Abortion vs. guns in South Dakota

baby
In South Dakota a law was recently enacted where women seeking abortions would have a 3 day waiting period before getting the procedure done. Of course the pro-abortion crowd has an issue with this.

However I have to ask how this is any different from the 48 hour waiting period needed to purchase a handgun in South Dakota?

While I’m not a fan of guns purchasing a gun does not guarantee someone’s death. An abortion does.

Panties in wads over Super Bowl commercial

CBS Urged To Drop Tebows’ Super Bowl Ad:

A collective of Women’s groups have their collective panties in a bunch over an ad that is set to air on CBS during the Super Bowl.

The ad is about Pam Tebow who on a mission trip to the Philippines became ill and was recommended by doctors to terminate her pregnancy at that time. Mrs. Tebow chose to keep the baby and eventually gave birth to two-time national champion Florida quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow.

Tim Tebow himself has handled the situation with class…

“I know some people won’t agree with it, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe,” Tebow said. “I’ve always been very convicted of it (his views on abortion) because that’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman. So any way that I could help, I would do it.”

The women’s groups are afraid that this will convey a pro-life message. So what if it does? There’s a word for people who want to silence the opinions of their opponents. It just escapes me at the moment. If you don’t want to hear a pro-life message then don’t watch the ad. It really is that simple. If you want your own ad pony up the money to get it played during the Super Bowl.

Not to mention this is one of the problems I have with abortion. If Pam Tebow terminated her pregnancy we would not have had one of the greatest collegiate athletes of all time, even though I’m not a fan. For each abortion that is committed you could be preventing the world from the person who goes on to cure cancer. But no, you’d rather deprive someone of that opportunity just because it doesn’t fit into your lifestyle.

The ultimate act of selfishness.

Boy’s Mom Sentenced For Signing Teen’s Abortion Papers

Link

This is how disposable life has become in our society.

44-year-old Cindi Cook was sentenced to one year behind bars for forcing her son’s 16-year-old girlfriend into having an abortion because it would “interfere with his college plans”.

Cook posed as the girl’s mother in order to sign for parental consent.

I’m guessing personal responsibility isn’t a strong trait in the Cook family.

A suggestion for abortion protesters

Anti-abortion protest targets Absecon clinic:

This is how an abortion protest/rally should be run…

Standing abreast on the parking lot of a nearby real estate office adjoining the wooded office park, nine Catholic laymembers, many clasping rosaries, repeatedly recited the “Hail Mary” prayer.

Patients leaving Sackstein’s office ignored the group, who shouted, “We’re praying for you,” or alternatively, “Jesus loves you. We love you.”

Most of the group broke up shortly after being interviewed, after protesting for about two hours.

Got that? That means no signs with pictures of aborted fetuses, no name calling, no spitting, and especially no violence. You make the rest of us who oppose abortions look like assclowns.

T-Shirt of Death II

Thanks to DeoDuce for bringing this to my attention…

From the creators of the “I had an abortion” t-shirt comes the new…

“Kiss me. I’m Pro-Choice.” T-Shirt.

The people at Planned Parenthood are once again responsible for this travesty of a t-shirt.

The aforementioned DeoDuce put it best…

Why doesn’t it just read “F*** me without any hesitations, I’m Pro-Choice”?

I couldn’t agree more.

Planned Parenthood. Helping would be parents shirk responsibility for decades.

Quandry

Antiabortion Activist on Trial in D.C.:

I don’t agree with this guy’s methods but it does bring up an interesting question.

So anyway this anti-abortion protester by the name of Jeff White, was arrested at a demonstration for producing an actual human fetus inside a glass jar suspended in what the comPost calls a clear liquid, probably formaldehyde. What is interesting is that he was arrested for keeping and exposing a dead body or body part. This could set an interesting precedent. If a “fetus” is considered a dead body then wouldn’t that automatically make abortion murder. If it’s considered merely a body part then shouldn’t the pro-death crowd be fighting for his release? Especially since abortion rights advocates have said that a fetus is nothing more than a cluster of cells and is not a human being. Yep, just a clump of cells that have arms, legs, eyes, and can feel pain.

Link via BOTW.

The Least Culpable

You know, I didn’t think yesterday’s entry about juvenile executions would garner so much discussion. And while I was doing some further investigation I came across a message board that I frequently lurk at where someone posed an interesting question that how come that for the most part how come anti-death penalty people are usually pro-abortion? That’s a great topic for discussion but I want to take it one step further. Since the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles can’t be executed shouldn’t that also outlaw abortion? I mean what is an abortion except the execution of the most juvenile of beings? Except the unborn children don’t have the luxury of a trial. Their only crime is being the product of irresponsible parents. Aren’t unborn children the “least culpable” of all beings? So what the “Supreme” Court is saying that the life of a violent criminal is more important than that of an unborn child. That’s just pathetic.

Men Have Rights Too

Men, keep quiet on abortion:

(Log in info) This is an opinion piece in my local paper the Charlotte Observer. It’s written by a woman, Avis O. Gachet, who is a book dealer in Hickory, NC. Her opinion is that men have no right to weigh in on the abortion debate because we don’t give birth. May I say to Ms. Gachet how incredibly sexist I think that is. Men take place in half the creation process so why shouldn’t we have half the say?

Let me tell you a story that I haven’t told you in many years. About 11 years ago a girl whom I had just broken up with told me she was pregnant and that it was mine. Which I don’t doubt. We were using protection but, as the left doesn’t like anyone to point out, no protection is 100% foolproof. She told me not to worry because it was an ectopic pregnancy. At that time I was ignorant in such matters. She told me that she just needs to have a simple procedure to have it removed and that it wasn’t really a baby. Lie #1. She told me that she had scheduled her procedure and then had to reschedule. Lie #2 because I found out later that with ectopic pregnancies they take you into surgery on an emergency basis. So as it turns out she was legitimately pregnant and had an abortion behind my back. She never asked me if I wanted to keep the baby. It was never an option for me. At the time I had been with the same company for 7 years so I had a steady job with decent income and great health benefits. I would have been more than willing to provide for my child. Again, I was never given the option. I was not abusive towards her. I have never been abusive towards any woman. She just didn’t want to have a baby but again I, the father of the child, had no say in the matter. I was willing to be solely financially responsible but that “choice” was taken out of my hands. So Ms. Gachet not only is your opinion that men should have no say is not only sexist it’s incredibly arrogant. You come off sounding like the stereotypical angry feminist who thinks that all men are irresponsible pigs whose only goal is to impregnate as many women as possible and avoid all the responsibilities.

I also have to take you to task for some of your reasoning in your article. In your article you state…

Did I ever face a demanding husband who wanted unprotected sex when we could not provide for one child, much less six or seven — or maybe 13? No. Did I have to deal with a damaged pregnancy with the long-term prospect of an ongoing caretaker role for which I was inadequate? I did not. Was I a victim of my father’s incestuous behavior — perhaps when I was 12? No. Was I battered in pregnancy because my drunken husband found me an unattractive sex partner? No, I was not.

You act like every unwanted pregnancy is due to some kind of unwarranted sexual attack. You’re almost saying that a woman is too good to allow herself to get pregnant if she doesn’t want to. If that was the case we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. And when you say “did you have to deal with a damaged pregnancy with the long-term prospect of an ongoing caretaker role for which you were inadequate?” smacks of eugenics. First of all what do you consider a “damaged” pregnancy? You make it sound like it can only be the husband’s fault for unprotected sex. To coin a very cliched phrase it does in fact take two to tango. Does a woman not bear any responsibility for an “unwanted” pregnancy? You also talk about not being able to financially provide for a child. So by your logic if I can’t afford to take care of a loved one that is an invalid I should just have them killed?

Another quote I take issue with is this…

Should legal abortion be left up to the individual states? No. A battered, impoverished wife should not have to fly to Wyoming because her home state would not allow her to terminate a flawed pregnancy. These are the United States, after all.

While I can sympathize with the plight of battered women as I have witnessed it firsthand your argument is flawed at best. So what you’re saying is if a woman is battered and poor she should terminate the pregnancy even if the pregnancy is viable? Not to mention that even if certain states were to outlaw abortion I think that your example of the battered wife would be an extreme minority of the cases crossing state lines. The majority of those who would cross state lines would be those looking to kill their unborn children as a matter of convenience which is the ultimate act of irresponsibility.

Many want to eliminate birth control — except by self-control and voodoo. If you doubt that, just ask them.

My that’s a broad generalization. I have no desire to have birth control eliminated but again it has to be said that the only true way to prevent pregnancy that doesn’t involve any act of killing is to simply not have sex.

The zealots attack the clinics and demonize everyone whose views are not their own, often using outrageous language and illegal tactics.

Isn’t that what you’re doing right now?

Throughout you’re entire diatribe you neglect to mention the alternative to abortion that benefits everyone. Adoption. So many people are out there for whatever reason can’t conceive their own children and would love to give a newborn child a home. Yet you feel like it’s almost an obligation for women to kill their unborn child. And this isn’t coming from some kind of religious standpoint either. It’s coming from the viewpoint of an adoptee who is grateful that I’m older than Roe v. Wade.

I feel sorry for you that you have such a wanton disregard for life and such a blatant prejudice against men, religion, and adoption. I’ll pray for you.

40 Million Dead

Democrats consider new tack on abortion:

(Log in info) Lazy blogging time for me again. This is an opinion piece from Cal Thomas who hits the nail on the head with the Democrats’ position on abortion…

In a Dec. 23 New York Times story headlined “Democrats Weigh De-emphasizing Abortion as an Issue,” several prominent Democrats suggest their party should at least open its doors to abortion opponents and make abortion less central in future party campaigns.

Some party leaders said Democrats might embrace at least one restriction, such as parental notification before a minor girl can get an abortion. Donna Brazile, who managed Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign, said, “Even I have trouble explaining to my family that we are not about killing babies.”

Maybe the reason she is having trouble is because that is precisely what is happening. More than 40 million children have been killed legally in America since the Supreme Court imposed Roe vs. Wade on the nation 32 years ago next month.

Democrats seem unconcerned that so many discarded members of the human family are not with us. These were 40 million taxpayers for new Democrat programs; at least 20 million women, some of whom might have become feminists and Democrat voters; 40 million people, one of whom might have discovered a cure for cancer or other dread diseases; 40 million once regarded as “inconvenient,” but surely not if they would have been allowed to be born; 40 million branches of family trees who will, themselves, never bear fruit and whose lines have been cut off.

Comments by Democrats trying to get back into the “moral issues” game are revealing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, said Republicans had “been successful at painting the view of the pro-choice movement as abortion on demand — and nothing can be farther from the truth.” Perhaps the senator might wish to explain her voting record, which to a fair reader might prove abortion on demand is precisely what she favors.

Feinstein voted no on a criminal penalty for harming an unborn fetus during a crime (March 2004), voted no on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life (March 2003, October 1999) and voted no on maintaining the ban on military abortions (June 2000). Feinstein was recommended by the liberal Emily’s List of pro-choice women (April 2001). She received a 100 percent rating by NARAL, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, for her pro-choice voting record (December 2003).

If the public perceives that the Democratic Party favors abortion on demand, it is because of senators (and many other Democrats in Congress) like Dianne Feinstein who have not done anything to curtail abortion.

There is only one reason to restrict abortion and that is because what is being killed is a human being. Any other “reason” seeks to invoke a moral standard one has just denied.

Indeed.

God, I’m lazy.