I am the woman in this ad. My mother was a victim of rape, and I am the result of it. I have lived my life not being embarassed about this fact, nor do I feel that I am any lesser of a citizen or person than anyone else. Do you disagree? Because of the circumstances of my conception, are you of the opinion that I deserved the death penalty? Please take this into consideration when you proudly proclaim that abortion is the obligatory solution for women who have already suffered the violence of rape. The additional violence of taking the lives of those in the same situation as I was does not erase or lessen the original violent act… it simply demeans the woman already suffering from a crime of our culture. Peace begins in the womb.

Comment by Zooey — February 15, 2008 @ 12:32 p

It’s a great day that the Creator has given us, isn’t Zooey?

Typical assholierthanthou attitude.
If there’s anyone who knows this attitude … it’s you Zooey.

Your argument is totally bogus, since there are no accurate statistics for the number of abortions BEFORE it was legal.

First, it’s not bitblt’s argument. It’s quoted from a link with a reference to a study.
Second, believe the point Zooey is criticizing was based on data after abortion became legal.

On the question of accuracy of statistics before abortion became legal you do make a good point. In fact the linked reference talks about the accuracy of the number of deaths caused by illegal abortions before abortion because legal.

Before RvW it was commonly said that illegal abortions caused 10,000-20,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. These estimates were used to justify making abortion legal.

Apparently the originators of this estimate have “fessed” up to real origin of these numbers.
These abortion advocates made the estimates up.

Now the best estimates on numbers of death from illegal abortion before RvW is 500 – 1000 per years.

This sort of suggest the question, “Would a country destroy 1,400,000 unborn a year to save 1000 women a year?”

So, yes the stats on pre RvW abortions are sketchy at best.

Link in post
Comment by bitblt — February 15, 2008 @ 9:43 am
has references.

You and upright left need to learn to mind your own business.

This statement strikes bitblt with a particularly strong sense of irony. It’s the same sense of irony that bitblt feels when one anonymous poster calls another anonymous poster a name.

An anonymous poster on an anonymous blog tells another anonymous poster to mind their own business.
I mean, like, why bother?

Perhaps Zooey should start using third person if this discussion is so bothersome.

You are correct. But for most there are ways to avoid having to go through the worst parts of life.

Since Zooey didn’t take well to this remark, does it mean that she thinks there’s no way to avoid the worst parts of life?

Are women condemned to suffer simply because they’re women?
Thought the, “Anatomy is destiny,” argument had be discredited.

It is bitblt opinion that the most advantageous situation for any woman is in a marriage with a husband who cares about her emotional, physical, and spiritual wellbeing. bitblt understands that this is idealist but sees it as the only “fix” and as the best advice.

Comment by Zooey — February 15, 2008 @ 12:32 pm

My original comments weren’t directed to you. You addressed me. You are free to express your opinions, but no one is allowed to challenge them, especially when the conclusion makes you uncomfortable. Sorry, I had forgotten that unwritten TP rule. ;)

My comments didn’t invovle issues of faith. I simply pointed out the hypocrisy of referring to an unwanted pregnancy as a clump of cells while a baby/fetus of the same gestational age that is wanted has worth and somehow becomes “the baby” or “our baby” rather than the fetus or a clump of cells no different than a tumor. Zooey and dbadass were willing to acknowledge, like you, that it’s a difficult decision. That, at least, is something. And I’m not advocating that abortion be outlawed. I accept that it is and will continue to be legal. I just fail to see how those who think abortion is ok can explain how the one baby/fetus is valued and the other is unworthy. If one truly believes that the aborted fetus is nothing but a clump of cells, how can the same person then celebrate the life of the wanted baby/fetus, talk about “the baby” moving and kicking and grieve for it in case of a miscarriage. I know several on this site have ridiculed the idea that women grieve after abortions.
The Savage remark was rather harsh. ;)

No, it’s not any of bitblt’s business, but this is an anonymous blog and nanlichi is an anonymous handle.

Posters neither know where nanlichi is, who nanlichi is, or if nanlichi is who he says he is. nanlichi could be lying.

You might try posting your comments as nanlichi’s comments.

nanlichi did bring up his experience in having made several decisions in this area without bitblt’s prying questions.

But, sincere thanks for the answer. bitblt is not going to attack anyone for their previous decisions.

Exactly.

Typical assholierthanthou attitude.

Your argument is totally bogus, since there are no accurate statistics for the number of abortions BEFORE it was legal.

You and upright left need to learn to mind your own business.

Not that it’s any of your business dickhead, but I am a compassionate person and a good giver of advice when it is asked. Friends of mine, and recently a friend of my college age sons have asked for my help in the decision.

The ask part is key, you might want to write that part down.

Comment by nanlichi — February 15, 2008 @ 11:34 am

Why has nanlichi you “been party to that decision more than once,” more that once?

Most of the people I know are Christians and we have some good discussions about faith and/or absence of faith. My best hunting buddy is an evangelical Christian. And I understand the dislike of abortion. I have been party to that decision more than once, and it’s always painful and never casual. In every case that the decision was made to abort the blastula, it was the right one.

I don’t advocate burning the churches and shooting the ones that get out, but when a person uses their faith based positions to intrude in other’s decisions then I will push back.

btblt might want to STFU. Nanlichi would say that not all Xians should be killed, that would be extreme. Nanlichi would say that Jesus freaks that want to jam their faith in other’s lives should not be given any quarter.

Comment by nanlichi — February 15, 2008 @ 11:12 am

nanlichi appears to be wanting to “jam” his faith, or his lack of faith, into bitblt’s life without any second thought – as if this is some sort of right he has but bitblt doesn’t.

Isn’t this hypocritical on nanlichi’s part?

Or, is it the case that people who don’t believe anything can never be accused of being hypocritical because nothing is expected of them anyway.

Lefty version of Michael Savage. ;)

As for abortion itself, lots of things in this country need to change to make the whole choice for abortion a moot point. I believe a lot of these things will change in the next 10-20 years socially, politically, and technologically. At that point there will be no need for abortions and that’s when Roe v Wade will be overturned. Hopefully it’ll be the last time government interferes with the rights of individuals in either direction. Government has no place in this argument, only needing to enforce the law that abortion, except for preserving the life of the mother, is murder. Having any other position on this matter other than the above is lying to oneself.

Comment by nanlichi — February 15, 2008 @ 10:09 am

If any has wondered, as bitblt has, what small, insidious steps lead a society to adopt religious persecution, you might want to pay attention to this post.

bitblt will be adding it to his, “Were there possible signs this was coming?” list.

Poster nanlichi has advocated killing Christians..

Comment by nanlichi — February 15, 2008 @ 10:09 am

There is a way to deal with this situation that I believe you’ve overlooked. It’s as obvious as the off/on switch on your radio.

You don’t want to read about controversial topics, don’t read about them. (Paraphrasing Comment by nanlichi — February 14, 2008 @ 6:28 pm)
nanlichi doesn’t want to read contrary viewpoints, he shouldn’t read them. nanlichi doesn’t want to read bitblt’s posts, he shouldn’t read them.

What could be simpler?

Perhaps nanlichi would be much happier not reading bitblt’s posts.

Why should society bear the responsibility of putting up with pious pricks?

Senator Henry’s amendment proposed on Jan30. Link is the same as above.

Amendment No. 9 to SJR0127
Henry
Signature of Sponsor
AMEND Senate Joint Resolution No. 127*
By adding the following language at the end of the first resolving clause immediately after the
language “abortion.”:

The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators
to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, where the pregnancy has
occurred from rape or incest, or where the life of the mother is threatened, or in any
other circumstance.

The knee jerk on this thread was unbelievable.