
Photo Credit: AP
Abortion continues to be a highly-contentious issue, even as this week marks the 40th anniversary since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court verdict was handed down. It’s a never-ending battle, typically colored by raw emotion. While one polar side traditionally argues that life begins at the moment of conception, the other tends to shy away from any recognition that the unborn qualify as human lives.
This pro-life versus pro-choice dynamic often leads to intense clashes in the public sphere, with both sides accusing the other of restricting rights and advocating damaging policies. In a new piece that was published this week, Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, a pro-choice adherent, decides not to steer clear of the “life” issue and asks: “So what if abortion ends life?”
The question, itself, is enough to send anti-abortion advocates into a tizzy. Williams, who identifies herself as pro-choice, takes a divergent route from others on the left who have staunch views about abortion rights. Rather than denying the fact that fetuses are human lives, she, like pro-lifers, fully embraces this ideal. However, Williams differentiates between the rights that the unborn have from those that belong to women.
“Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life,” Williams wrote. “And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.”
She went on to decry the “semantic power” that is inherent within the modern-day debate, taking particular aim at those who oppose abortion by using the word “life” to win the debate. But rather than cowering to what the writer says are the “sneaky, dirty tricks of the anti-choice lobby,” Williams proposes that pro-choice advocates should not cower when the word “life” is brought into the discussion. Instead, she believes that pro-choicers should double down and explain why women should have more rights than fetuses.
“Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal,” she wrote. “That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers.”

Photo Credit: AP
See, Williams believes that a fetus, while it is a human life, does not need to be afforded the same rights as the woman who it resides in. She goes on to say that the woman is the “boss” and that it is her right to decide whether having that baby fits in with her life circumstances and health. In the end, Williams argues that this personal decision — predicated upon a woman’s individual situation — should always take precedent over the fetus that is inside of the female.
As for the semantics surrounding abortion, Williams calls for pro-choice advocates to be less squeamish, especially when it comes to avoiding whether or not an unborn baby should be considered a “life.”
“When we try to act like a pregnancy doesn’t involve human life, we wind up drawing stupid semantic lines in the sand: first trimester abortion vs. second trimester vs. late term, dancing around the issue trying to decide if there’s a single magic moment when a fetus becomes a person,” she continued. “Are you human only when you’re born? Only when you’re viable outside of the womb? Are you less of a human life when you look like a tadpole than when you can suck on your thumb?”
At the end of the piece, Williams notes that she believes that women’s lives can be saved in certain circumstances and that the life of a mother should always be put before a fetus. In these complicated scenarios, she said the unborn life being aborted is, “A life worth sacrificing.”
Read the entire piece over at Salon and commentary on TheBlaze blog.
(H/T: LifeNews.com)
–
Related:




















































































































Comments (350)
Ghandi was a Republican
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:44pmDON”T GET PREGNANT- It’s not rocket science. If you want to get pregnant- You actually have to time it out. It takes effort to get pregnant. You can’t just get pregnant unless you are willfully intent on performing an act, during a particularly narrow time frame in order to do it.
If you are that stupid– you aren’t particularly adept at making decisions..
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:56pm“If you want to get pregnant- You actually have to time it out. It takes effort to get pregnant. You can’t just get pregnant unless you are willfully intent on performing an act, during a particularly narrow time frame in order to do it.”
You are saying… that no woman, in the history of humankind, has ever gotten pregnant without “wanting to get pregnant?” Because it “takes effort”?
Most conservatives here have read basic biological textbooks at some point. Pregnancy does NOT require a woman to want it, nor does it take effort on her part.
I realize you’re likely just wording your point in the worst way possible, but you’re echoin Todd Akin and making us conservatives look idiotic.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:02pmMan it only takes one time. Planning is necessary for some but not all. believe me. I am living proof. and what would you say to rape victims? they did not choose to get pregnant. or are you under the assumption that they can’t get pregnant because there wasn’t enough planning?
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:09pmSolution:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/14292-congress-has-the-power-to-overturn-roe-v-wade
Report this comment
Silvertruth
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:20pmWell, that’s really where the ‘choice’ side the argument comes in. This woman is saying, ‘don’t give them the life’ side of the argument, you can steal the pro-choice side of the argument by embracing ‘choice’ too.
Saying that WHEN choice comes into play is more important than where ‘life’ comes into play removes their side as well. If conservatives say, ‘consensual sex that creates a life is not subject to abortion except when the mother’s choice is overridden by unforseen hazards to herself’ is a simple legal concept. It means that non-consensual (rape, forced incest, etc.) generated life is allowed to be aborted, and health problems to the mother as well. It is the crux of most conservatives (non-catholics) in the anti-abortion side.
Now you are forcing ‘pro-choicers’ to say what this lady is saying: “We want the right to not be inconvenienced by a child for whatever reason we say” which is the point of most pro-choice directives and this lady unabashedly puts it out there. I give her kudos, but if the pro-choice lobby actually adopts her words, abortion will be dead in under a decade. America is not to the point of rational heartlessness that she’s advocating. Her position is abortion suicide. That’s why they aren’t using it.
So, please, accept that it’s about WHEN and HOW the choice not to have a child is made: No sex (can’t get pregnant there), Birth Control (Reduces chances but possible), or surgery (no pregnant there). That’s w
Report this comment
Dan_o
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:21pmNice work with the mantra, Keaton. What percentage of abortions are rape related? What percentage are to protect the LIFE of the mother? What other extreme cases would you like to cite to support the murder of 55 MILLION infants?
Report this comment
wethepublicans
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:39pmseriously…. planets have to align inside a uterus for pregnancy to be possible.
Report this comment
Lloyd Drako
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:59pmIt doesn’t matter. All arguments are pointless. If a woman wants an abortion, for any reason, at any time in her pregnancy, she should have the right to have it. Period.
Report this comment
Thomas
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:59pmI don’t care whether they have an abortion because these people shouldn’t be parents anyway as screwed up as they are. What I do want is a list of the names of women who have abortions so that I know who not to leave my child with and also which teacher I want teaching my child.
Report this comment
sjpru
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:04pm…so we are back where we started in 1972
…abortion intentionally terminates a human life
…abortion is murder
Report this comment
000degrees
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:16pmThere is no logic in evil…..no explanation for this type of evil.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:40pmThis woman is evil. This is her theme song as well as Obama’s.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzmsh7_vgW8
Report this comment
JohnofOregon
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:49pmSo what’s the big deal. All of this opinion is in the national democrat party platform. If you are a democrat, this is your fundemental belief that is closest to your heart.
If republican leaders had testostrone around their testicular area or republican woman showed more leadership, they would demand that every hispanc group in america justify voting democrat with the catholic church and biblical teaching. Killing children is a mortal sin. It is that in your face discussion that would change things. “I knew you before you were born”. By puting traditional beliefs aside and worshiping the new son of man-Obama, this is the true clash.
After that, TV adds should run showing the base belief of the democrat party and infanticide in the party platform. People know right from wrong. The media does not. When former Carter official and Oregon Gov goldschmidt rapped little girls, he became very pro-abortion and anti parental notification. Democrat leaders such as him need these things to cover thier crimes. Weak submissive women will always cover for these guys. Look at Hillary. She just ended her carreer the way it started. Dutifully lying and covering for the men in her life.
Report this comment
SpankDaMonkey
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:53pm.
Maybe her mother will decide to Late Term Abort her if we’re lucky……….
Report this comment
biohazard23
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:05pmIf she had to choose which one of her kids had to be killed, I doubt this chromosome donor would have a problem offering all of them up thus relieving her of any further inconvenience brought on by the task of being a parent. What an evil, despicable carbon-based, oxygen-wasting walking uterus.
Report this comment
AvengerK
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:09pmThis is where Williams’ argument falls flat. She says coldly..”all life is not equal” (then goes on to give succor to her liberal sensibilities with her typical liberal relativist blather). And she’s right..not all life is equal, that’s why we can eat beef, pork, fish, foul..etc. Because we can farm those animals, take their lives and consume their meat. But what Williams won’t say is “all HUMAN life is not equal” . A baby in it’s mother’s womb is a human life, it’s value is beyond measure. The fact that it is so helpless and at the mercy of it’s mother makes it all the more precious. It’s life is equal to the value of everyone reading this….and Ms Williams’.
Report this comment
meltzen
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:46pmKeaton…. If a woman gets pregnant via rape do we punish the child for the sins of the father? Something to think about.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:54pmmeltzen… do we punish the mother for the sins of the father? I get your point and it is a good one. But id imagine carrying a rape baby to term and then living with the constant reminder is a lot harder than you’d think. and then what quality of life does the child have if the mother resents him.. or even blames him.
Report this comment
The_Cabrito_Goat
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:57pmThe matter of fact is, if Roe v. Wade had not passed, there would be 400 million Americans rather than 315 million. I, for one, don’t think that is negative.
Report this comment
bonesiii
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:16pm“Instead, she believes that pro-choicers should double down and explain why women should have more rights than fetuses.”
But this is what I’ve been demanding that they answer for years, and they cannot give an objective defense of this!
Anyways, I’m glad of this turn of events. It shows that even they realize that the excuses they have tried to give so far have unraveled. This will too — even more easily. It’s simple — this is discrimination.
ALL HUMAN LIFE IS EQUAL.
And we all know it is the liberals who misuse semantics, not us. She did it right there — calling it a “fetus” to emotionally imply it’s not a person. But that is merely a word game — it has no effect on the actual reality. Calling babies subhuman doesn’t make them so.
And interesting that she admits that all “lines in the sand” are semantic. Does she realize that she is logically opening up the door for all murder by anyone with the power to do it? It’s Ad Baculum fallacy; appeal to superior force. And it also validates the logic of using legal force to ban abortion and give consequences to those that commit it, so ultimately it is self-defeating.
To Ghandi — it is not really that simple, but to be fair there are many situations when women get pregnant without intending to (obviously including rape). The answer (which we ourselves need to stop being squeamish about) is that murder doesn’t make it better — really, worse, and it’s wrong.
Report this comment
Wolf
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:28pmGhandiWas… has to be one of the most assinine people on the planet- even Pelosi and Feinstein can’t be that stupid.
Not that better can be expected from dimocraps- who think like this, “…Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, a pro-choice adherent, decides not to steer clear of the “life” issue and asks: “So what if abortion ends life?”…”
Which begs the question: is it time to start thinning the herd?
Report this comment
rs9
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:37pmKeaton
What i say to rape victims is this, The day you execute the baby that resulted from the rape then execute the rapist and I would be all for it
Report this comment
Aelita.Aeros
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:40pmI am 100% against abortion! Even if a woman was raped or forced in incest & got pregnant from it, I still think it is murder & wrong to abort the baby because it is not the baby’s fault & that baby is an innocent life! If the mother cannot handle keeping the baby because of it reminding her what happened to her (which is completely understandable for her to feel that way) than she can give the baby up for adoption to a loving family that would want & love that child more than anything as soon as that baby was born. I feel I can say this because I was raped & was so sure I was pregnant because I missed my period for over a month & I was not going to abort the baby because it is not the baby’s fault for what happened to me. But I also knew I could not handle keeping the child because I knew that every time I looked at that child, it would remind me of what happened to me & I was afraid I would resent the baby for it so I looked into adoption. I knew that there are so many loving families that would give anything to adopt that baby & would give that baby everything they needed including lots of love. I wanted to give my unborn child a chance to have the best life they could possibly have & I knew I would not be able to provide that for my unborn baby but another family could. So I was set on and 100% determined on giving the baby up for adoption and 100% determined to NOT abort the baby and just struggle through the 9 1/2 months of pregnancy, then give the baby to a good famil
Report this comment
Al J Zira
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:46pm@Lloyd Drako: Yep! Just give a woman the right to murder a baby, that’s intelligent.
Report this comment
IdahoBlaze
Jan. 24, 2013 at 8:10pmBull. My one and only pregnancy was due to a burst condom. I had no idea I was even pregnant for three months, until my tube burst at 3AM. I thought it was appendicitis. It wasn’t. I had a tubal pregnancy. It was a girl.
After that, I tried for six years to get pregnant with my husband. SIX YEARS. We tried everything short of IVF. Nothing. I gave up.
It is what it is. But yes, just one time, not even full penetration, or even using birth control – it CAN happen. I had to let them take my baby or I would have died. I spent many years grieving but I know it was necessary.
It was a hard thing for me, and I would like to think that women would not take abortion lightly. I know that some do – ex friends of mine, whom I never thought would do such a thing – but most people I know wouldn’t.
It’s so, so sad.
Report this comment
valiant1776
Jan. 24, 2013 at 8:41pm@Keatonc333 BS. That is still the child of the mother, regardless of who the father might be. The child bears her blood and genes.
Report this comment
TomsDaughter
Jan. 25, 2013 at 10:13amLloyd Drako:
I can’t image why you would make such a statement – “It doesn’t matter. All arguments are pointless. If a woman wants an abortion, for any reason, at any time in her pregnancy, she should have the right to have it. Period.”
You state that all arguments are pointless, and then give an argument (albeit, one that is not substantiated by any proposition other than your opinion). Why should a woman have such a “right”? By whose authority does she commit this act? If by her own authority, then, following such logic, murder at any stage of life for any reason should be acceptable. However, how do you answer these questions – is human life valuable? Are we created in the Image of God? And if your answer is no to both of these, then who among us should decide which of us is valuable? Should you? Should I? Should Washington? Should a pregnant woman? The child growing inside of her is an independent person, not an appendage of it’s mother. I believe we are created in the Image of God, therefore ultimately we have no “right” to snuff out the life of another person, whether we carry that person in utero or whether he/she exists externally. If you study history, you will see that those who lead others, and do not value human life, leave much blood and misery in their wake. The value we place on the smallest and weakest among us indicates the value we place on all human life. Please re-think your position. You may hate me, but I’ll pray for you in this.
Report this comment
ConstitunalAmerican
Jan. 25, 2013 at 10:21amHillary Clinton’s comments on the death of Four Americans killed in Benghazi was, “So What!! Get over it.” Now the abortion issue days later has become, “So what” if abortion ends life?” as stated by Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, a pro-choice adherent.
Why then, since life is a “So What” issue, is the government so intent on taking away our 2nd amendment with gun control??? Seems to me there’s more to the story.
Report this comment
Lloyd Drako
Jan. 25, 2013 at 12:46pm@TomsDaughter: Yes, human life is valuable. I have no idea whether or not we’re made in the image of God, or even what that statement objectively means. A fetus has a potential human life, a pregnant woman has an actual one. The former cannot exercise volition, the latter can. Abortions are horrible, late-terms ones especially so. In the realm of culture and public policy, I would do everything possible to encourage contraception and promote adoption, for those women who want it. For those who do not, abortion on demand. The alternative, ultimately, would be to stand guard over a woman who expressed any interest in abortion, 24/7, until she came to term. No thanks.
Report this comment
zhaan
Jan. 25, 2013 at 12:50pmLocked, technically, a woman does have a choice if she doesn’t want to get pregnant due to a rape. A woman who is that concerned about it should take the pill (whether she’s in a relationship or not), or if she truly does not want any children ever, she can proactively get her tubes tied. However, I do believe that most anti-abortion laws would exempt rape and incest. And the fact is, most abortions are not because of rape, and many women use abortion as their preferred method of birth control.
Report this comment
bonesiii
Jan. 25, 2013 at 5:40pm“he alternative, ultimately, would be to stand guard over a woman who expressed any interest in abortion, 24/7, until she came to term. No thanks.”
No, legal consequences in the case of crime tend to act as deterrents (that’s the whole point).
And yet again, apply this same logic to any other murder and I must conclude that if you are consistent, you support any murder? Because if someone shows the slightest hint of threatening behavior we’d have to keep armed guards on them, which is not economical, therefore we should have no law against murder? It’s a non sequitar (logicanspeak for nonsense :P).
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:06pm@Thomas, I agree. We can’t stop them. But I want to know who they are, every last damn one of them. And I want their addresses too. And I want to know if they are involved in education at any level. I’m not threatening them. I just want to have the freedom on non-association.
I guess to this woman “equal protection” doesn’t apply to live persons.
Report this comment
Lloyd Drako
Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:23pmBonesIII: I’m with “Aelita.Aeros,” who gave a heartfelt account of her own pregnancy, and her decision not to have an abortion. Like her, I’m 100% against abortion. I wish no woman ever felt the need to have one, and that all babies could be born healthy, loved and with 2 parents, one male and one female. But I’m also against any state intervention in what is essentially a private matter, namely, a woman’s pregnancy and the nature of its termination, whether live birth or abortion. I see no reason for the government to be involved one way or the other.
Report this comment
erock33
Jan. 25, 2013 at 9:23pmPointing out liberal hypocrisy is too easy. They argue that you cannot tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body yet wholly embrace Obamacare which has 2400 pages of how the government will dictate your personal healthcare decisions.
Report this comment
jaygoji
Jan. 25, 2013 at 9:38pmYeah, and while you’re at it, don’t get in car accidents. And don’t fall down the stairs. And don’t… ugh…
Report this comment
bonesiii
Jan. 26, 2013 at 2:25am” I wish no woman ever felt the need to have one, and that all babies could be born healthy, loved and with 2 parents, one male and one female. But I’m also against any state intervention in what is essentially a private matter, namely, a woman’s pregnancy and the nature of its termination, whether live birth or abortion. I see no reason for the government to be involved one way or the other.”
So do you not want the government to protect born people either? Isn’t that the whole point of government? Rather than tyranny, it is to protect our freedom and basic rights, especially our right to life. This is the essence of conservatism.
Couldn’t the same “private matter” logic be used to support any murder?
If you’re against there being laws against murder, that would be consistent, but please say so. The position as it’s being explained does not make sense, because as far as I know, those of you making it -are- being inconsistent — because you do agree with laws against murder of born children and adults.
One thing we can hopefully agree on at the very least is that government shouldn’t be funding abortion organizations. Yeah?
Report this comment
lemonfemale
Jan. 26, 2013 at 4:22amAs Locked says. What you probably ought to say is “Don’t chance getting pregnant.” This would apply in any consensual sex. Rape, both “legitimate” (Akin clearly meant assault rape) and rape by deception, rape of a passed out drunk woman, serial rape of women by whatever military force is occupying their country- using a young child, all these occur without the consent of the woman. If I have an accident when I drive, I am responsible. Likewise if I have an “accident” when I have sex.
Report this comment
emberlyawake
Jan. 26, 2013 at 6:57amI was raped as an early teen. I had an abortion. It was an experience I will never forget. I sat in a pre-op room with women who steed this was their third and fourth abortion. They spoke as if it was nothing. My parents are libs. My mom was all for me not ruining my life by having a child from rape at 14. But looking back, the abortion broke me in different ways. I realized too late that it was the single most selfish moment of my life. Does anyone understand what killing another human does to you? An innocent human. Just as innocent as the Sandy Hook children. It kills something inside you too. I have two teenaged children now. My heart knows that I should have had three. Perhaps if I see that child when I die I will get the chance to say I am sorry.
I personally do not believe abortion should be legal unless the pregnancy would kill the mother and child. I am sorry for young rape victims. But trust me, the rape is bad enough to deal with. Do not add to that by victimizing another innocent life. Because for the pain caused by doing that you will have only yourself to look at for who’s to blame.
Report this comment
CathyvanDyke
Jan. 26, 2013 at 12:25pmReminder
BALLOT BOWL 2008
Aired March 29, 2008 – 14:00 ET
OBAMA: … I’ve got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. …
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/29/bb.01.html
Report this comment
hafadai
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:44pmThis should not surprise us, Barbara Burke, atheist and militant womans rights advocate quoted Charles Darwin saying, “Infanticide is probably the most important of all checks on population growth throughout human history.” Peter Singer, “The value of a human is no more than that of an animal.” When we keep our heads in the sand, we are shocked when we see the true colors of God (and baby) hating people.
Report this comment
tonypro
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:43pmI don’t engage these pro-kill a child people anymore.
God will sort it out.
Report this comment
JohnofOregon
Jan. 24, 2013 at 10:30pmAgreed
Report this comment
Dan_o
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:39pmdepraved [dɪˈpreɪvd]
adj
morally bad or debased; corrupt; perverted
Report this comment
Balpit
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:29pmUsing her logic, a landlord should have the right to gas his tenants when he feels they’re more trouble than they’re worth. Sure, the landlord had a right to choose not to let seedy people board. But the woman also had a right to choose not to engage in unsafe sex, knowing she risked getting pregnant.
Report this comment
Dan_o
Jan. 24, 2013 at 8:05pmDon’t give her any ideas.
Fact: Less than 2% of abortions since 1973 are related to a rape case and over 40% of those women were pressured to have the abortion by outside entities like PP and now regret the decision.
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:39pmLIKE HIMSELF- for example!
Report this comment
MDECKER
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:38pmDifficult to imagine Ms. Williams’ mindset if she were advised that I, was now the “boss”. “A life worth sacrificing.” Puts a different spin on things, doesn’t it?
Report this comment
DatabaseSue
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:35pmStrong on Pro-Choice in killing innocents, but against Pro-Choice on Guns because of protecting innocents – you lefties can’t have it both ways. Innocents are innocents Stop abortions and keep your hands off my guns!
Report this comment
BADDOGGYDESCIPLE
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:53pmExacly, 55,000,000 vs a couple hundred, an argument based on fraud.
Report this comment
American Soldier (Separated)
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:09pmI suppose it’s an age old question; Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
You do not want the woman to have the choice of her body, of medical decisions of her body, why would they care about your choice to own a gun?
I’m playing devils advocate here to show that both sides are guilty. Who started it? Who knows. But the point is, both sides are hypocrites in their own way.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:27pm@American Soldier (Separated)
“Which came first, the chicken or the egg?”
The egg did. Long before chickens existed they had evolutionary ancestors which were egg-laying reptiles.
I’m just joking with you, but there is an obvious answer to that question ;-)
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:30pmdidnt God create the chicken, which then laid an egg?
yes, both sides are hypocrites. The anti-abortion crowd talks about abortion=murder but they are more than willing to kill innocent people in other countries
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:38pmSoy- what “innocents” do conservatives advocate killing? I certainly don’t know of any.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:45pm@DLV
“what “innocents” do conservatives advocate killing? I certainly don’t know of any.”
If I had to guess, I’d say he’s referring to collateral damage in foreign military attacks. Multitudes more civilians and non-coms have been killed than terrorists, insurgents, or military over in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:52pm@DLV
“what “innocents” do conservatives advocate killing?”
Well we saw that in action over the last 8 years. Hundreds of thousands dead in Iraq. Were the people of Iraq guilty of anything besides having a dictator? Do we have a dictator? Would we resist an invasion force? It was reported that 500,000 Iraqis died as a result of our sanctions after first gulf war…Cant forget that…..We eliminated Al Qaeda rather quickly in Afganistan but the last 10 years have been unnecessary as innocent people getting killed by bombs, cross-fire, and all the poverty that goes along with warfare. These are all things advocated and celebrated by conservatives
Which brings us to today. Conservatives are advocating war with Iran. People of Iran do not deserve to be invaded because they are innocent as well and have a dictator just like we do. I will also add Venezuela, Syria, and Cuba as places where conservatives would love to see a show of military force. I see many posts on theblaze.com advocating for open war on muslims. I wont even get into all the crazy killing people like Bill Kristol/Krauthamer talk about – I’m not gonna call them conservatives.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:02pmlocked and Soy- I am not for killing civilians in pakistan, Iraq, Iran or whatever. I am not for all the things that happened. And if conservatives are for all that, shame on them. The only part of the iraq war I might be for is getting rid of nukes and if the Iraqis wanted us to stay and rebuild and help form a democracy (which it doesn’t seem like they did) then that’s fine. I’m not for dropping bombs or nukes on any civilians.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:10pmnot that i am saying all conservatives are evil – but the idea of war, death, and suffering is so far removed from the average person that it is a GAME to us. But there are some who always clamor for war and hate peace – they will get what they deserve.
Here is something else to chew on
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/08/iranians-turning-to-black-market-medicine-amid-hospital-overcrowding-and-collapsing-economy/
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:17pmSoy- I really don’t view war as a “game.” And guess what I play video games which “supposedly” shut me off to logical thinking and make me want to go on killing sprees (no halo pun intended.)
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Jan. 25, 2013 at 1:41amChildren are people because they have human minds, fetuses aren’t because they don’t.
Report this comment
drbage
Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:52amRecently seen bumper sticker:
DID YOU KNOW THAT ALL PRO ABORTION PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY BEEN BORN?
Report this comment
Farmhand82
Jan. 25, 2013 at 2:29pmOh okay Xylliab. I suppose that means you think people with severe mental handicaps, autistic, brain damage etc should have no right to life because they don’t have properly developed human brains? Fail argument.
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Jan. 25, 2013 at 2:40pmFarmhand82
Subnormal is not the same as subhuman. If they can communicate through language, then they have human minds and human rights. If they have the minds of animals, then they have the rights of animals.
Report this comment
Lordchamp
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:35pmSo let me get this right, she supports the belief that the “carrier” is the “boss” and can do with what the “carry” as they wish.
Does that then logically mean that anything that could be defined as the “carrier” would then have the same powers?
That is the danger, once you start, there is no stop. Once you agree murder is acceptable, it then becomes a matter of who it is acceptable to murder and when.
It never stops with what the original intent was, whether it was well intentioned or not does not matter, the end result is the same, murder becomes accepted, and the list of who can be murdered grows from there.
When Roe v Wade was passed would anyone have ever thought there would be any discussion of “death panels” that would actually take place? Yet here we are. It’s the natural progression and won’t stop until we stop it at the source.
All life is valued or none is valued. There is no grey area. It’s one of those absolutes that the liberals refuse to accept because it’s inconvenient to their agenda.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:04pm@Lordchamp
“All life is valued or none is valued. There is no grey area. ”
Of course there is a grey area. This is one of the greyest of areas. And I guarantee you value some lives over others. I’m saying this as a conservative and a Christian – it’s simply a fact of life. The author of the article, while she’s immoral in her views, is technically write when she says some lives are valued more than others. If you think about it for more than a few seconds, I promise you’ll find your view is more nuanced than “all lives are equal in value.” Here’s an example:
You’re in a room with a pitri dish full of fertilized eggs, a crying baby, and a brain-dead coma patient. The room bursts into flames and you can save only one of the three. Which do you save?
I, and presumably almost everyone else, would save the baby. Why? Because we place the most value on the baby; the blastocysts may not ever be born, and the brain-dead patient will likely never wake up. We agree they’re all alive, but the baby’s life is valued above the others. If we truly thought all lives are equal, we’d see a random distribution where a group of people would choose evenly among all three choices.
I am not advocating abortion, by the way. I’m simply saying “all lives have equal value” is a false statement – even to those of us who are pro-life in all cases. It’s a terrible basis for an argument because it’s objectively untrue.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:36pmI wouldn’t be so sure on your example Locked. It would probably be a random choice for me as well as logistics. If the brain dead patient were heavier I would go with the baby because I risk myself as well as the patient when getting out of there. I do hold life equal. And what I think our poster means by gray area is that there isn’t gray area on abortion it’s just wrong plain and simple. I would go as far as even in scenarios like rape it’s wrong. IS it unfortunate? Absolutely, but it’s not our place to be deciding who lives and who dies. However, I do understand your point that many despite saying they believe all life is equal their actions would prove otherwise. I would save them by random decision and logistics (and a few other factors).
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 6:02pm@DLV
“It would probably be a random choice for me as well as logistics.”
I personally doubt that, but obviously that’s your opinion and I must take it at face value. Let’s change the stakes then. There’s one crying baby, and a hundred fertilized eggs (still in a petri dish; bastocysts are small, after all). Which do you save? If you value all life as equal, wouldn’t you need to choose the dishes (even if you have no assurance that any of them would ever grow into children) and let the baby die? That’s saving 100 lives versus one; a terrible choice, yes, but by far the lesser of two evils?
Report this comment
AvengerK
Jan. 24, 2013 at 6:03pmLOCKED.
Williams is echoing the liberal penchant for devaluing life. They must do this in order to make people look to the state for all their needs. Just this week the new Japanese Finance Minister said that the elderly should “hurry up and die” because they burden the health care system. This is socialism and statism at it’s most glaring. And I assure it’s not a unique sentiment among statists and elites (look up Ezekeil Emanuel’s -brother of Rahm- views on health care for the elderly or John Holdren’s alarmist hysteria). Making beaurocrats and liberal talking heads like Williams the arbiters of the value of life is a very VERY dangerous thing to do.
But Williams is right in one sense…”all life is not equal” indeed. That’s why I can eat a steak, or fry eggs. Those animals’ lives are not the equal of human lives. But notice she doesn’t say “all HUMAN life is not equal”? To do so she’d reveal herself as the callous, cold blooded liberal she is. This is the slimy nature of liberals and the semantics they play. She acknowledges her own children as human while in her womb but in typical statist fashion..everyone else’s unborn children are “not all equal”. More “do as I say not as I do” liberal relativism and elitist duplicity.
And by the way..put the baby on the bed with the comatose patient and wheel them both to safety. You’re welcome.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 6:09pmI personally doubt that, but obviously that’s your opinion and I must take it at face value. Let’s change the stakes then. There’s one crying baby, and a hundred fertilized eggs (still in a petri dish; bastocysts are small, after all). Which do you save? If you value all life as equal, wouldn’t you need to choose the dishes (even if you have no assurance that any of them would ever grow into children) and let the baby die? That’s saving 100 lives versus one; a terrible choice, yes, but by far the lesser of two evils?
Perhaps, hard to say since I am not in that situation. Sometimes I’m not great at answering hypothetical questions because I’m not in the “moment.”
Report this comment
valiant1776
Jan. 24, 2013 at 8:57pm@Locked Those arguments are ridiculous. What if you had to choose between allowing your daughter to live, or allowing 100 neighbors to live? These are hypothesis based on nonsense. It’s not about worth or merit. All men are create equal. All men are equally free and independent. We’re all made in the image and likeness of God. Human Life, in nature and essence, is either valued the same for all, or God created certain races, peoples, and families with special privileges and rights, which gives them a human value inherently greater than others.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 25, 2013 at 8:18am@Avengerk
“And by the way..put the baby on the bed with the comatose patient and wheel them both to safety. You’re welcome.”
Not an option. Choose one of the three, please, and back up your answer if you’d actually like to discuss it. I guarantee you don’t think all human life is of equal value. God certainly doesn’t (otherwise why wouldn’t everyone go to Heaven?).
@DLV
“Perhaps, hard to say since I am not in that situation.”
Fair enough. I can unequivocally say I’d save the crying child, personally.
@Valiant
“Those arguments are ridiculous. What if you had to choose between allowing your daughter to live, or allowing 100 neighbors to live? These are hypothesis based on nonsense.”
The arguments are to prove a point: that NO ONE values all life equally. If I had a choice between my daughter and 100 other people, I’d save my daughter in almost any situation. My values aren’t utilitarian; they’re personal. My child is worth more to me.
“All men are create equal. All men are equally free and independent.”
In the eyes of US law and how it applies to each individual, sure. In reality? It’s not even close. As a white, heterosexual male born in a Christian household in America, I am infinitely more likely to accept Jesus than a black Muslim lesbian in Somalia. Deny it if you’d like; facts are facts.
” Human Life, in nature and essence, is… valued the same for all.”
By whom? Not by you or me. By God? Read the Bible!
Report this comment
kdshell1
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:34pmReminds me of ancient Rome when the man (in their case) ruled the family and had life or death control over every family member. In this case, the author says the mother is “the boss” (not just a steward of new life).
Report this comment
momrules
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:32pmThis is Satanic. Williams is the voice of true evil.
Report this comment
DIR
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:24pm‘So What if Abortion Ends Life?’: Pro-Choice Writer Says Some Babies Are ‘Worth Sacrificing’
Personally I’m glad she said it because she’s opened ‘Pandora’s Box.” Now it can be said that the same logic applies to her/it. If someone wacks her then it’s worth the sacrifice, except in her case there isn’t any sacrifice, well except sacrificing a round of amo on a worthless piece of crap. I wonder if people showed up at abortion clinics or crazy William’s house with guns and said they were there to defend the unborn … forget it.
Report this comment
Rillobymorning
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:26pmI totally agree, as well as sick and twisted, but yes, evil covers it.
Report this comment
mycomet123
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:47pmI totally agree with you. There is spiritual blindness when you don’t believe that the fetus is a human being. Then there is this “lady” who stated that “I believe that what a fetus is : a human life, & that doesn’t make me one iota less pro-choice” PURE EVIL! I heard a story of Bishop Sheehan( when he was alive) was on a plane & when they offered him lunch he stated he didn’t want any because he was fasting. for the end of abortion. The woman sitting next to him on the plane didn’t want any either. She told him she was fasting also–she stated that she was a witch & she was fasting for the continuation of the pro-choice movement. Satan has his minions out there!!!!!!!!
Report this comment
CathyvanDyke
Jan. 26, 2013 at 1:18pmmomrules
There is an upside. If I had a 16 year old vulnerable pregnant granddaughter about to make a decision of a lifetime … I would rather her sitting across from a Planned Parenthood counselor instructing her that it is indeed a life within her womb … not a bunch of cells.
Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart.”
Report this comment
wingnut1955
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:32pmIt is my belief that when a woman has unprotected sex, she has made her choice. I, also, believe that things like Sandy Hook happens because life is so cheep in today’s society. In the past children were considered a blessing. Today they are a burden. This is what the Sandy Hook killer had been taught all his life. So, why not relieve some families of their burdens. Until the view that life is precious and worth keeping is the main view point. We will have things like Sandy Hook happen. The idea that sacrificing some babies it, O.K. is sick. It reminds me of the Biblical times idol Baal. The worshipers of Baal would throw their babies alive into the fire to sacrifice to this idol. It is the same thinking that Elizabeth Williams is using. When will America wake up and remember that children are God’s blessing and not a burden to be gotten rid of.
Report this comment
3monkeysmomma
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:39pmOK, I’m pro-life…but I like to remind you, women do get raped and birth control sometimes fails even when used properly. Having said that, it still doesn’t justify killing them.
Report this comment
WarMunger_Al
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:54pm3monkeys-
Less than 1% of abortions are had for reason of rape. The rest are for the convenience of the woman. Murder for convenience. Pregnancy is the natural consequence from sexual relations.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:57pmlife is indeed precious and humans should not be sacrificed for selfish reasons or to achieve domination
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/08/iranians-turning-to-black-market-medicine-amid-hospital-overcrowding-and-collapsing-economy/
Report this comment
SUNTZU
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:58pmWoman gets raped,
Progressive law: Woman made to look like whore,
Man goes free, Baby gets death .
Happy 40th Birthday Roe Vs Wade
over 50,000,000 dead Babies
And some of you think the US still
has a chance?
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:05pmbefore birth control children weren’t always considered a blessing, but often a burden. when you’re up to 16 kids and counting, that’s a burden to many. So birth control is great, but as usual we humans have gone too far, we always do. We remove the shame from unmarried pregnancy (compassion) but then end up with a slut culture (too far). So birth control is good, but now we sleep around. Yes, the time for choice is before sex, and even if the birth control fails there are people willing to adopt…even disabled children. Many, though not all people, can concede an abortion in the case of life of the mother or rape but – as usual – humans go too far and now it is for any reason whatsoever. I suppose I’m not being entirely linear here, but I am just getting so worn out with people being given a little leniency and then messing it all up with going too far. My new mantra “C’MON PEOPLE…DO BETTER!”
Report this comment
wingnut1955
Jan. 24, 2013 at 11:28pm@granny58 There has been a form of “birth control” all the way back to biblical days. True, it doesn’t always work. The exception for rape is kind of destroyed by Roe v Wade where Jane Roe claimed she was gang raped. Her lawyers knew of the lie but wanted someone to advance their agenda and didn’t care. Until we get honest lawyers we can’t have any exceptions.
Report this comment
Just_Us2
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:32pmSo we should go back to the days of one person’s life is more valuable than another, and the people in power get to decide who is more important. So much for equality, we have devolved back to the days of slavery. Maybe conservative lives are more important than a liberals. In the end, the ones with the guns have the power and make those decisions. This is the left’s incrementalism. The very young, then the very old, then mentally disabled, physically disabled, then people you just plain don’t want to have around.
Report this comment
AmericaMustBeFree
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:31pmI wonder if this person would say that if it had been them who was sacrificed. Disgusting!
Report this comment
brntout
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:30pmHey idiot,infanticide did not specifically give an age. wanna piece of candy Mary?
Report this comment
sgorney
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:29pmI hope the whole “Pro Choice” movement goes in this direction. Progressives are intoxicated with their power right now and will say anything. This will certainly create an enormous backlash if adopted on a larger scale. Like is a matter of “convenience”. Wow.
Report this comment
DCM8063
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:27pmIf the left acknowledges that human life begins at conception, then abortion is the murder of human life. Then it should be a simple matter of “All men are created equal …”
Report this comment
Bill Wallace
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:25pmShe shows the liberals true colors.
All life is not created equal. Sounds to me like an argument for many things, including slavery. 3/5ths of a human being, no?
Sounds like the justification for the holocaust. Jews are less than human was the rhetoric then.
And if what she advocates is true, then why should anyone value her life as being equal? Why can we not just eliminate her, or others like her? Her own philosophy allows such a conclusion.
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:11pmgood comment. kudos.
Report this comment
spirited
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:48pmYes Granny
Report this comment
Carrieann1
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:25pmWhy don’t you publish a picture of “Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams” – - so we can all see what a pathetic pice of DNA she is??? A
Report this comment
momrules
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:40pmCarrie……..here is the link to the original story, picture and all.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:53pmhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/7/2011/03/medium_mew.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gawker.com/5782232/mary-elizabeth-williams-is-irksome&h=280&w=300&sz=26&tbnid=K8pi4nrpiW27rM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=96&prev=/search%3Fq%3DMary%2BElizabeth%2BWilliams%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=Mary+Elizabeth+Williams&usg=__uBywqfJK8SAsL5UeOkQ_sAC-Rl4=&docid=25D8xkndcmAd6M&sa=X&ei=LJEBUZ62N4e09QTb54DIDg&ved=0CEYQ9QEwAw&dur=714
Report this comment
media-bias-steals-elections
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:25pmBarbarians, abusing technology instead of using the pillar of good government, justice? The only reason you have abortions, is because you have un-ethical people in the health industry? How’s that working for you? Technology has given you a pill, and you still want to rip out of a mother a live baby, and as long as that disclaimer is signed, the mother might die too?
There will be no disclaimers on judgement day?
Report this comment
woodyee
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:24pmAbortion – the sacrificial rite of Left-wing theology.
Report this comment
LeadNotFollow
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:23pmIt would cost much less to teach abstinence and how to properly use birth control, but the followers of Satan would much rather murder babies.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:36pm@Lead
“It would cost much less to teach abstinence and how to properly use birth control, but the followers of Satan would much rather murder babies.”
Have you ever met anyone, pro-life or pro-choice, who thinks abortion is a preferable option to education on the proper use of birth control or explaining how pregnancy occurs? I’ve certainly never done so. This sounds like a strawman argument to me.
Most pro-choicers I’ve met have said abortion should be legal but rare – that better sex education and easier access to birth control will reduce the amount of abortions. I’ve never heard of one who said that we should forego sex education and birth control and would rather just force women into abortions.
Of course, perhaps you were referring to actual Satanists rather than pro-choicers overall. If so, I read too much into your statement.
Report this comment
Spitfire1938
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:39pm@LEADNOTFOLLOW,
The Catholic Church recognizes that Contraceptives, not abortion are the central evil! Abortion has always existed, but its use literally exploded after the introduction of the ‘pill’ in the mid 50′s as a backup to contraceptive ‘failure’. The Church teaches that the only time a babies death in it’s mothers womb is acceptable is if it dies secondarily to an effort to save the mothers life. No direct attempt on a babies life is EVER justified.
The evil of Contraceptives is they eliminate the connection between procreation and coitus thereby eliminating ALL cultural norms regarding marriage, family, parenting, fidelity and gender while focusing only on the ‘selfish’ pursuit of pleasure.
‘Abortion’ is satan turning as many people as he can into murders… ‘contraception’ destroys their society! The Catholic Church is the only religion, besides Islam, that condemns the use of contraceptives as an intrinsic evil. You need only to look around to understand why.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:43pmlocked- 55 million deaths isn’t rare. I get the feeling they like doing evil things and no one is going to stop them. Abortion makes the Holocaust look like sandbox play by comparison in numbers. Hitler killing Jews would be rarity compared to this.
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:22pm@ Locked – have you ever talked to the teenagers/young adults who engage in sex as easily as my generation went bowling and they do so without protection? they have no interest whatsoever in abortion being legal but rare, it is their form of birth control. if people actually wanted it legal but rare it would be.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:52pm@Granny
“they have no interest whatsoever in abortion being legal but rare, it is their form of birth control.”
You’re saying that you know more young people who have never used birth control than have had abortions? I’m curious who you know.
@DLV
Key word being “should.” I’ll scroll to see your new comments below, but I’d ask: if there’s a Holocaust going on, why have you not taken up weapons to stop it?
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:58pmlocked- for whatever reason my main response to your last comment isn’t showing up to the thread a few below this one isnt showing up. I can try here on this one.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 6:01pmThe blaze really doesnt want me to post this. This is the fourth time….
Why is it your responsibility to protect living children, but not unborn children, if you think that either being purposefully killed is still murder?
Bare with me here. some may seem silly. One I just don’t think God would want me to go after abortionists, I think he wants to deal with them in his own way whiule at the same time I think it would be my responsibility to stop lanza, and if I didn’t and could I would be hounded endlessly, maybe even prosecuted etc etc etc.
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 24, 2013 at 7:35pm@ Locked – yes, I do know this. Due to my job. Nuff said.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 25, 2013 at 8:21am@DLV
“One I just don’t think God would want me to go after abortionists, I think he wants to deal with them in his own way”
I agree, personally.
“whiule at the same time I think it would be my responsibility to stop lanza”
Why? What’s the difference? There must be some reason for the different feelings on the two you both consider murderers.
“and if I didn’t and could I would be hounded endlessly, maybe even prosecuted etc etc etc.”
I’m not sure how that factors in. Could you explain?
@granny
Not quite enough said. What job do you have that deals with people who use abortion as their sole force of birth control?
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 25, 2013 at 12:04pm@ Locked -working in the medical records field, but I do not want to say any more than that due to HIPPA
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 25, 2013 at 4:41pm@Granny
“working in the medical records field, but I do not want to say any more than that due to HIPPA”
Er, I’m really not sure why HIPAA would apply (I work with hospitals as well and pass HIPAA certification every year as part of my job requirement). You’re not giving out identifiable information on patients. Unless you’re saying you’re Michael Jackson’s personal physician or something.
The only cases I can think where you’d be involved inmedical records and find people who get abortions but don’t know how to use condoms would be perhaps working for the CDC with collecting STI/STD statistics in inner cities. But even then, I’ve (yes, “I”; I worked in Miami doing just this a few years back) never found that people forego birth control in favor of abortion. Or if you work at an abortion clinc in the inner city. Those would be the highest abortion rate / lowest education areas of medical records related to abortion that I can think of.
It just seems like a strawman, is all.
Report this comment
Cavallo
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:22pmThese people are sick and macabre. How can you argue with someone who simply states, “Yeah, we kill babies, what of it?”
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:25pma zygote and a baby are two different things
Report this comment
3monkeysmomma
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:42pm@keaton..not according to Williams. She acknowledges they are alive but rationalizes killing them anyway!
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:56pmKEATONC333, Hey dirtbag, still making nasty comments about what you would like a pretty redhead to do? Like I said before, your wife just has to be so proud.
Report this comment
Cavallo
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:00pmOnce again, dehumanization. Although this woman apparently has a stronger stomach than keaton and can murder children without needing to jump through the psychological hoops.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:04pmi think i am more proud of my wife’s ability to recognize a joke…..
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:14pm@3monkey
Keatonc33 said: “a zygote and a baby are two different things”
You responded “…not according to Williams. She acknowledges they are alive but rationalizes killing them anyway!”
Being alive is different than saying a zygote and a human are the same thing. You’re moving the criteria. No, a zygote and a baby are objectively different. Yes, both are alive. Two separate arguments there.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:15pm3monkey.. of course both are alive. a cow is alive but that doesn’t make eating a hamburger cannibalism. you’re missing my point.
Report this comment
Granny58
Jan. 25, 2013 at 6:53am@Keaton – a baby and an adult are 2 different too, merely being different phases of human life, as is a zygote.
Report this comment
Lloyd Drako
Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:38pmPerhaps we should do as the Japanese sometimes do. Abortion is legal in Japan, with restrictions broadly similar to those we have in America. It is regarded as a species of “unavoidable murder,” which requires that the murderer (the mother) make amends. This is done by naming the aborted fetus, going through a period of mourning, and often setting up a shrine where apologies can be tendered and offerings made, in the form of toys, flowers, candy, etc . Even after abortion, the fetus is regarded as human and even as a member of the family, though absent. I have sometimes thought that this might be the best policy, not ham-handed government imposition of waiting periods, movie screenings, demeaning lectures and trans-******* ultrasounds.
Report this comment
momofcharlie
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:21pmhttp://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/statsre.jpg
- 54,559,615 abortions from 1973 through 2011, 38 years
- Divide by 38, equals 1,435,779 abortions per year
- Divide by 365, equals 3933 abortions per day for 38 years
Children killed in Newton massacre = 20 in one day
- Divide 3933 by 20, equals 196
This means that EVERY DAY Pro-Choice women are choosing to kill children at the same rate as having 196 Newton massacre occurrences PER DAY… EVERY day… for 38 years!!
One can ONLY conclude that conversations and laws leading to the infringement on the 2nd Amendment are of FAR lesser importance than… teaching morality about the consequences and parental responsibility of conception… and passing laws that respect the life of the children in the womb, to be of equal importance of those in the classroom.
[To all affected by Newtown, I apologize for referring to it here. I have done so only to draw out the hypocrisy of the left in their use of Newtown to promote their anti-gun agenda (which by all accounts would not have prevented the death of these sweet children) while ignoring the shocking number of child deaths by abortion that they fight to sustain.]
Report this comment
Shasta
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:28pmThat really puts it into perspective. Thanks.
Report this comment
woodyee
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:58pmWell put. Thank you, and thank you for the reference! Copy & paste time for me…
Report this comment
Witness1974
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:58pmThank you, Mom. Well done. Think of all the beautiful souls we’ve been deprived of: Lincolns, Saulks, Mozarts, Rembrandts, loving mothers, good fathers, beautiful children, best friends. . . the loss is incalcuble. What a horror it is.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 3:32pmI have three questions, @momofcharlie. Just for the sake of discussion.
1. Do you consider those humans who have been aborted to be equally as valuable as 5-7 year-old children? Or to say it a different way, do they have the same right to live as those currently living?
2. If you had the opportunity, would you have gone to Newtown and shot Lanza before he killed those 20 kids?
If you said yes to both questions, then…
3. Why on Earth have you not gone and shot every abortionist you can find?
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:06pmLocked- I say yes to both 1 and 2 and I can answer 3. It’s because it’s not my right slash decision to decide whether an abortionist lives or dies. I feel like I would get in trouble with god ad well as the law
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:14pm@DLV
“It’s because it’s not my right slash decision to decide whether an abortionist lives or dies. I feel like I would get in trouble with god ad well as the law”
Then why would you shoot Lanza to stop him from killing children? How is it your right/decision to decide if he lives or dies?
Your second sentence seems to imply that you’d only stop a murder through lethal force if the government wouldn’t punish you for it. Am I reading that correctly?
Report this comment
joecooning
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:17pm@Locked: The problem with the 3rd question is that in the case of the Sandy shootings, a man forcibly took the lives of the children. So for comparison, that would be a man that would forcibly abort women’s children. I wouldn’t have much of a problem stopping a sicko like that. Now flip it the other way around. Abortion would be similar to parent’s willfully giving their children over to the murderer. Sounds pretty tragic to me. (Also, for question 2, there are more ways to stop a criminal than killing them first.)
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:29pmThen why would you shoot Lanza to stop him from killing children? How is it your right/decision to decide if he lives or dies?”
Self-Defense. Abortion isn’t self-defense. Joe explains it fairly well too. I would say it’s more my responsibility to protect children if I were there from him forcefully taking their lives. I also have the overwhelming feeling God would want me to. Now if God told me to kill abortionists (and it was actually God nad I was not going insane) then yes, I probably would. It’s one of those things that I really don’t feel that he would want me to kill abortionists and that their time for judgment will come.
As for your part 2- I fear God infinitely more than the government.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:37pm@Joecooning
If I’m understanding you correctly, you would shoot a man who is forcing a woman into an abortion against her will, but if a parent willingly gave away her children to a murderer, you would not stop the murderer?
Report this comment
joecooning
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:40pm@Locked: Never said I’d shoot, just try and stop. And as for mothers that give their children up to the murder, of course I’d want to stop the murder. That’s why I’m against abortion. I’d love to see it stopped.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:42pm@DLV
“Self-Defense. Abortion isn’t self-defense.”
Neither is stopping a murderer unless you’re the one he’s going to kill. I might be missing what you’re trying to say, however.
“I would say it’s more my responsibility to protect children if I were there from him forcefully taking their lives. I also have the overwhelming feeling God would want me to.”
Why is it your responsibility to protect living children, but not unborn children, if you think that either being purposefully killed is still murder?
“Now if God told me to kill abortionists (and it was actually God nad I was not going insane)”
Ok, the parethetical part made me laugh :-)
“It’s one of those things that I really don’t feel that he would want me to kill abortionists and that their time for judgment will come.”
But He would want you to shoot Lanza if it stopped the murder of 20 kids? How do you figure that?
“As for your part 2- I fear God infinitely more than the government.”
I’m on board with you for that. But if you think God agrees with you using lethal force to stop murder (in the example of Newtown), and you think abortion is murder, why do you feel it’s innappropriate to use lethal force to stop an abortionist?
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:47pm@Joe
“Never said I’d shoot, just try and stop.”
So you would not shoot Lanza deadto stop the Newtown murders? That was my original question.
I’m not looking to pass any kind of moral judgment on you (in case you felt that way; I’m sorry if I came off as such!); I’m legitimately curious how (or if) people can justify the two conflicting cases.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:49pm@Joecooning
My mistake before; in my response I said “stop” instead of “shoot.” All instances of this should involve shooting dead the person you know is going to commit the crime.
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:15pmlocked- one other thing I forgot to mention. If we are trying to bring unbelievers to Jesus but they saw us going around killing abortionists, even if it’s justifiable, I don’t think it would help spread the word.
Report this comment
Locked
Jan. 24, 2013 at 5:57pm@DLV
Perhaps it just didn’t know up yet, but you didn’t answer my last few questions here.
“If we are trying to bring unbelievers to Jesus but they saw us going around killing abortionists, even if it’s justifiable, I don’t think it would help spread the word.”
I completely agree. But according to your responses so far, abortion is murder, and while you think it’s justified to use lethal force to stop murderers on living children (even going so far as to call it “self-defense” when your life is not endangered), why do you hesitate to kill abortionists? You call them murderers. They’re methodical and consistent; according to @momofcharlie’s stats, thousands are killed daily. They’re easy to find.
In another comment, you call the abortions done in the US “a Holocaust.” Would you kill a Nazi about to shoot a Jew? What about thousands of Jews a day? Now replace “Nazi” with “doctor” and “Jew” with “fetus.” For you, what possible excuse is there to not kill an abortion doctor?
Report this comment
DLV
Jan. 24, 2013 at 6:04pmlocked- look up a ways the blaze was preventing me from posting the bulk of my argument I seperated it into two pieces above with the thread where Granny responded to you.
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Jan. 25, 2013 at 1:37amWow, without abortion there would be another 54 million people in this country! That’s an extra one sixth of our population, one half of what our population was a hundred years ago. Thank God for abortion, this place would be a third world hellhole by now without it. Our population has grown by 54 million in the last 20 years, and by 54 million in the 25 years before that. Think of everything that’s gotten crummier in the last 45 years and imagine it another one third crummier than that.
Report this comment
wellright
Jan. 25, 2013 at 12:57pmAbortion “rights” advocates defend the right of a doctor to pull a baby’s head from it’s mother’s womb, stick a needle into the skull, suck out gray matter until life ceases and toss that form into a trash can. And then they claim to have the moral high ground. Many of those same people believe that it is wrong to kill animals for meat, use capital punishment, or, to use water boarding to interrogate terrorists.
They will also claim a strong reliance on science, and then ignore it when it pleases them. DNA of the embryo is not the same DNA as mom or dad. As long as progressives see pregnancy as a disease, wellll……
Report this comment
PK_SEA
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:20pmI read a history book that said in Germany in the 1930′s, the Jews lives were less equal than the Aryans.
Report this comment
Sharon Rose
Jan. 24, 2013 at 2:19pmAnd we wonder why so much hatred, sadness etc exists in America and the rest of the world.
Report this comment
searcher619
Jan. 24, 2013 at 4:55pmWe live charmed lives in the west. If this is all we have to argue over then i count us lucky. but sadly we don’t There are far more pressing matters that need our attention. whether or not a woman should be allowed to abort her pregnancy early on is not something we should be focusing on. It’s an issue people on the left and right use to divide us.
Report this comment