Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Faith

Today’s Anti-Abortion March Could Draw ‘Record-Breaking Crowds’ to the National Mall

Jan. 25, 2013 6:50am

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Abortion opponents plan to march in Washington in a demonstration that coincides with the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a constitutional, nationwide right to abortion. As TheBlaze has noted, this week marks the 40th anniversary since Roe v. Wade passed (read about the real Jane Roe here), leading to decades of debate surrounding the controversial issue.

Hundreds of thousands are expected for the noon Friday rally at the National Mall and in front of the Supreme Court. Organizers say the event will feature former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum. Reps. Chris Smith of New Jersey and Diane Black of Tennessee are also scheduled speakers.

March for Life Could Bring Record Breaking Crowds to National Mall Today

Photo Credit: AP

Jeanne Monahan, president of the March for Life Education & Defense Fund, told the USA Today that the event’s attendance could break previously-held records. This will be her first year leading the march.

“We are expecting record-breaking crowds — 80% under the age of 20,” she said. “Mostly teenagers come and we get a lot of high school groups.”

Earlier this week, opponents marked the anniversary with workshops, prayers and calls for more limits on abortion rights.

Many streets will be closed for the rally.

–

Related:

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Comments (149)

1 2 3
  • soybomb315_II
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:21am

    “Repeal Roe V Wade overnight”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29IQ9G2xAR0

    Report this comment

    soybomb315_II  
    • searcher619
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 3:38pm

      Give it a rest. The Supremes already ruled on this. It’s a done deal.

      Report this comment

      searcher619  
    • merchantmarineman
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:01pm

      Hey Searcher619:
      At least those of us who will not give up trying to save any unborn life will be able to stand before God and look him in the face and say we at the very least tried or cared. I don’t care if I am the last person in the USA, or on this planet, I will always fight. You can not silence us, you can not crush our resolve, you will not deter out cause. Come hell or high water, we will always fight. Your careless and cowardly words have no place on this webpage, or anywhere for that matter.

      Report this comment

      merchantmarineman  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:30pm

      @Merchantmarineman

      “I don’t care if I am the last person in the USA, or on this planet, I will always fight.”

      Well, if you’re the last person on the planet, I think the fight against abortion is pretty much won, right?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:20am

      Locked – No it isn’t. But don’t let your big ego get in the way of that. And more and more young people are anti-abortion now than they have been in past generations.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 7:11am

      @Git

      ” No it isn’t.”

      Feel free to explain how, if there is a single person left on earth, and that person is a man, that abortion is no longer an issue.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • U4eeeahhh
      Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:34am

      Git – your statement about increasing support for anti-abortion sentiments among the young is just not true.
      70% of Americans believe Roe v. Wade should stand, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll release just a few weeks ago. Only 41% of Americans now call themselves pro-choice and many who call themselves pro-life support abortion in some cases. Only 9% of Americans think abortion should be illegal in every case, the WSJ poll found. The new poll’s figure – 70% – is the highest proportion of Americans ever to back Roe v. Wade and shows increasing support for CHOICE.

      Report this comment

      U4eeeahhh  
  • whatsallthisthen
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:17am

    Mr. Hllowell, Don’t know if the headline of this story is yours but it does illustrate the language use of the left. Don’t know how to combat labels except for committed conservatives to speak up whenever possible. Pro-Life is labeled anti- abortion, pro-family is anti this or anti that. If you’re not for a leftwing nut idea you’re a hater. When good people stay silent bad guys win.

    Report this comment

    whatsallthisthen  
    • wordweaver
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:52am

      I had the same thought. I refuse to use the term “anti-abortion”. I would rather advocate for the life of the fetus.

      Report this comment

      wordweaver  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:02am

      I’ll post the same response I had when someone said this below:
      Most people who describe themselves as pro-life are actually only anti-abortion. We know several things that will reduce abortion rates:
      – Free contraceptives
      – Comprehensive sex education
      – Assistance to low-income expecting mothers
      – Higher education for women (the higher your education rate, the lower the rate of abortion)

      But many conservatives are against most of these things. Fiscal conservatives like myself are against the government funding free contraceptives or extra assistance to expecting mothers; social conservatives are by-and-large against anything that teaches about sex or makes having sex less consequential (aka, would reduce the risks of sex before marriage).

      Hence, most of the pro-life movement is actually only anti-abortion. There are many ways to lower unwanted pregnancy rates; basically they boil down to either making an unwanted pregnancy “wanted” (and thus more likely to be kept) or you can make a woman less likely to become pregnant. But for most pro-lifers, that’s not the primary focus; it’s to make abortion illegal. It’s attacking the effect, not the cause.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Sugabee
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:25am

      This article, from a secular pro-life organization, speaks to much of what you say “pro-lifers” object to: http://feministsforlife.org/news/weddington2013.htm
      I would disagree with you that artificial contraception has reduced abortions. Since the dawn of the birth control pill and all other contraceptives since 1972, pregnancy/STDs/abortions have only increased. Providing free contraception will not lower abortion rates. Why do you think PP has their mitts on both ends of the issue? Because it makes money; period.

      Report this comment

      Sugabee  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:49am

      @Sugabee

      “I would disagree with you that artificial contraception has reduced abortions.”

      As I didn’t say that, I don’t think you’re disagreeing with me. Contraceptives, used properly and consistently (due to availability and proper sex education), reduce pregnancy and thus abortion. This is why the EU, oft-times considered a liberal hotbed of immorality, has incredibly low abortion rates compared to the US.

      “Providing free contraception will not lower abortion rates.”

      Where is your source for this? I’d say there’s definitly a correlation between the two (again, pointing to the EU)

      “Why do you think PP has their mitts on both ends of the issue? Because it makes money; period.”

      I absolutely agree. It’s the same way that if Breast Cancer was cured, the Komen Foundation would be out on their butts. Hence why they advocate much more of their money into advertising than actually searching for a cure for cancer.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • David_Webb
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:54am

      Exactly. And he continued to use the language of the left throughout the article.

      Apparently, The Blaze is growing to fast to keep their quality control at acceptable levels.

      Start writing like the left, you will get the reduced readership of the left.

      Report this comment

      David_Webb  
    • Sosorryforyou
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:55am

      @LOCKED

      This is one of the best posts I’ve ever read on The Blaze. You are absolutely correct. Pro-life advocates are actually anti-abortion advocates. For many, their interest is only to protect the life of a child from abortion once it is in the womb. I think they are fighting the wrong fight. The VAST majority of pregnant women wanted to get pregnant and want to keep their babies. But, the women and teen-aged girls who want to abort their babies rarely ever wanted to get pregnant in the first place, so you would think, in the best-interest of Life, that the Pro-Life advocates’ fight would be to do whatever is possible to prevent these unwanted pregnancies in the first place. But more often than not, they are the ones who put obstacles in place against ways to prevent such pregnancies, such as birth control measures and comprehensive sex education, etc.

      Report this comment

      Sosorryforyou  
    • Sugabee
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:04am

      Since you stated that free contraception would reduce abortion rates, that was where I disagreed with you. Here are links to studies that indicate contraception does not reduce abortion rates: In Spain – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21134508 and in Russia- http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0049986?imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0049986.t003
      I agree with you on Komen, also. It’s repugnant to me that I am forced to have my tax dollars sent to Planned Parenthood while they perform abortions.

      Report this comment

      Sugabee  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:12am

      @Sosorry

      Thanks. I am of the opinion that every child should be a wanted child. It’s an ideal we’ll never achieve, of course, so the best we can do is get as close to it as possible.

      @Sugabee

      Thank you for the studies; though I will note two things:
      1. The methodology used is not mentioned. For example, in the Spanish study, it says that condom usage had gone up; but that does not indicate consistency of use. If your question was “Have you used a condom during sexual intercourse?” you’ll receive a much different answer than “Do you use a condom properly during every sexual encounter?”
      2. I didn’t see it indicated that contraception was free in the articles? I could have missed it, though.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • AntonW
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 12:46pm

      Oh please. Billy Hallowell is not a liberal and he’s certainly not a hater. Your comment has no merit.

      Report this comment

      AntonW  
    • Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:19pm

      Are all of these people against capital punishment? Are all of these people pacifists? Do all of these people support animal rights? Those are all issues of life and death, but they don’t all agree about any of them. The only thing that unites them is that they are against abortion so the only accurate label for them is anti-abortion.

      Report this comment

      Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:23am

      Locked – In other words, you want more people to become moochers in society. And most of the European countries have more legal restrictions on abortion than the US in case you missed it. There’s also no proof of legalized abortion reducing the child abuse rate. So much for you leftists claiming to care about people.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 7:13am

      @Git

      You should really read before you post, ma’am.

      “In other words, you want more people to become moochers in society.”

      No. I specifically said that I’m against some of these initiatives due to fiscally conservative values. Not education, obviously.

      “And most of the European countries have more legal restrictions on abortion than the US in case you missed it.”

      Considering most have a clause “for the mental health of the mother,” no, they really don’t.

      “There’s also no proof of legalized abortion reducing the child abuse rate.”

      Strawman argument? Where was this being argued besides in your head?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
  • bo1921
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:08am

    I look forward to watching news of the rally tonight on the major news networks. I assume ALL the networks will make this event a prime piece of their Friday night news reporting.

    Report this comment

    bo1921  
    • CatB
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:22am

      Yes .. I don’t usually watch network alphabet news .. but I will check it out tonight and look for the coverage … ;-)

      Report this comment

      CatB  
    • DebateMe
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:57am

      @bo1921
      If you watch network news, just understand that you are permanently wasting some of the finite time you have on this Earth and you can never get it back. Network news will make you dumber over time. Just look at the electorate as a case in point.

      Report this comment

      DebateMe  
    • The_Cabrito_Goat
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 2:44pm

      I have been a part of this march once, about three or four years ago, I went with my church to Washington. It was rough and cold.

      This was ‘walking the straight and narrow’ literally, it felt to me. I only saw one news van, just one, a local news station. And the numbers were probably just a little lower than the projected numbers shown here.

      C’mon media, give us a little bit of the love you show the Obama family

      Report this comment

      The_Cabrito_Goat  
    • Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:30pm

      You will not see these people on television for the same wise and valid reasons that they will not show people who tear off their clothes and run onto the field during a baseball game.

      Report this comment

      Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh  
  • XPat
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:07am

    King Obama and the infantacidal party he leads make Stalin, Mao, and Hitler look like choirboys. It’s much easier to kill the helpless which is why progressives hate the second amendment.

    Report this comment

    XPat  
  • vaman
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:03am

    All of these protesters will be signing up to adopt all of the unwanted kids? No abortion means someone other than the parents will have to care for the kids. So if you think abortion is murder or your god doesn’t approve, then step up, don’t just complain and adopt. Although a child raised in the house of christian radicals is a lost cause.

    Report this comment

    vaman  
    • CatB
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:23am

      Do you understand that people have to go out of the country to adopt? People are lined up for these babies .. get a life.

      Report this comment

      CatB  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:30am

      @Catb

      There are hundreds of thousands of children in the US adoption system right now. The sad fact is that most of them are not wanted. Potential adoptive parents prefer children under 2, of the same race, without physical or mental illnesses, and with no inherited substance addictions. Most of those currently up for adoption in the US don’t meet these criteria.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • termyt
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:54am

      You are so right. Better to kill them. Let’s just kill everyone who is unwanted or unneeded.

      That way we can solve poverty and unemployment, too.

      Report this comment

      termyt  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:29am

      @CAT
      Women are not baby-making machines.
      Especially working women who are the income earners and the primary support of their families.

      Report this comment

      Verceofreason  
    • dosdelgados
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:10am

      @LOCKED,

      Adoption through the foster care system is not as free and easy as you think. It is a logistical nightmare, and these “up for adoption” children often still have parental rights intact when they come to live with you. You automatically become involved in the child’s case and facilitating parent/child and sibling visitation. Bio parents are given chance after chance while you are backed against the wall. And if the bio parent(s) demonstrate enough progress,the child you’ve loved and nurtured and integrated into your family can be ripped from your home in a day. Older children are a risk to inexperienced parents, and to families who already have children. Sometimes you have to think of your family’s safety first. Foster/adoptive parents are required to follow the state’s guidelines for home amenities and discipline (in Texas, for example, you are not allowed to withhold dessert from a foster child if any other family members are having dessert). After almost two very miserable years with CPS, our daughter’s adoption should HOPEFULLY be consummated next month. Hubby and I agree that the next adoption will be through a private agency.

      Report this comment

      dosdelgados  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:16am

      @Dos

      “Adoption through the foster care system is not as free and easy as you think.”

      I never thought it was free nor easy. The adoption system in the US is very tedious and expensive to navigate.

      “Older children are a risk to inexperienced parents, and to families who already have children. Sometimes you have to think of your family’s safety first.”

      And as said, this is why there so many unadopted children; they don’t fit the criteria many adoptive parents want. Don’t get me wrong: I’m not faulting those who adopt for wanting to find the best fit for both themselves and for the child. I’m saying that “adoption is an option” is more accurately stated as “adoption is sometimes an option, for some kids.”

      “After almost two very miserable years with CPS, our daughter’s adoption should HOPEFULLY be consummated next month. Hubby and I agree that the next adoption will be through a private agency.”

      Best of luck, and I hope your time and effort is worth it. God bless you!

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:25am

      Voiceofstupidity – And it’s you irresponsible leftists who are the ones who promote irresponsible sexual behaviors to where women become single mothers. But you leftists have to be a burden to everybody else in society since your fun is more important and everybody else should have to pay for it.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:03am

    .
    LOCKED

    I do believe Abortion is murder. But in-order to save the country, we may have to encourage Abortion for the Left and the Free Lunch Slaves…..

    Besides they don’t seem to mind killing babies, or as far as that goes standing and crawling over their Bloody Dead Bodies to get what they want……

    So the fewer the better………..

    Report this comment

    SpankDaMonkey  
    • OldSurfRat
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:12am

      Agree!!!!
      If you do not agree with abortion than dont have one.

      The left will continue to have abortions and this will change the demographics over time.

      I say encourage the left to fill abortion clinics with record breaking numbers.

      Report this comment

      OldSurfRat  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:14am

      So murder is acceptable as long as it’s done by people you don’t like, on children you probably won’t like in the future?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • OldSurfRat
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:33am

      Locked

      Its not murder but natural selection.
      If the left aborts than we will have less to fight against.
      Seems like a simple resolve to a growing problem.

      Report this comment

      OldSurfRat  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:57am

      @Oldsurfrat

      “Its not murder but natural selection.”

      Spankdamonkey says it’s murder.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:12am

      @Spank

      So, as said, you’re fine with murder as long as it’s done by people you don’t like, to people you probably won’t like in the future?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • SpankDaMonkey
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 3:14pm

      .
      @LOCKED

      Democrats and Free Lunch Slaves don’t see it as murder, so I encourage them to have as many Abortions as possible for the good of the country. Not to mention the effect fewer Democrats and Free Lunch Slaves will have on Man Made Global Warming…….

      Report this comment

      SpankDaMonkey  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 3:50pm

      @Spank

      “Democrats and Free Lunch Slaves don’t see it as murder”

      … but you do, as you said. So, for a third time: you’re fine with murder as long as it’s done by people you don’t like, on people who you probably won’t like in the future?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:27am

      Better yet, cutting off all of the welfare benefits will reduce the number of future leftists.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 7:14am

      @Git

      I notice you never answered the questions either. Do you think abortion is murder? Do you condone it if it’s done by people you don’t like, to people you likely won’t like in the future?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
  • TC
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:00am

    I find that pictures can help to see really what is going on. Caution, this IS a no spin zone.

    http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/abortionimages/archive1.htm

    This one is hoping to point out how many more black babies are aborted than any other race. It is a awful.
    http://www.100abortionpictures.com/Aborted_Baby_Pictures_Abortion_Photos/

    Report this comment

    TC  
    • Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:25pm

      Is anyone dragging black women to abortion clinics and forcing them to abort against their wills? Then who gives a crap? It ain’t nobody’s business but heir own.

      Report this comment

      Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:43am

    .
    I hate to say this but we may need to “Embrace Abortion”…….

    It may be the only way to keep the Free Lunch Slaves in check……..

    Report this comment

    SpankDaMonkey  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:47am

      If you believe abortion is murder, why have you not done so?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Winedude
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:13am

      If the fetus you save is gay, will you continue to protect its rights?

      Report this comment

      Winedude  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:29am

      It won’t keep the freeloaders in check. It hasn’t so far and it never will. The only way to stop this is to cut off the freebies.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
  • Locked
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:29am

    If abortion is indeed considered murder, I think there would be a more effective halt in legal abortion if all of these protesters killed abortion doctors.

    As said in the topic yesterday, ask yourself these three questions:
    1. Do you consider abortion to be murder?
    2. If you had the ability to shoot Lanza dead and stop the Newtown murder of 20 children, would you have done so?
    3. If you answered yes to both questions, what possible reason do you have for not shooting every abortion doctor in the country?

    Report this comment

    Locked  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:40am

      (Also note: I am in no way advocating murdering abortion doctors. That should be clear, but some people are terrible at reading).

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Mad Engineer
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:54am

      OK, I take a run at your strawman argument….
      1. Abortion is not only murder, it is the pagan sacrifice of children similar to that seen in the Old Testament to the pagan gods of the Assyrians, Canaanites, etc.
      2. If I had the opportunity to stop any madman from shooting innocent children, I would take that option. This being said, all options should be explored as time and events permit and not just jump to lethal force (such as seeing the SOB in the parking lot and running him over with my truck, sneaking up on him and hitting him over the head with a 2×4, etc.) A gun is NOT a “one size fits all” answer to addressing the social and moral issues others may have.
      3. This is a strawman argument. There is a HUGE difference between options for dealing with a mentally unstable person who is an imment threat to himself and others and dealing with a rational person about to harm someone else. The options discussed in item 2 are equally valid here, but so is a rational discussion. There is NOT a “one size fits all” all answer to this problem, but we should not be jumping to the most drastic option as the first option to address a bloodlust people on both sides of this argument have.

      Report this comment

      Mad Engineer  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:13am

      @madengineer

      “1. Abortion is not only murder, it is the pagan sacrifice of children similar to that seen in the Old Testament to the pagan gods of the Assyrians, Canaanites, etc.”

      Where is your source for this? Now THIS is a strawman argument. I’m interested in how many expectant mothers or abortion doctors offer prayers to Ba’al before going through the procedure. I’m going to guess the number is close to zero.

      “2. If I had the opportunity to stop any madman from shooting innocent children, I would take that option. This being said, all options should be explored as time and events permit and not just jump to lethal force”

      You KNOW that thousands of abortions happen every day. These “madmen” are “murdering” every day. What amount of time do you need? You’d shoot a gunman in the parking lot of school, but would you not shoot an abortion doctor on his way in to the clinic? Why?

      “3. This is a strawman argument.”

      How so? The parameters are set; both are murder, done intentionally, and you can stop them with lethal force. You seem to be ‘hem’ing and ‘hay’ing, but that’s about it. It’s a honest hypothetical, and the only answer I see so far is “Lanza was nuts, doctors aren’t.” But you think they’re both murderers. You allow the doctors to do this, day after day. You might think protesting is “doing something,” but it’s not stopping the doctor in his clinic at this very moment. Why would you not use lethal force to stop “murder”?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:30am

      LOCKED

      There is a big difference between Lanza’s murders and doctors conducting abortion. What Lanza did was murder by definition. What doctors and parents do when they conduct/have abortions is not. You have to remember that murder is the “unlawful” killing of another human being. Since abortions are legal, they are not murder. They are lawful killings. That is the problem. Our government has decided that killing via abortion is legal. That is what Pro-life people want to change. You can’t possibly try to compare responding to Lanza’s murders and abortions with deadly force because they simply aren’t related. It’s apples and oranges. Now if abortions were unlawful, as I believe they should be, then you can pose your question about killing doctors. If that were the case, I would most definitely do whatever was necessary to stop a doctor from committing murder via abortion.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:43am

      @Cain13

      “There is a big difference between Lanza’s murders and doctors conducting abortion. What Lanza did was murder by definition. What doctors and parents do when they conduct/have abortions is not. You have to remember that murder is the “unlawful†killing of another human being. Since abortions are legal, they are not murder. They are lawful killings.”

      My questions were specifically targetted to those who would call abortion “murder.” It seems you’re saying is that everyone who is calling abortion murder is incorrect?

      I completely agree with you, by the way. Abortion is not murder; it is definitely a killing, and it is lawful (and at times, medically justified).

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:15am

      LOCKED

      I hear what you are saying but your hypothetical question was based on a definition of murder that was not necessarily mutually understood. People who call it murder, while maybe not understanding the true definition, still know that abortions are legal and can differentiate between stopping Lanza and stopping doctors with deadly force. I was just pointing out that your comparison and hypothetical question might not hold as much relevance as you may think. Unless your point was to clarify the actual definition of murder.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:16am

      Locked, it’s you inferring Ba’al. Like not eq same.

      You don’t understand the principle of instrumentality in modern black magic. As long as one is instrumental in a deed in some way, one can claim the sacrifice. It has a lesser potential power than a direct sacrifice, but one can compensate by a sheer scale. So the practitioners believe.

      Ba’al is so 2nd millennium BC… different entities are invoked today.

      Report this comment

      Twobyfour  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:22am

      @Cain13

      “Unless your point was to clarify the actual definition of murder.”

      That is exactly the point, in fact (or at least to get people to think about it).

      Most people say abortion is murder without stopping to think about what that means or what logical conclusions they should draw from it – see my example above. They open their mouths before their brains turn on. When you stop and think about it, three questions come up:
      1. SHOULD we classify abortion as murder?
      2. What would be the implications of doing so?
      3. Are there better ways to reduce abortions? (And I suppose a bonus question: how effective would outlawing abortion be at reducing abortion rates?)

      Now there’s a good discussion, in my opinion.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:46am

      @twobyfour

      I think you responded to the wrong thread, but…

      “Ba’al is so 2nd millennium BC… different entities are invoked today.”

      So your view is that all abortion doctors and pregnant women seeking abortion are invoking the names of demons of some sort before the procedure?

      I would still love to see a source on that.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 12:11pm

      Locked, I were not speaking about the “doctors”. They are just executioners in it for the dough. Though some may try to partake on the aspect I mentioned. It’s the facilitators/enablers that can make the claim, because it’s the volume making it worthwhile.

      Source? Can’t. I love my skin.

      Report this comment

      Twobyfour  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 12:25pm

      LOCKED

      OK gotcha. However, I don’t think that it’s fair to say they turn off their brains.
      Just because some people technically misuse the term murder, it doesn’t necessarily negate their argument or opinion. The technical term that should be used is homicide, but whether or not the correct term is used I am pretty sure that their position can still be understood with a little common sense. They believe, myself included, that abortion is wrong and should be illegal because individual human life starts at conception.

      I think the real question is: Does human life start at conception?
      If yes, then your questions 1 and 2 become no brainers, and the answer to question 3 starts with legally classifying abortion as murder.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 1:18pm

      @Cain13

      “Does human life start at conception?”

      Ah, but then we dive deeper! ;-)

      What constitutes human life? We know “life” doesn’t begin at conception; sperm and eggs are alive. We also know that a fetilized egg will never become a human without implantation. We also know that a large percentage (as many as half) of all implanted eggs spontaneously abort. So “life” itself is a very fragile concept in this time period. But assume everything goes well and the fertilized egg implants and stays.

      We then ask, “Well, when do we recognize that a zygote is equal to a baby?” The easy answer is obviously “at the moment of fertilization,” but almost no one realistically thinks this way (in a fire, would you save a crying baby or a petri dish of fertilized eggs?). The best answer I’ve heard is the spectrum argument: blue is not green, but at what point of the melding of colors does blue become green? As time goes on, the fetus is more “human.”

      I know the Bible’s answer is that harming a fetus desired by a woman should be punished, but falls far short of the penalty for murder (see: Exodus). We also know that miscarriage is allowed to be induced to test for adultery (see: Numbers). So even using the term “homicide,” while accurate, still gives the mistaken impression that biblically an unborn person is valued as much as a born person. That’s just how the Bible states it though, and obviously doesn’t apply to US law, which is secular.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 1:29pm

      @Twobyfour

      “Source? Can’t. I love my skin.”

      I think this is the part where we back away slowly, and then ask if you’ve been taking your medication.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 2:25pm

      LOCKED

      Exactly! This is the real core of the issue (at least in my opinion).
      As you can see, I was careful to clearly state “human life” because that is point is essential to the discussion. Like you said, sperm and eggs are “life” but not technically an individual human life.

      So I guess I would go back to what is accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community and medical professionals and check out the Human Life Cycle. Apparently it is generally accepted that the Human Life Cycle begins at fertilization of the egg and formation of the zygote. So if scientifically speaking, that is the when human life begins, I would think that our secular laws should reflect that.

      As far as the Bible goes, the punishment for causing a miscarriage does NOT fall short of the punishment for murder. If fact, it is the exact same punishment (Exodus 21:23 “life for a life”). The Bible seems to be pretty clear on that. So if anything, by biblical law, “homicide” would not be the correct term. As you said, it would be misleading. “Murder” would be the correct biblical term when it comes to abortion.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 3:58pm

      @Cain13

      “So if scientifically speaking, that is the when human life begins, I would think that our secular laws should reflect that. ”

      And that, good sir, is an excellent starting place to make a secular pro-life debate. I agree with you on your analysis, and find it much more convincing than “abortion is murder!!!”

      “If fact, it is the exact same punishment (Exodus 21:23 “life for a lifeâ€).”

      That’s actually the exact part that I’m referencing, although you’re skipping 21:22:
      “22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she has a miscarriage, but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life

      With “serious injury” commonly meaning “the woman dies.” Obviously some of the words are different in other translations; the KJV, for example, says “her fruit depart from her” instead of “miscarriage;” but it seems pretty obvious that a woman’s health and well-being is valued above that of the unborn, no?

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Mad Engineer
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 5:09pm

      @Locked,
      You have apparently locked everything except your desire to justify abortion into a time dark hole somewhere in your mind. I didn’t say that abortion doctors and “patients” pray to Ba’al (or Molech as the case maybe). Their religion is radical humanism that seeks to make man the highest source of authority…they have placed themselves above God, if they believe in God, and believe that they have the right to choose who lives and who dies. This is no different than the kings of Israel and Judah who either allowed child sacrifice or practiced it themselves, they were placing themselves above God. As I said before, the killing of someone is not the only option in either of these cases, so why are you running to a bullet as the first option? You are drawing a false parallel between the crazy gun shooters and abortion doctors. One is committing an act which society, through our elected officials, has condemned and one does not. Thus, in limited parameters, society has authorized me to use force for force to stop a shooter. In the case of the doctors, society has determined (incorrectly in my opinion) that they do not conduct a condemned act. As such, I do not have a mandate to “take the law into my one hands”. Committing murder to stop a abortion-murder does not make it any less murder. In this case, I am constrained to work to change the expression of society’s will in the law. I would suggest that you give up your fascination with murdering (cont. b

      Report this comment

      Mad Engineer  
    • Mad Engineer
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 5:20pm

      give up your fascination with murdering school shooters and abortion doctors. The core problem here is that we are becoming a society that does not value life and is about nothing more than self-gratification and exalting personal pleasure without responsibility.

      Report this comment

      Mad Engineer  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:18pm

      Haha, I was pulling your chain with that skin comment, Locked.

      Though not entirely. I was a low degree member of O.T.O, a long while ago. What they promised to you if you reveal any important info may have involved skinning, but disemboweling and consequent hanging that I remember clearly.

      But being a small fish, the info is dull and without much substance. I was curious, so befriended someone high up and he was feeding me verbotten bits, still, it was not stuff up to my alley, so I was not active after a while. But the really juicy stuff is only accessible to the last tier of 2-3 degrees. I think that as a concept, the principle I mentioned by me is accessible in public Crowley’s libers, so knock yourself out, but the actual how-to is only available to high degrees.

      Contrary to the commonly held beliefs, O.T.O. are not satanists (as far as I could research, they use name Baphomet as a ward against Jehovah Witnesses), but some satanists may be O.T.O. In any case, it is better to stay away from it.

      Report this comment

      Twobyfour  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:42pm

      I dug up the contract I signed up at my initiation.. so tongue cut out, eyes gouged out, skinned, disemboweled, and hung. E.g. if they wan you dead, they’d do it thoroughly, making damn sure. I suspect that in modern times, more “with times” methods may be used instead, “accidents” and “assisted suicides”.

      Report this comment

      Twobyfour  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 12:02am

      One more comment and I cease and desist. Why? Why did I become a member of O.T.O.?

      Simple. The chapter in my locality had an excessive amount of HB7-9 (hot babes, 10 is top of the scale) associated with it. They were simply scrumptious, too hard to pass.

      Report this comment

      Twobyfour  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 7:21am

      @Mad

      “One is committing an act which society, through our elected officials, has condemned and one does not. ”

      So its society’s approval that’s stopping you from using lethal force to stop murder?

      That’s… well, pretty obedient of you.

      “Committing murder to stop a abortion-murder does not make it any less murder.”

      But you would have done so to stop the Newtown shootings, would you not?

      Saying “banning abortion will stop abortion!!!” is as ridiculous as saying “banning guns will stop shootings!” Your position, whether you’ve realized it or not, is not only illogical, but self-defeating.

      Abortion is something that should be done away with. Why do abortions happen? Primarily, unwanted pregnancies. Instead of forcing unwanted pregnancies to happen, why not make sure every pregnancy is a wanted one, as near as possible?

      I can actually answer my own question with your quote:
      “The core problem here is that we are becoming a society that does not value life and is about nothing more than self-gratification and exalting personal pleasure without responsibility.”

      You’re not actually interested in stopping abortion. You’re interested in stopping what you see as self-gratification and exalting personal pleasure without responsibility. What does this translate to?

      You want to stop unmarried people from having sex (which is actually kind of odd, as about 1/3 of all US abortions are married women). It’s anti-abortion, not pro-life.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 28, 2013 at 9:23am

      LOCKED

      I know this super late but I wanted to respond to your comment on Exodus. I hope you end up reading this.

      I would urge you to take some time to study the original Hebrew text. It’s is clear that it never mentioned miscarriage. It’s translation is more appropriately “premature”, “to come out”, or even “birth”. Those verses are specifically address injury and/or death to the child. As far as the different translations are concerned, “miscarriage” is rarely used. The vast majority use the more appropriate translations of the Hebrew text. I would have to say that it is clear that the Bible considers the harm or death of a child in the womb just a serious as the harm or death of any other person.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:46pm

      @Cain13

      “I would have to say that it is clear that the Bible considers the harm or death of a child in the womb just a serious as the harm or death of any other person.”

      But it’s not; it specifically says that if all that happens is a premature birth (which is actually not a common translation at all; as said, most refer to the fetus “departing,” and this is taken to mean “miscarried” today), then you get fined. If the woman dies, you take a life for a life.

      This is backed up again in Numbers, where miscarriage is induced as a test for adultery.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • Cain13
      Posted on February 1, 2013 at 5:36pm

      LOCKED

      It is talking about injury or death to the unborn child and the mother, but the verse was written to specifically address unborn children. Verse 12 already establishes the punishment for killing someone that is already born. There would be no point in repeating the same thing only 10 verses later.

      In no definition of the Hebrew text is it said to mean miscarriage. Premature, to come out, untimely birth, to come forth, or even depart, none of these mean the death of the child. Miscarriage, by today’s standards, means the loss of life. There is no translation of that Hebrew text that even implies a death. It even ensures that there is no life lost by saying, “but there is no serious injury” or “If no further injury results” or “yet no mischief follow” or “but there is no harm”. Babies can depart from, come forth, or have an untimely birth and still be perfectly healthy. That is why the second part is there. It describes the penalties for any harm that may occur. On top of that, there is an exact Hebrew word for miscarriage/abortion.If that is what Moses wanted to say, he would have used to the word that actually meant that miscarriage or abortion.

      There are places in the Bible where child is used to describe a baby still in the mothers womb. This means that although they were unborn, they were still considered children. The penalty for killing a child is still death.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
  • Wilma
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:26am

    Obama’s words on Sandy Hook are used against him in the March for Life video. Let’s make this a viral video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opl0jnKbn5Y

    Report this comment

    Wilma  
    • Sil in CNY
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:04am

      I LOVE this! It so perfectly shows the hypocrisy of BO and his ilk…..

      Report this comment

      Sil in CNY  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 10:28am

      A fetus is not a baby.
      What’s your point.
      You make up a ‘fact’ then argue it.
      Check out the article on a Catholic hospital.

      Report this comment

      Verceofreason  
    • Cain13
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 11:28am

      VERSEOFREASON

      And a baby is not a teenager… or an adult…. or a senior….
      What’s your point?
      Having different titles for life stages doesn’t make a stage life any less human than the other stages.

      Report this comment

      Cain13  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 2:37pm

      VERCEOFREASON, The origin of the word FETUS is another word for BABY.

      Report this comment

      RJJinGadsden  
  • nickg2003
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:15am

    Let’s keep fighting the fight and teach our children what is evil and what is good. Soon they will become adults.

    Report this comment

    nickg2003  
    • 41mag
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:34am

      on the bright side if the pro choice people keep killing ther babies. Then one day our children will out number them.

      Report this comment

      41mag  
    • Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 4:23pm

      Abortion is good. Forcing women to bear children they don’t want and can’t care for is evil.

      Report this comment

      Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on January 26, 2013 at 1:32am

      Xylliab – If a woman doesn’t want to have a child, then she can keep legs closed or get her tubes tied. Problem solved. The baby shouldn’t have to be murdered b/c the woman chose to be irresponsible.

      Report this comment

      Git-R-Done  
  • DougHuffman
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:03am

    I certainly will not argue these as the only human rights in natural law, but I will accuse the natural rights community of not watching their six as the tyrants work to disarm them of the Life human, fetus and adult, and the right of self-defense. What, please, is the mechanism of the human-fetus defense of self?

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.(U. S. Declaration of Independence adopted 1776)â€

    Report this comment

    DougHuffman  
  • 41mag
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:43am

    I’am pro choice on carring guns and i don’t kill babies. The pro choice people kill babies, but are anti gun.Please explain that one to me.

    Report this comment

    41mag  
  • OldSurfRat
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:41am

    I’m not going to get in the middle of this subject because I will get called all kinds of names.

    However we have much bigger fish to fry at this time. I don’t like abortion but I think that will be a mooch point if we don’t get this ship turned around.
    Lets prioritize people or abortion will be the least of your worries.

    Yes abortion does take human life but no where near as many as tyranny.

    Report this comment

    OldSurfRat  
    • facilitiesmgr
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:35am

      The value and sanctity of life is a critical foundational point of our society. If one don’t get this right it’s easy to get off track on a myriad of other issues as well.

      Part of the problem we face in this country economically, along with a financially and morally incompetant boob of a president, is that we have killed 50 million+ people who the vast majority of would have been contributing to Social Security, built businesses, hired people, contributed as members of this society, etc.

      Abortion is a travesty and has taken the lives of as many people in the last 45 years since Roe v. Wade as there have been since Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, Idi Amin, etc. This is not a trivial matter.

      Report this comment

      facilitiesmgr  
    • soybomb315_II
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:43am

      abortion has to remain front and center, otherwise half of the republican party will not show up to vote. Of course, abortion can be solved through state action and congress – but they would rather keep it as a wedge issue

      Report this comment

      soybomb315_II  
    • OldSurfRat
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:55am

      Facil
      “This is not a trivial matter”
      Never said it was but neither is tyranny. Without freedom you will have zero say concerning abortion and may very well be mandated to have one (China).
      I think the cart is being put ahead of the horse and the left will play this quite well.

      Soy
      You are correct. Both sides will use abortion as a wedge but the left will win if we keep focused on abortion and not the most important thing “Freedom†and the Constitution.
      People that vote purly on abortion care nothing about freedom but care only about their belief.

      Report this comment

      OldSurfRat  
  • soybomb315_II
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:38am

    Last week, Beck said it was a bad idea for you to march at your state capitol. Wouldnt this be a bad idea as well?

    Here is another thing to consider
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/14292-congress-has-the-power-to-overturn-roe-v-wade

    Report this comment

    soybomb315_II  
    • DougHuffman
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 8:12am

      I suspect Beck thinks that he is more controversial/influential than he really is and seeks greater notoriety. I tried TV-Plus and when I had nibbled the bait to switch to switch to Basic it was snatched away. Beck has little to zero credibility with me, he’s a SLimbaugh wannabe.

      Report this comment

      DougHuffman  
  • 41mag
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:37am

    I’am pro choice on carring guns and i don’t kill babies. Pro choice on killing babies but anti guns. explain that to me.

    Report this comment

    41mag  
  • TJexcite
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:33am

    They can have 55 million people at the march and the Media will say 12 if they talk about it at all. The March should be in front of the media offices in both DC and NYC. Fill the street there will make them talk about it. When the crowd is so deep they can’t leave.

    Report this comment

    TJexcite  
  • Tri-ox
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:33am

    And, for those on the West Coast … The Ninth Annual ‘WALK for LIFE West Coast’ takes place tomorrow in downtown San Francisco.

    http://www.walkforlifewc.com/

    Report this comment

    Tri-ox  
  • biohazard23
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:30am

    Abortion = murder

    Report this comment

     
  • momrules
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:27am

    I will agree with previous posts, this is a PRO- Life march and God bless the people that will be there.

    At least one of the many pro-abortion/murder advocates admits she knows that it is a human life that is killed with abortion. I suspect that many, many more of them feel the same way she does. It is just easier for them to kill their unborn if they dehumanize him or her.

    The Blaze had the story yesterday but here is the link to the original Salon.com article. Spread this article to everyone you know.

    http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/

    Report this comment

    momrules  
  • TeaHeeHee
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:24am

    Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it a “right”. My rights come from God, the same God that has wept for every single one of the 50,000,000 children killed by abortion in the past 40 years.

    Report this comment

    TeaHeeHee  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:22am

    Good, its past time to bring the murder mill of abortion to an end. Over 55 million unborn have died and our nation is all the lesser for it.

    Abortion is murder, pure and simple.

    Report this comment

    Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • SamIamTwo
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:20am

    Pro live, anti abortion…seriously you quibble over that?

    Myself, I like the change up…pro live to a liberal means they can abort a child. Let’s get down to what it really is…baby killing. Pro life sounds like yesterdays soup. JIMHO

    Anti-abortion is closer to killing than pro life…the dems are always changing words to benefit themselves and their messed up agenda. But when one calls it something other than the traditional we get fluffed up…pffft.

    My prayers and thoughts are with those who are out there fighting the good fight and not quibbling over words…give me liberty or give me death…

    Report this comment

    SamIamTwo  
  • pma_guy
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:10am

    Billy Hallowell, it is called PROOOOO-Life….

    Report this comment

    pma_guy  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 9:06am

      But most people who describe themselves as pro-life are actually only anti-abortion. We know several things that will reduce abortion rates:
      - Free contraceptives
      - Comprehensive sex education
      - Assistance to low-income expecting mothers
      - Higher education for women (the higher your education rate, the lower the rate of abortion)

      But many conservatives are against most of these things. Fiscal conservatives like myself are against the government funding free contraceptives or extra assistance to expecting mothers; social conservatives are by-and-large against anything that teaches about sex or makes having sex less consequential (aka, would reduce the risks of sex before marriage).

      Hence, most of the pro-life movement is actually only anti-abortion. There are many ways to lower unwanted pregnancy rates, but the primary focus isn’t on that.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • deeberj
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 12:12pm

      LOCKED
      You say if we have this…
      - Free contraceptives
      - Comprehensive sex education
      - Assistance to low-income expecting mothers
      - Higher education for women (the higher your education rate, the lower the rate of abortion)
      Abortion will go down. We have this stuff already. Women can get free contraceptives if they can’t afford them, kids get sex ed in school, low income women have Medicaid, and any woman who wants to get a higher education can with Pell grants, other grants and loans.

      Report this comment

      deeberj  
    • Locked
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 1:27pm

      @Deeberj

      Compared to, say, most of the EU… the US is nowhere close in these categories. Hence why the EU in general has an abortion rate that is roughly a third of the US.

      Report this comment

      Locked  
    • valiant1776
      Posted on January 25, 2013 at 3:12pm

      A sound family structure and proper moral foundation will reduce promiscuity, lewdness and revelry. We need parents, not free pills.

      Report this comment

      valiant1776  
  • omniavincetamor
    Posted on January 25, 2013 at 7:07am

    Good Morning Blaze….How about changing the spin in this headline and throughout the article? ….These good folks are PRO LIFE…….And I say God Bless them for their prayerful march. A previous article on The Blaze “So What if Abortion Ends a Life….” used the term Pro-Choice. So….if you’re PRO LIFE you are labeled ANTI ABORTION by The Blaze…..but if you think it’s ok to kill babies, you’re Pro Choice……A baby is a life and not a choice!!! So, what side of LIFE are your writers on?????

    Report this comment

    omniavincetamor  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love