The roots of violence

Here's what it is in a nutshell, moral relativism and it even applies to the man who shot abortionist George Tiller to death. As I said at Kris's Elephant blog when you condone the killing of even late-term unborn babies you set up yet another exception to Thou Shalt Not Kill and then someone might decide the next exception is YOU, it's moral relativism turned on itself. Man as a rational creature (don't laugh) cannot choose evil for evil's sake, it has to be rationalized first as a good and in the case of violence the person doing the violence feels he is enforcing a moral code. Enforcement of a moral code is at the roots of modern-day violence and the person doing the killing feels the moral code being enforced is about absolute Right and Wrong. When Boston lawyer Tom Capano killed his lover Anne Marie Fahey who wanted to break it off with him he killed her and is now awaiting the death sentence (see the bestseller And Never Let Her Go by Ann Rule). Here's how he can more than live with himself and bide his time in prison, he believes in his heart of hearts she deserved her fate, by spurning him she was violating some type of moral code, a kind of absolute and universal code of we should be together forever and in the case of true sociopaths like Capano and O.J. Simpson it's not enough to believe in this moral code which many of us may believe in too but here's the difference. Most of us might accept the moral code of don't break my heart or it's wrong to kill unborn babies but in the mind of the socio this moral code needs to be enforced, it's a kind of karmic necessity, a cosmic balancing of the Scales of Justice so no matter that Tiller's killer believed in the absolute moral code of it's wrong to take the life of the unborn, he acted like a relativist for acting this out. You can't go there, it is what it is and only God can judge Tiller. For me anyway this is not debateable and one of my cardinal rules is once you throw up something for debate over time it will become morally defensible, we don't debate the pros and cons of rape for instance. Kind of a disturbing beginning of the week all around.

Send complaints to...

OK so Beth has weighed in on the murder of abortionist George Tiller and yes technically she is correct but I also agree with Daniel who posted there he thought Tiller was an evil man. The real issue is this: not the rare act of violence by an anti-abortionist but why are the late-term abortions that Tiller specialized in even legally allowed in this country? Killing Tiller, besides being wrong also has the consequence of making somebody into a martyr who doesn't deserve to be. You had to be a psycho to do the work he did for thirty long years which also begs the question of what kind of late-term patients these women were who sought his services in earnest. That the man apparently was a regular churchgoer boggles the mind and it's one reason I'm not overly keen on eulogies, many times they don't do justice to the character of a man. That the mainstream pro-choice movement never saw the necessity of ostracizing him at the least speaks volumes of THEM and that includes Obama's new Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius and so that's that.

I can't help it if I was born a Great White Male

Sonia Sotomayor, first nominated to a federal judgeship by none other than Bush the Sr. then on to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals covering NY, CT and VT. Said once that policy is made at the appeals level, said something else about me but whatever. She'll be confirmed, can't lose the Hispanic bloc but got to thinking last night about this thing called Borking. Now Robert Bork in his Slouching Towards Gomorrah comes out foursquare for censorship, feels free speech as envisioned by the Founding Fathers had to do with only speech that was political in nature and ya wanna know something? It was ugly and over-the-top but I'm glad the man wasn't confirmed. With me when you talk about Free Speech you touch a nerve, I might be all over the map on some other issues but here he got my dander up. It's not the Ron Pauls and the Michael Savages the Right needs to distance themselves from, you might not agree with what they have to say but God knows they'll defend your right to say it. Bork might look like a Christmas ornament but don't let that fool you, his philosophy is dangerous. That said allow me to digress on something the Gray-Haired Brother said over at Beth's Place the other day that got me to thinking. We talk about abortion too much for his taste but in my view liberalism with its reflexive support for legal abortion actually fosters and reinforces social irresponsibility. OK take the housewife who has an affair with the mailman while her husband is at the office, she gets pregnant and has an abortion, chances are he'll never find out about it. The Pro-Choicer, put it this way, a hitman is not the least bit interested in why somebody wants to get rid of somebody else, could be the color of his tie that's not his concern, just show me the money and then we go dark. The choicer does not care about the WHY you want to get an abortion, aborting the mailman's kid falls under the all-inclusive heading of reproductive rights, women's sexuality YADA YADA YADA while the Pro-Lifer and I'll plead guilty here sees a moral lesson for the woman in carrying the child to term. YES, the child if allowed to be born is a constant reminder of the original error in moral decision-making on the part of all the parties involved. Here's where in my gut I'm against Pro-Choice, take away not so much the scarlet letter, that's not where I'm coming from but take away the flesh and blood consequence of the act and all morality loses its moorings and becomes adrift at sea, do this do that do what your little heart desires. So how does this relate to Obama for that matter? Well as a liberal by taking that Pro-Choice position whether it's his intent or not (probably isn't) support for legalized abortion reinforces social irresponsibility, how could it be otherwise? just to know where my side is coming from OR to put it another way

you ain't livin' right.

I've always found Colin Powell mildy irritating

You don't hate him, he's more like that smug neighbor of yours with the slightest wisp of an arrogant self-confident air, he has a 'tude going and it ain't in your favor. He's morally superior, he knows it, you know it and the mailman knows it. In fact before forming an opinion he feels you need to consult him if only to tell you where you're wrong. You're on your porch happily puffing away on your fine $6.50 cigar that you bought at Mom's, it's not a celebratory cigar by any stretch since your life sucks but anyway he passes on the sidewalk, doesn't say anything, continues on his way to get something out of the trunk of his Hummer but was that just the hint of a pissy expression as he waved his hand away at that fine Honduran aroma, some kind of body gesture lingo about your habit? He's the more powerful version of the poor man's Kennedy and he's lecturing you on what's wrong with your party. It ain't moderate see? You need to grow yourself beyond your base and stop listening to the dictates of the right-wing element. Usually this pretty much ONLY means you object to fetal parts backing up the plumbing system of some abortion clinic although it could mean immigration and gun-control too but it MOSTLY refers to the A-word. He says Rush is an entertainer and the GOP needs another spokesman. I agree but not for the same reasons. It's not his conservatism just that the GOP needs someone besides some rich well-fed guy in a golf shirt with the little alligator logo puffing on an expensive cigar who lives in a mansion. Don't get me wrong, he can stay, he's more than welcome but him and Cheney? get real!! Anyway he still says he's a happy GOPer whatever that means. Col looks like some guy you'd work with, you tell him a joke and he doesn't smile and just walks away, you may as well have sneezed and he goes to Corey "is Aisle 8 all packed out yet?" You see him rapping with Chris Rock and he kinda smiles as Chris calls him a house nigger but YOU? you ain't cool, you're part of the problem, you're a social-con. Fact Condi kinda feels the same way about you......sorry the guy kinda just gets under my skin.

Obama's Notre Dame speech

Actually said something I agreed with which is unusual, said about abortion "in some sense the two sides are fundamentally irreconciliable." This was clever on his part, it had the subtle effect of making Obama look like a kind of disinterested observer of the issue, above it all looking at the debate from the outside, a professorial air being intellectually open to both sides despite his 100% rating from NARAL. Of course they all say they want to reduce the ole abortion rate and it's such a heart-wrenching decision for the woman. Of the second point I personally know of stories where the parties involved were unusually casual about it all and as to the first your average pro-choicer opposes such modest measures as informed-consent legislation so really it's just more pro-forma statements from a liberal president. Despite Clinton's safe, legal and rare it's not really about Choice at all but Abortion and the right to get one freely and without judgement from parents or other parties and to be fully subsidized by the American taxpayer if need be. Pro-forma statements are important though, it shows you have a heart and have properly wrestled with the issue even though your own views just accidentally, ever so coincidentally coincide with those of Kate Michaelman.

File this one under a false issue

According to last Thursday's PageSix Christopher Hitchens has written in his intro to the new book Certitude by Adam Begley and Edward Sorel:

"In my own lifetime I have seen a series of popes make public apologies to Jews (for the false charge of deicide and its consequences), to Protestants (for the Counter-Reformation), to Galileo to forcibly converted and exterminated South American Indians, to Eastern Orthodox Christians (for the massacres in the Balkans) and to Muslims (for the Crusades). One day if - just suppose - it is discovered that AIDS was a worse affliction than the condom, rather than the other way around, the necessary admission will have to be delayed for years by the fact there was once a sacred dogma involved."

Now I realize Hitch is a hard-drinking man and some of the hardcore stuff he is regulary accustomed to really make the grievances come out, about a week ago I had a couple of Rum and Pepsis and sank into some kind of weird depression and pretty much went over my shitlist and then some, hardly the mood to be in to waft off to a peaceful slumber but last I checked the Roman Catholic Church cannot by force of law forbid you from buying a Trojan or a Ramses. The thought occured if people don't listen to the Pope on the matter of abortion why would they over a piece of latex or lambskin? If one is going to cruise down the ole Hershey Highway with different males every week it's pretty much a given you haven't been following much of Church teaching lately anyway. As Oscar Wilde once said to be witty without being charming is an unpardonable mannerism of style. Hitch is from the Ann Coulter school of thought though from the other side, everyone you disagree with even the mailman who once casually threw your mail on the porch, nuke everything in sight, it's a psychic massacre and he's wallowing, going down the hallway and opening up the next door to the next poor shmuck who has pissed the guy off ("hey you [insert insulting witticism of choice]"). H-Block and his scorched earth policy, you accidentally bump into him one day and you know how someone's eyes are always darting up and down when they're first talking to you? they have an opinion, it ain't very relaxful to be around such people which finally brings me to the conclusion you can totally disagree with the Church on condoms and everything else under the sun and still think Hitchens is a dick:)

The real motive behind censorship and suppression

OR confronting people with an uncomfortable truth becomes a threat

To kind of cap things off then - some of my themes of late, the control issue and what's really behind it. The human urge to censor is a powerful one and really applies across the board, Right and Left have been equally guilty thoughout history but lately the Left have been the bad guys and the Right comes across now as more and more the champions of what liberals used to be about, freedom of thought and expression. No matter, people who practice censorship and suppression and it could be an individual, a group of individuals, a political group or movement or at its most pervasive and dangerous a government or the State, be it Right or Left they are threatened by something. People who tell you how to think or how you should think, over time if enough people think alike it becomes a form of political correctness and its sanctions for dealing with those who think outside the box are a kind of form of mind control else why the need to punish those who think differently and view things in their own sometimes unique ways? The whole Political Correctness Movement is threatened by something, the free use of your mind and its awesome power and in this respect it's more than an annoyance or a nuisance, it's a form of evil and I'm applying this in a general sense not to particular individuals. The mind represents freedom of thought and inquiry so those attackers of the Miss USA runnerup Carrie Prejean let's say, they are not only offended by what she's saying relating to traditional marriage but they are threatened by the mere thought she may be right. Many many years ago I offered to buy some pro-life videos for libraries here in Westchester County NY, should've been a done deal since freedom of thought and expression is the very foundation of their existence according to them but the sheer resistance I encountered in my own county from liberal librarians and pro-abortion groups prove to me they were threatened by something, threatened by IDEAS since the films in question were merely informational in nature, popping a movie into your VCR is not the same as banning abortion but because Z doesn't give up my persistence paid off over time and the county library system agreed to carry one of the films and the Westchester Coalition for Legal Abortion was allowed to get theirs in too. Geez was that so hard? The nature of the enemy is US, we're the threat but then again if THEY'RE so threatened by us then it means we have some power, the power of our minds and the ability to express that which they hate so really when you stop to think about it us conservatives shouldn't be so down in the dumps of late. If you get put on a list you're important, consider it a compliment and the sheer force of our ideas will prevail over time. The Death of Conservatism? not by a long shot!!

So why doesn't this work in reverse?

Liberal Supreme Court justice David Souter is retiring and returning home to New Hampshire because unlike Arlen Specter he has a life. Now consider some of the Supremes nominated by conservative presidents over the years who for some strange reason later evolved into liberals: Nixon got Harry Blackmun on the court and we all know what he did, Reagan gave us Sandra Day O'Connor and Bush the Sr. gave us Souter who usually voted with the liberal wing. So what Z is asking today is how come a liberal president never nominates someone to the court who later turns out to be a staunch conservative and a real pain in the ass to people with a liberal agenda? I'd bet dollars to doughnuts Obama is not gonna put up someone who later is going to "accidentally" overturn Roe vs. Wade so is it because the liberal vetting process is better? do conservative judges leave more of a paper trail? are they more vocal in their views? or does just saying Judge Q or W is good because he only interprets the Constitution and nothing more really mean anything these days? geez EVERY potential Supreme Court nominee is gonna say that. I'm in a wondering kind of mood today.

The fetal conundrum

People especially liberals often assume if you take the pro-life position that they can guess with a rather high degree of accuracy your position on other issues, some pro-choice whiners at Danny's place a few months back assumed quite naturally that I was for the war in Iraq but for me I take each issue as it comes. A theme has emerged at my blog of late and that is I don't apply social conservatism across the board. I'm on the record, on porn and prostitution I am very libertarian and with gay marriage I have no problem with the federalist approach although you'd have to put a gun to my head to attend the gay nuptials ("ok I'm getting dressed just let me find my tie"). BUT abortion is different my friends and that's because it's very very unique from the three big issues I just mentioned. Those have a personal element of distaste for so many by their very nature, my God just think Eliot Spitezer in nothing but his black socks but these issues generally do not involve the taking of an innocent human life (ok, generally speaking). For the average liberal though he glumps them all together into some kind of collective trauma of keeping the government out of our lives, actually out of our sexual lives because he does care very very much if you smoke or use an aerosol can. For the liberal with a conscience abortion is resolved this way: from a biological perspective he or she readily admits it's a human life, he's very personally against it as he's always fond of saying but because that human life resides for a time within a woman's body it ipso facto becomes a feminist issue, a women's rights issue not so much because of the nature of the fetus as he has pretty much figured this out by now but by the sit'chayshen. He or she can't get it out of his damn head that because the home of the fetus is the womb that the homeowner as property owner can do as she likes, it's nothing personal. She might see the fetus as an intruder although truth be told she answered the door when the penis rang. I'm a bad person because I only see the human life, I ain't sophisticated like Bill Moyers you know? I just know how to spit chickens.

Conservatives out of sorts

First off we have to put a checkmark in Obama's corner. He gave the order for the use of force last Friday to free Captain Richard Phillips from those Somali pirates. He gets a kudo or two in my book but somehow Jimmy Carter would've f****d it up.

The Winter of our Conservative Discontent - Beth has had it with liberals, you can't change their minds she says but before we go there we gotta look at our own camp. IMO the fiscal conservatives (FCs) want to take over the Party and purge us social conservatives (SCs) from the ranks. OK, maybe not soapie and Patrick M but the ones who pull the strings do. The FCs don't just want to stop moralizing about things like abortion, rather they want to moralize or mainstream abortion so as to talk about other more important things. Now as I blogged recently when you take the social issues off the table there is less and less that bonds us FCs and SCs together - economic policy, military campaigns and overall patriotism is basically what you're left with, kind of a thin gruel like eating the same thing everyday. Here's where the FCs are wrong though. I'm an idealist not just about politics but Life in general, even if our politics were correct Life could still suck. Put another way you need spirituality, conservatism has to be about moral values too. One of the SCs' focus is doing the right thing, the FCs would add nothing wrong with that but such right choices need to be freely made in an environment of maximum freedom. Whatever, we could have the right economic policies tomorrow, ultimate victory in Iraq and all the rest and still have the usual laundry list of social ills, divorce, abortion, drug abuse etc. In short how can you be a conservative and not talk about spirituality, about moral values? Social conservatism is about preserving traditions, not about saying psychedelics are good for you, that's libertarianism. So before I can respond to Beth's points we need to define what conservatism means, what does it really stand for? with so many strains of conservatism today it's hard at times to know exactly what it is we're fighting for and conversely before we take on liberalism we have to know what that stands for too, what precisely are they fighting for on their side?

Isn't that just a pro-forma statement?

I originally was just gonna post this comment in my last thread about liberals but wanted to draw more attention to it. When a reporter put the stem cell question to President Obama in his last press conference he said he has wrestled with stem cells just like he has wrestled with abortion. Is this really true though or how do we know it's true? It's what I call a pro-forma statement or saying what's required as a societal or cultural consensus is forming or has actually coalesced around a controversial issue. Now the abortion debate has been evolving lo these past going on four decades now. Maude's daughter once said it was just like getting a tooth pulled but those were the early years, the consensus now is that the act itself does have a certain gravitas to it thus the pro-forma statement BUT let's say someone has really really wrestled with the issue as Obama has said he's done, on the whole list of sub-issues important to both sides wouldn't the wrestler come down sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other? Put another way you have two columns, the official NARAL positions and the official NRTL positions so wouldn't our wrestling Commander-in-Chief have checkmarks in different columns going all the way down the list? "Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned?" NO "Parental notification" YES "Should we have what are known as informed-consent laws?" YES "Parental consent" NO See what I'm saying? BUT Obama has a 100% approval rating on issues of concern to the abortion lobby. Brilliant? I thought it was.

What is the next big news story?

I was thinking of a transformative and positive event that transcends politics, that when everybody went in to work the next day they'd be a little less consumed by the daily grind and go "how about that?" An end to abortion? doubt it, there's seems to be a kink in our culture right now, seems we have to have a little Hoover action from time to time, we could have a thousand methods of birth control tomorrow, wouldn't matter, I don't get it. The cure for cancer? 'twould be nice, we're about due as I keep saying but somehow it never seems to come. World peace? in what lifetime? The capture of OBL? Bush should've wrapped this up and no Mark Levin Fan, this is not some liberal talking point. Abolishing the IRS? that's self-evident but the continued existence of the IRS is why we only have two major political parties and they both remain in power. Madonna becomes a nun? she's back to swinging from the trees again.

Obama as the nation's first African-American president? Many, even a majority might go with this as being the transformative and positive event I'm talking about. Even many conservatives would go along with this, I call this the Peggy Noonan School of Thought, no matter he's a liberal who's sinking our country deeper into debt the important thing is that it happened, mull this over with your brandy at night and get that happy feeling, that mentally orgasmic reverie but for me and Beth and soapie it doesn't satisfy, it's formula food and doesn't fulfill, it doesn't sit in your gut and give you that contented feeling. As a blogger I need to sink my teeth into something. Porkulus, an important but dry subject and I can't blog about Obama for the next four years, it's too depressing and you get that feeling of putting your heart and soul into a blog but where's the influence? where's that Jon Stewart pull? that "did you hear what Z-man just said?" It has to get worse before it gets better as they say. Beth taking a sabbatical from her blogging and yes it is a sabbatical is perfectly understandable, if Nancy Pelosi doesn't follow her own Pope what does that make us?

The culture's in a rut these days. Movies suck although some people feel they still have to go. Pop music, it ain't exactly the '80s and even a recent "House" had an episode about a guy who grows pot in his apartment and got sick from some rat piss, at least FRINGE knows to take a break every once in a while. You'd be surprised at the number of 40-something men seriously browsing through comic book stores, porn is so yesterday. There's no talent out there, people don't know how to make the workplace jazzy and interesting anymore, we're all into our 9-5 little gulags. Come on guys, give us the Big Story!!

& what if those cures never come?

I hadn't even planned on blogging about this today but Savage was so eloquent and insightful last night it inspired me. Yeah Savage is known for an extreme view every now and then (nobody ever seems to define this term "extreme") but I enjoy the show anyway and the biggie topic yesterday was Obama taking pen in hand (yet again) and signing an executive order lifting the ban on taxpayer funding of human embryonic stem-cell research. OK, so 'twas to be expected and so far Obama's report card has a big fat red L on top saying he's a liberal and so where to begin?

ALL the approaches from the scientific to the philosophical to the mathematical which I recently contributed in a blog point overwhelmingly in the direction that human life begins at conception. Faith talks about ensoulment but I don't think that's relevant here, after all if we hold a newborn may not get a soul until two weeks later we don't normally then sanction infanticide. You did not come from an embryo, you once were that embryo, so says this branch of philosophy concerned primarily with the nature of existence. Mathematically we have what Dr. Bernard Nathanson calls the vector of life at work, cells dividing at a rapid pace and forming organs etc., a velocity and direction at work, a force and magnitude and again the vector obviously begins at conception. It's a canard to say we don't know when life begins and will probably never know, that's not the issue anymore although many pretend it is but that's for psychology. The long and the short of it is as one pro-lifer put it after yesterday's signing "this president places very little value on the life of the unborn." You wonder though, yeah I know Obama's official political position is one of Pro-Choice but when he looks into the eyes of his daughters Sasha and Malia at night how can he not question his own stance or is he that hardboiled on the issue? Anti-socialism unites us conservatives far more than the social issues (ka-ching ka-ching) but for me the larger concern may be how extreme will Obama be on abortion? The media might pretend FOCA doesn't exist but I know an awful lot of folks who are concerned. As Savage said yesterday Obama is beginning to pay back one of his biggest constituencies, the abortion racket in this country. Some people might consider this out-of-the-box talk but I was never a fan of the box anyway.

In one ear and out the other

Pope dresses down Nancy Pelosi on abortion.

If it's not the social issues what unites us as conservatives?

Is it the theme of less government? The fiscal conservatives (FC's) would say no, if anything they're the true conservatives. With my heavy abortion blogging a few months ago to my more recent drug tangent it's become apparent we're not all on the same page. Throw in gay marriage and I would hazard a guess too that they don't get all that bent out of shape if a sex shop opens next door to a church and a playground which segues nicely into

economic policy? Well if this is all there is that's kind of thin gruel. Most conservatives favor lower taxes but what about those of us who favor no income tax at all? I almost said "and less spending" but true to form when they get into office even they throw the money around. OK, so the libertarian position of no income taxation to the more mainstream conservative view of lower taxes, well that's a bit of a ravine but we can still wave comfortably to each other from each side of the bridge. So does it all revolve around the dinars? Then there's

military excursions. Surprisingly I would've expected more diversity here, when those phantom WMD's in Iraq failed to materialize I would've expected conservatives to debate more the loss of life there, we're not pacifists by any stretch but remaking the Middle East? OK, Pat Buchanan had a problem with this but he's Pat Buchanan, the rest of us referred to it as Bush-bashing.

$$$$$$ and War.....hmmmmm.....and oh yes, Alec Baldwin is a dick.

Take social issues off the table and what do we have? Are there still common threads? Do we still have A common thread? I don't quite have the answer anymore but I don't think liberals debate what liberalism means to them, if they're not always on the same page at least they're reading the same book.

Should the penny become obsolete?

What I used to do with all those coins collected down through the years, mostly pennies, is wrap 'em up in those coin folders and take 'em to the bank. Now that's too tedious a chore so nowadays I just give 'em away in dribs and drabs to various charities. Ronald McDonald House for instance although even here you'd like to put more coins in the slot but you'd be holding up the line. Now as a pro-lifer giving to charity in any form ties in with helping the born, no I can't explain it but what is a penny's true worth these days? are they worth having around? I used to collect those older wheatstalk pennies or wheaties as we called them but they're not really worth anything so why bother? Even your average Indian head you may find in your backyard ain't worth snot even after you've given it a good vinegar bath. Wanna stimulate the economy get rid of the penny.

The Stimulus Bill. So how does spending millions of dollars to fight STDs help boost our economy? STDs are a public health issue plain and simple, not unimportant by any stretch and money needs to be spent in this area but as part of a stimulus package to get our economy back on track? I can't figure it and all these proposed millions for side isses dear to liberals they ain't gonna help us get out from under. Some skank down the block wants an IUD, how does that put food on my table? Malkin just wrote a column detailing how if the stimulus bill gets passed in its current form it'll mean a real windfall for ACORN, can it get any more depressing? Obama has called this the "era of responsibility" so how's this for sacrifice? let's all turn our pennies in, I'm tired of the little copper buggers.

The case might be made...

...that divorce is more damaging to the social fabric than abortion in this sense. Abortion imo effects our views on things like the sanctity of human life and it's safe to say it's pretty polarizing but with divorce it's, you know, put it this way, conservatives get divorced probably at roughly the same rate as liberals. Most folks might say it's

a bad thing

but I lost track, Rush might soon be nipping at Larry King's heels in this dept. You can make the case that divorce is more damaging to the social fabric because by its very nature it's more insidious than abortion, it's subtle though but far more folks rationalize it than abortion, there are many people who'd sooner see a divorce lawyer than be a party to an abortion. A word on the gay marriage. Advocates most often bring up how does legalizing gay marriage pose a threat to hetero-marriage but they're missing the mark imo. It doesn't of course but what we are talking about is our cultural preferences being democratically written into our laws at least until recently before the Judiciary became the supreme branch of government. I still remember my history class at Mt. St. Michael in the Bronx and right there in black and white it said there are three, count 'em three, co-equal branches of government - the judicial charged with interpreting our laws, the executive charged with enforcing our laws and the legislative branch whose job is to make those laws.

You might even make the case that divorce is a more sensitive issue than abortion since so many conservatives partake going all the way back to Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman. IMO it's as bad a social trend as abortion so if I've ruffled any feathers you can send any complaints to.....Beth, lol.

It ain't Merry Christmas but it'll do

Instead of starting a blog about quasars or the Gaza Strip or wallpaper or God forbid Happy Holidays and having it turn into some pro-abortion cistern of bad feeling I wanted to say something about my fellow Social Conservatives here. I don't see them poking their noses into people's lives. They live by broad social conservative principles, let's say they don't have sex outside of marriage and this covers a lot of ground I never heard of a group of them conducting surveys in their local neighborhoods on your sexual habits. The chances are very very good indeed they don't know anything about what Bob or Collins are doing or what Myself is up to (if anything, I think they talk big and wouldn't surprise me if one is 18 and blogging in his basement when he needs to be cleaning his room). In my neck of the woods I have absolutely no idea who's had or been a party to an abortion and I don't see myself trying to find out. Honestly I don't think conservatives as a rule conduct sex surveys at all, wasn't it Kinsey and Masters & Johnson who wanted to know what we were all up to? I always thought the man in the M&J team looked like that guy in Phantasm with the killer ball which brings to mind what one young wag once said on the Phil Donahue show: "how come most sex therapists look like you wouldn't want to have sex with them?" Dr. Ruth may be a veritable fount of sexual knowledge but let's pretty much keep it on an intellectual level. So besides social conservatives having a broad set of philosophical and moral principles they live by or at least try to (nothing wrong with having goals) I don't see how they're poking their nose into People's Business. I'm hearing a lot of talk of late but not much backing up. Now watch this blog get a big fat goose egg for comments and I'll start a blog about stamp collecting and everybody will unload. Fair Warning though, if you want to be an asshole and post about abortion on a totally non-abortion related topic I'm gonna delete your ass as in permanently.

Before I blog about OTHER things

some final thoughts on the issue (for now). Reading through the latest rantings of the choicers it's become fairly obvious to me at least that the issue of when human life begins is not a part of their moral calculus. No this is not being uncivil just an analysis on my part and so for them the value of choice trumps the value of life, in other words it is vastly more important to exercise your liberty in the form of choice even if that choice may involve the snuffing out of a nascent human life. For the RTLers life of course is the overriding concern and it is this very stark simplicity that most offends the choice crowd. They seem to revel in ambiguity and moral ambivalence, to say the issue is complex is to show one's mental sophistication and to oversimplify the issue in their view shows the mind of a social Neanderthal. Theirs is the intellect and ours is the narrow mind even after a lifetime of thinking to yourself you happen in the end to come to the pro-life conclusion. Abortion will for the foreseeable future be a tremendously polarizing issue simply because for the choicers it is factors other than pure reason that decides the issue for them (e.g. the woman's financial straits, is she really in love with him? can they make a go of it? etc).

Now there are some choicers, they may be in the minority, but you can say they're pro-life in the latter stages of the pregnancy and so if they don't find fault with the pro-life position here why is it problematic in the beginning unless to provide the woman with some sort of "window of opportunity"? So with these people you might say choice is not the overriding principle or it is at least tempered with other considerations. The abortion lobby and Obama's 100% rating from them is unique in being so outside the mainstream by adopting the mantra of choice throughout the pregnancy or most of it so why should fiscal conservatives adopt the same position at least in terms of the political strategy of never talking about the issue (but I'm repeating myself here ain't I)?

A final thought, speaking totally candidly here for the moment I honestly don't respect their position so why should I expect them to respect mine? As Joe once said abortion is a non-compromisable issue and I would add once an issue, any issue becomes debateable at least in terms of its underlying philosophical concepts it's only a matter of time before the act in question becomes morally approveable, we don't discuss the pros and cons of rape after all. For me civility means you're polite to other people as human beings although you can take issue with their positions. We're talking over each other as is often said because we adhere to different philosophical principles, for me I can't imagine believing the fetus is a member of the human species and then advocate for its destruction or at least the liberty to do so, the value of choice loses its luster for me at that moment. Post what you will but try to address the points (I know I know, I'm a comedian).

They doth protest too much

Daniel has made the decision to moderate the commenters over at his blog and has closed off his most recent pro-life thread "An End to Abortion." I can understand his decision so I will address those commenters like collins directly right here. I was discussing this with someone yesterday and she said people have abortions and they do this and they do that and no wonder everyone's so unhappy these days. I don't know anything about these people's personal lives nor care to but I think what drives alot of heat on the pro-choice side these days, the almost exorcistic rantings is guilt, they doth protest too much, it's personal Beth. As the woman I was talking to said "imagine you did something like this, how would you feel?" I also sense that some of the bloggers at Daniel's and elsewhere may be working for the abortion lobby, the lines are straight out of the Planned Parenthood playbook. With the notable exception of Erik who is genuinely pro-choice in my book Bob, Myself, TR and the rest of the gang reek of pro-abortionism which is their right of course but they're not really honest about it. Mention religion and they go into some kind of epileptic seizure thing, it's amazing those well into adulthood can still talk this way and it's indeed very tempting to make a personal judgement against them and the rest of the pro-abortion movement but I'll refrain, as they say it ain't Christian. None of my points were addressed AT ALL and if you said you'd pray for them they'd get even more unhinged. Also, regarding this issue and others like it civility is overrated, needed of course and you should try but a civil presentation of your views will not convince them, they're really not looking for a better tone although they may say so, they really hate you. If anything I think pro-lifers have been way too civil for way too long and should kind of man up about it and jab back if need be. It's been too often said imo that debates about abortion give off more heat than light, I say so be it it's not the light they're after anyway. And btw when you're a guest at somebody's house and have to use the facilities flush after you're done and wipe the rim, put the seat back down and leave it as you came in, you're a guest after all. Tell the owner you had a nice meal and a good time and go home. So that's that.