democrat party too far right to be worthy of your membership.

AZfederalist on May 3, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Could also be a Canadian as a few of our longtime trolls are. Maybe Mexican or other hispanic.

slickwillie2001 on May 3, 2013 at 2:48 PM

jdpaz on May 3, 2013 at 11:23 AM

It caucuses with it’s own stomach, by shoving its head in through the “back door.”

PJ Emeritus on May 3, 2013 at 3:03 PM

More

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Last note on this for me. About the caption of Ramirez’ satire, “Never Again.” Along with anything else, it can be understood to mean that the Gosnell murders are like their own Holocaust, and like the Holocaust, we should mark history with a line that divides something that happened before it from everything that happens after it.

But, along with anything else, it also can be understood as ironic in at least one sense. Trimming history to only the subject matter at hand, this would be the second time we’ve said “Never again.” This would be the second time we’ve engaged in a conversation about disposable people being disposed of by obdurate monsters. And our selection of only two, cherry-picked things from history is glaring — this isn’t the second time, or the third time.

I told my half-assed girlfriend yesterday (she’s a full-assed girl — I assume — that’s not what I mean) that this cartoon makes me grimace. But it’s not the Holocaust reference or the ugliness of the Gosnell murders. It’s the picture of people in my mind, standing like a smoker with a pack of cigarettes in his pocket, saying, “Never again,” bravely and severely.

Saying “Never again” doesn’t stop it. Saying “Never again” and meaning it doesn’t stop it. If anyone believes these things are comfortably behind us, stop believing that.

The only thing that keeps the next Holocaust held back — actual Holocausts and things like the Holocaust in some way — and the next, and the next — is the knowledge that human beings are not disposable.

*middle finger for percolating trolls*

/jumps down from soapbox

Axe on May 3, 2013 at 4:08 PM

Google and read up on Moloch. Satan has induced his followers to destroy their children for practically as long as there have been followers of Satan. This is simply the current iteration.

Seriously. Evil people have found ways to kill infants on a mass scale for 10,000 years. Every several generations, there seems to be a new method, but the result is always the same — lots and lots of dead human beings, at the hands of liberals and their less efficient ancestors.

God will get to them eventually. One does not order God, of course, but some days I sure wish He’d get on with it. I’ve certainly seen more than *I* can take…

Dirty Creature on May 3, 2013 at 4:27 PM

i like the CNS news column. i too think that one day future generations are going to look back on abortion like people today look back on jim crow, slavery, women not being allowed to vote, etc:

“how could so many people allow that?”
“people actually fought hard to protect THAT?”
“so many people turned a blind eye to that.”
“it’s so obviously wrong. how was that even legal??”

and the column makes a good point about future generations asking parents and grandparents, “what did you do to fight against it?”

do you have an answer?

Sachiko on May 3, 2013 at 4:58 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

You are trying to justify cruelty and evil on speculation of what might have been. There is no stretch in reasoning to justify on the same for any arbitrary “undesirable” for a death penalty roundup. I say roundup because, as in the case of all babies, the component of innocence of any and all heinous crimes is still intact. Please reexamine the very clear morally untenable position.

anuts on May 3, 2013 at 5:00 PM

NO:

1. The right believes in freedom of speech, especially for the incredibly stupid and offensive.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 1:46 PM

No one tried to get the troll arrested. First Amendment protections of freedom of speech do not apply.

cptacek on May 3, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Nothing brings out bird-crazy nuttiness in trolls like abortion.

itsspideyman on May 3, 2013 at 5:22 PM

Genocide is the soulmate of Utopianism.

RushBaby on May 3, 2013 at 5:32 PM

And maybe this is a good time to head for Gander Mountain before the black-souled ghouls show up to preach about an infant’s lack of humanity and inherent worthlessness until they can actually contribute something to society.

Keepthechange and thuja, I’m looking at you creepshows.

Bishop on May 3, 2013 at 10:57 AM

Dissenting on this topic is a holy cause for me and all that, but it’s 2013. Even the fanatics are required by politeness to be mellow, dude. I try. I went up the mountain to see the seamless web of life that is our ecology. Life filled me with joy. And a biological fact is that most seeds don’t germinate where they will be sucessful. It’s the nature of life on this planet.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:39 PM

I keep but help point out that if no one knows about Gosnell trial, then it has brought no people to the pro-life cause. Meanwhile some in the GOP are talking themselves into a frenzy on the topic. Obama benefits from this.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:54 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs
nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

“Then perhaps they ought to die, and reduce the surplus population.”–Ebeneezer Scrooge, A Christmas Carol

If memory serves, the spirit repeats these words to Scrooge when he’s contemplating his own grave. “Perhaps in the eyes of heaven,” he says, “YOU are the surplus population.”

Nonpartisan: Scrooge. Pre-conversion.

Grace_is_sufficient on May 3, 2013 at 5:56 PM

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:54 PM

You, and those who stand by you, are truly sick. May your soul never rest over this topic.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 5:57 PM

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:54 PM

You, and those who stand by you, are truly sick. May your soul never rest over this topic.

Schadenfreude on May 3, 2013 at 5:57 PM

You are aware that this sort of attack is no longer stylish? Be mellow and enjoy your life more.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Dissenting on this topic is a holy cause for me and all that, but it’s 2013. Even the fanatics are required by politeness to be mellow, dude. I try. I went up the mountain to see the seamless web of life that is our ecology. Life filled me with joy. And a biological fact is that most seeds don’t germinate where they will be sucessful. It’s the nature of life on this planet.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:39 PM

Did you just compare humanity to grass seed? Not your best moment, even though you thought you were being insightful and wise and actually came off as a blabbering fool.

Spliff Menendez on May 3, 2013 at 6:07 PM

You are aware that this sort of attack is no longer stylish? Be mellow and enjoy your life more.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 6:07 PM

It’s also no longer stylish to ignore the topic of conversation when you have nothing to add and act like an old, burned-out hippie.

Spliff Menendez on May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Dissenting on this topic is a holy cause for me and all that, but it’s 2013.

thuja on May 3, 2013 at 5:39 PM

Am I to understand that as taking the position that Gosnell’s actions are morally acceptable in your estimation?

anuts on May 3, 2013 at 6:18 PM

Thuja you’re brain has rot and you’re soulless.

CW on May 3, 2013 at 6:19 PM

It’s also no longer stylish to ignore the topic of conversation when you have nothing to add and act like an old, burned-out hippie.

Spliff Menendez on May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Thuja has no problem with dead babies born or unborn. The guy is a puke.

CW on May 3, 2013 at 6:20 PM

Thuja, Moloch would be so proud.

kingsjester on May 3, 2013 at 6:25 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

You’re ill.

CW on May 3, 2013 at 6:34 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

You’re ill.

CW on May 3, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Dickwad is trying to get someone to agree with her so she can run off to Kos and under another name tell them all the horrible racist things that are being said at HA.

slickwillie2001 on May 3, 2013 at 7:13 PM

You’re ill.
CW on May 3, 2013 at 6:34 PM

And high as a kite.

pambi on May 3, 2013 at 7:16 PM

=========================================================

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/04/working_up_to_auschwitz.html

canopfor on April 14, 2013 at 12:27 AM

canopfor on May 3, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Says it all.

+1000

they lie on May 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

The distance from “you have a right to take a lesser life” to “you have a duty to take a lesser life” is much closer than the utilitarians realize. God save us.

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

So you would stamp out the miracle of life based on nothing but some twisted left-wing talking point?

Incredible. And they say that WE are the ones with no compassion.

TarheelBen on May 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

And they say that WE are the ones with no compassion.

TarheelBen on May 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

If it can save just one child’s life…

Oops. Sorry. Wrong debate for that talking point.

/libwit-utilitarian

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM

If abortion doesn’t kill a human being,
no justification for abortion is needed.

If it DOES kill a human being,
no justification for abortion will ever be adequate.

pambi on May 3, 2013 at 9:20 PM

The Koch brothers or some like-minded philanthropists with deep pockets could do a lot of good by purchasing some air time and running a documentary that shows moving ultrasounds of babies and graphic pictures of the results of late term abortions. Liberals would cry foul but everyone would be talking about it.

I am convinced that very few women would have a late term abortion if they were required to have an ultrasound and view the pictures before hand.

hopeful on May 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Aren’t the Koch brothers pro-abortion?

Count to 10 on May 3, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Aren’t the Koch brothers pro-abortion?

Count to 10 on May 3, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Hell, even *I* don’t think the federales should be involved in regulating abortion — and I’m pro-life!

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 10:03 PM

The Koch brothers or some like-minded philanthropists with deep pockets could do a lot of good by purchasing some air time and running a documentary that shows moving ultrasounds of babies and graphic pictures of the results of late term abortions. Liberals would cry foul but everyone would be talking about it.

I am convinced that very few women would have a late term abortion if they were required to have an ultrasound and view the pictures before hand.

hopeful on May 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Aren’t the Koch brothers pro-abortion?

Count to 10 on May 3, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Doesn’t matter, no network or cable channel would dare show it.

slickwillie2001 on May 3, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Hell, even *I* don’t think the federales should be involved in regulating abortion — and I’m pro-life!

gryphon202 on May 3, 2013 at 10:03 PM

I’m “squishy middle” on abortion, but even I think that the federal government has an interest in setting a minimum gestation at which point one achieves the right to life, and I don’t think states should be able to elevate “privacy” above that right.
Frankly, I think any level of government should have the ability to limit what abortions are legal in their jurisdictions.

Count to 10 on May 3, 2013 at 10:35 PM

Frankly, I think any level of government should have the ability to limit what abortions are legal in their jurisdictions.

Count to 10 on May 3, 2013 at 10:35 PM

Constitutionally, it should be the states absent a constitutional amendment.

gryphon202 on May 4, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Just ran across this excellent vid by Alveda King.
Thought I’d post it for others to see, have at hand.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=P78_V1Z9CO4&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DP78_V1Z9CO4

pambi on May 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM

“to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs.”

Walter Duranty, NY Times Pulitzer Prize winner in his support of Joseph Stalin.

Bevan on May 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I hate to say it, but while what gosnell did was morally wrong, ultimately it was probably a net positive in terms of societal costs

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

It is a well-established fact that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was openly pro-eugenics. Thank you for providing evidence that lefties still look upon the killing off of “undesirables” as a social good.

SubmarineDoc on May 4, 2013 at 5:40 PM

nonpartisan on May 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM

You are vile and worthless and have no redeeming value.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 4, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2