Sunday, February 19, 2012

Supervillain Sunday! Foster Freeze vs Abortion Man!




"It's Rick Santorum's misfortune that his main moneybags has a name that sounds like a Batman villain." 

Yesterday we were treated to another of Jersey's wretched and vulgar outbursts.


Most of it is incoherent and unprintable, but I will provide a few counterpoints.

Jersey ignorantly blurted...
"In fact, until the mid-19th century, most of you Cafeteria Christian Conservatives didn't believe that. And not until the mid-20th century did it become a focal issue for the right wing Protestants among you."
Wrong-O, angry and intolerant one.  I refer you to The Didache, a first century Christian document written by men who knew Christ...
Chapter 2. The Second Commandment: Grave Sin Forbidden. And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born.  (Didache)
You can disagree with the teachings, but it's authenticity is universally accepted by historians.

Jersey continued with some more gay bathhouse profanity, then closed by defending abortion as legitimate because "abortion has been around for at least all of recorded history."  Well, so has murder and theft, so I can't imagine what his point could have been...

Selective Outrage on the Left

It's Rick Santorum's misfortune that his main campaign moneybags has a name that sounds like a Batman villain.  Foster Friess had the temerity to tell women who didn't want to get pregnant to keep their knees together and liberals everywhere collapsed into hysteric vapors.

This is the same left that...

... Gleefully mocks and dehumanizes conservative women, from Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter to Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin, to include cheering when liberal men make "jokes" about them that include their children and the prospect of them being raped

... lionized lady-killer Ted Kennedy and his fellow carouser and serial sexual-harasser Christopher Dodd.

... batted not an eye when Bill Clinton abused his power by seducing a star-struck, barely-legal intern into performing sexual favors on him in the oval office

Illiberal, Intolerant Left

And the left dares to sling charges of hypocrisy? Not living up to one’s beliefs? Has anyone checked out the “tolerant,” “diverse,” and pro-choice” left’s illiberal, intolerant gang rape of the Komen foundation for making the choice to not hand free money to abortionists at Planned Parenthood ? It was the very antipathy of true classical liberalism.

Yeah, they're pro-choice, so long as they are the ones choosing what the rest of us will pay for:
In a society that thinks itself free, how dare the government force employers to provide health insurance? How dare it mandate that coverage include contraception—or any particular service? How dare it mandate that any coverage be free? (It can’t really be free; the coverage necessarily reduces employees’ cash wages.) How can contraception use be insurable when it is a chosen act, not the kind of low-probability, high-cost event that insurance was designed to protect against? (Obama’s Big Government Mandates)
So yeah, get your freak on, but do it on your own damned dime.

* - If you had fun today, tune in tomorrow.  This was just a warm-up...

Other fun links:
Birth Control Yes, Government Control No
The Audacity of Power
Explaining Conflicting Poll Data
Commerce is the Culture War
Birth Control Mandate: Unconstitutional and Illegal
Careful what you wish for

48 comments:

Always On Watch said...

I'm not sure that this is accurate, but I'd like to find out. Excerpt:

...[A]bortions, sterilizations and contraception will be paid for in your monthly ObamaCare invoice. Thus the term Abortion Premium Mandate. It will be a separate fee or expense that you will write a check for....If I understand this correctly, we can equate this to our phone bill....

Will it be an itemized bill, then?

Always On Watch said...

Jersey said:

"In fact, until the mid-19th century, most of you Cafeteria Christian Conservatives didn't believe that. And not until the mid-20th century did it become a focal issue for the right wing Protestants among you."

In my own observation, the topic of abortion wasn't talked about nearly as much until legalizing abortion began. It did take some time to get Roe v. Wade to court.

Yes, abortion has been around "forever." And the wealthiest managed to get safe abortions long before abortion became legal.

BTW, we are going to see many more abortions -- now that earlier testing for genetic defects is becoming available. This new testing is becoming (or has possibly already become) available.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Since Abortions are legal, women should be able to get them on demand...

And please Foster Freiss, Billionaire Scion of the Patriarchy and a firm member :( of the 1% is just doing what rich old white men have always done. Tell the world how things are going to be.

Anonymous said...

"...And not until the mid-20th century did it become a focal issue for the right wing Protestants among you."

Think that might have something to do with the fact that up until then they were illegal in most places, and an unconscionable act to most people?

viburnum

Ducky's here said...

You can disagree with the teachings, but it's authenticity is universally accepted by historians.

----

Universally? How would you know?
Anytime someone starts in on "universal" historic truths it's time to get out your bullshit meters.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Gene: Since Abortions are legal, women should be able to get them on demand...

As long as others are not forced to pay for them...

Silverfiddle said...

Whatever Ducky. Careless word on my part. The document itself is not in dispute, and that's my point.

Ducky's here said...

... Gleefully mocks and dehumanizes conservative women, from Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter to Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin

-------------
Mock them because they are women or because they are four of the dumbest demented commentators on the scene today?

Is Palin mocked any more than a male manure spreader like Beck or Gasbag Limbaugh?

Ducky's here said...

Silverfiddle. you are aware that Aristotle considered an early abortion not to be the taking of life.

The debate has been with us for some time.

Me? Opinionated? said...

Silverfiddle said...

@ Gene: Since Abortions are legal, women should be able to get them on demand...

As long as others are not forced to pay for them...


Hits the nail right on the heard!

Bunkerville said...

Looks like the GOP took the bait, and it will no doubt doom us. Apparently the issue is too comples to understand the real issue, and Santorum is happily marching right into it with his overbearing approach that will doom his candidancy. Stick with the issue of libery and stay away from the preaching GOP if you want to win,

Shaw Kenawe said...

"...left’s illiberal, intolerant gang rape of the Komen foundation..."

So SF compares a group of people protesting what they believed was an unfair action by SGK Foundation to a gang rape? Seriously, dude, you need to get hold of yourself and understand that a protest does not equal a rape.

When the Catholic clergy took to their pulpits a week or so ago and loudly protested the contraception coverage section of the ACA, which was changed so that the RCC wouldn't be forced to participate, would that be a "gang rape" by the conservative RCC clergy?

Oops! How illiberal of me to have used the words "rape" and "RCC clergy" in the same sentence.

Ducky's here said...

Silverfiddle, I was forced to pay for your expensive cab ride back to base when your vehicle broke down in Afghanistan. Now, I didn't approve of your being there or your useless mission but that's the way things go in a society.

We become part of things we don't approve of and possibly effect political change to resolve them.

The fact that you or Mark don't approve of abortion means NOTHING. The procedure is legal, it's covered in insurance policies and that's that.

I:'m sick of paying for penis pills for the Republicans because we know they don't have the freaking sack to get it up but we all compromise.

Me? Opinionated? said...

Once again we see the Dynamic Duo Ducky and Shaw giving us their wisdom. Their opinions has been a great inspiration. Though hypocritical as usual. I will be sure to recommend it to my friends.

Silverfiddle said...

The debate has been with us for some time.

Indeed it has, so it is not a settled issue.

You make a great collectivist argument, Ducky. Throw all our rights and money into a government pot and let the progressive overlords of the state dole them back out.

Less collectivism, not more, is the answer.

What our government spends our tax money on is related but not analogous. It is a separate and distinct issue from the government telling you to directly pay for something for me. Nice try.

Silverfiddle said...

Shaw: Your pedantic literalism is tiring. I can't help it if you are hyperbole-challenged.

Anonymous said...

...you are aware that Aristotle considered an early abortion not to be the taking of life.


A Google search of the topic will reveal that both Aristotle and Plato have been extensively cherry picked to support arguments on both sides of the issue. However philosophies are not made of sound bites, and no fair reading of the 'Ethics' would allow one to conclude that Aristotle could see the deaths of millions as "seeking that which is good".

viburnum

Shaw Kenawe said...

SF,

Whatever.

Finntann said...

"Now, I didn't approve of your being there or your useless mission but that's the way things go in a society."

Except one is an enumerated power and the other isn't.

"The procedure is legal, it's covered in insurance policies and that's that."

Neither the legality or coverage is at issue. No one is calling for the banning of birth control and no one is calling for banning insurance coverage of it, perfect example of dezinformatsiya.

The issue is whether or not the federal government has the authority to mandate it.

"I:'m sick of paying for penis pills (sic)"

Agreed, has the government madated that insurer's provide it? Otherwise it is another non sequitur.

Cheers!

Cheers!

Mark Adams said...

"I was forced to pay for your expensive cab ride back to base when your vehicle broke down in Afghanistan. Now, I didn't approve of your being there or your useless mission but that's the way things go in a society."
Wow, Ducky. I am sure SF approves of his efforts to protecting your sorry ass and your right to spew such dribble.

Hugh Farnham said...

To people like you and I, Silver, the ancient sources which have withstood the test of time have great weight. Quoting the Didache to Jersey was a 20 kiloton love bomb.

To bad he didn't feel it.

To liberals, any source first must meet the criteria of being "non-biased" (which really means "non-conservative"). Then the information can enter their tightly shuttered minds.

Quoting the Church fathers doesn't meet this criteria. So you need to find a liberal or communist who, in a rare moment of clarity, said what you need to open their minds.

For example, in dealing with anti-self defense and anti-gun nuts:

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." Sigmund Freud

"Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice." Mahatma Gandhi

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." The Dalai Lama, 2001

And here's another Gandhi quote for Jersey: "Anger and intolerance are the twin enemies of correct understanding."

Anonymous said...

Fiinntann,

Isn't equating Abortion with Birth Control [IF that's what you've done -- I can't be sure, but it sounds that way] a little too similar to equating to equating the seeping Invasion of Illegal Aliens from south of the border with Legitimate Immigration?

The Marxist-Liberal-Progressive elements have made a career out of reversing or confusing the meaning of terms long in use with their willfully perverse "interpretations" of truth.

You know in the mythical country of Liberalia black is white, up is down, right is wrong, truth is falsehood, bad is good, good is bad, degeneracy is something to honor and celebrate, virtue is passé, honor is a quaint, outmoded concept, loyalty is "square," goodness is a bore, and water will not make you wet, ETC.

We're so steeped in these false perceptions, even we conservative-libertarians have absorbed too much of it unconsciously and go along with it unthinkingly.

Either words have meanings -- or they can mean anything we feel like they ought to mean subjectively.

The former makes sense, the latter surely leads to the madness of incoherence and incomprehensibility. The anything goes approach to linguistics, if left unchecked, would ultimately destroy language altogether placing s back in Square One where grunts, groans, yips, barks, howls, growls and "Body English" return as our primary means of communication.

Regards,

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

You've piqued my curiosity:

How in HELL did "they" perform "abortions" before the age of modern surgery? Abortion is after all a SURGICAL procedure.

Witches' Potions to kill nascent life maybe? Lethal douches? Post-coital vacuum pumps?

It may be an unsavory subject, but the science -- or lack thereof -- attendant on it is fascinating.

HOW did they DO it?

Anybody know?

~ FreeThinke

Hugh Farnham said...

It may be an unsavory subject, but the science -- or lack thereof -- attendant on it is fascinating.

HOW did they DO it?


I can handle this one. Yes, they have had abortion since the dawn of time. Church fathers described how Roman women used abortificants (poisons) to induce abortions.

The Romans didn't stop with a third trimester abortion, either. They did fourth, fifth, and beyond abortions as well - as in leaving a newborn out to die if it was too inconvenient.

Jersey: what trimester are you in? 180th? Just kidding.

Anonymous said...

As for ancient wisdom handed down by Church Fathers or other sages, it is -- and always should be -- susceptible to questioning, reinterpretation and possible revision.

This does not mean, however, that it ought to be categorically dismissed by supercilious modern Smart Alecs without being given due consideration.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

...HOW did they DO it?

By and large by resorting to herbs and fungi know to produce spontaneous abortions. Ergot, a fungal disease on rye, for instance.

Incidentally, the active ingredient, ergotomine, is what they were trying to synthesize when then created LSD

viburnum

Anonymous said...

One wonders what effect these poisons must have had on the pregnant women, Hugh?

I must have been right in thinking these methods were non-surgical before the age of the sterilized D&C.

Infanticide is not abortion, but once the latter has been rendered thoroughly uncontroversial by liberal activism, the Marxicrats will soon be thumping their little tubs and shouting slogans in favor of legalizing -- and enthusiastically promoting -- the former.

You can bet the farm on that.

~ FreeThinke

Finntann said...

FT, I wasn't aware I was equating abortion with birth control, but honestly the issue, although Jersey and Ducky would have you believe otherwise, is neither.

They want to make it about abortion and birth control because it is a liberal touchpoint issue and distracts from the matter at hand.

If they can get left and right all riled up over 'birth control' they presume you will overlook the real issue, the government power grab.

It's amazing how they successfully manage to talk out of both sides of their faces at the same time. Saying it is about a woman's right to access to healthcare, yet at the same time claiming that 98% of Catholic women do it.

Honestly, if 98% of Catholic women use it... doesn't that necessarily imply that access isn't an issue? For certainly they aren't implying that Catholic doctrine is such an effective lifestyle choice that all Catholic women are wealthy and can afford it.

They accuse us of trying to paint everything black and white, yet they are the ones standing their with brushes in their hands, as illustrated by Gene:

Since Abortions are legal, women should be able to get them on demand...

Gee, by that logic Einstein, breast implants are legal too!

The current argument is not about the legality of Abortions, it is not about the legality of birth control, IT IS ABOUT WHO IS PAYING FOR IT AND WHETHER OR NOT GOVERNMENT HAS AUTHORITY TO DICTATE WHO PAYS FOR IT.

Hugh Farnham said...

One wonders what effect these poisons must have had on the pregnant women, Hugh?

Human nature never changes. I would imagine the psychological damage to Roman women would be the same as to modern women.

Depression, anxiety, fear, and a great unhappiness for liquidating a child. There are many parallels you can draw between modern women and Roman wives.

What I was attempting to do is conflate abortion with infanticide, which in my view is a matter of timing - the act remains horrendous.

The difference in today's society between abortion and infanticide? One happens in private with comforting background music and someone officially sanctioned by the State, the latter with flashing police lights, evidence bags, yellow crime scene tape, and a perp in the back of a cruiser in cuffs.

Anonymous said...

"...IT IS ABOUT... WHETHER OR NOT GOVERNMENT HAS AUTHORITY TO DICTATE WHO PAYS FOR IT".

"As usurpation is the exercise of power which another has a right to, so tyranny is the exercise of power beyond right, which nobody can have a right to." John Locke

What we're dealing with in this instance is clearly an attempt at both.

Viburnum

Ducky's here said...

Not exactly, the issue seems to be whether or not the government can demand coverage, any coverage.

The religious argument is smoke but Obummer is certainly putting it to masterful use.

Seeing L'il Ricky Retardo rise on this issue makes you wonder if Obummer didn't plan this all along. The idea of this giving L'il Ricky traction must have The Black Bush laughing his arse off.

Ducky's here said...

@Finntann - They want to make it about abortion and birth control because it is a liberal touchpoint issue and distracts from the matter at hand.

--------

I won't speak for ersey but myself. I really don't support the edict.

However, I do support everyone jumping on the L'il Ricky Retardo bandwagon letting that demented ass munch deliver the coup de grace to the retarded tea party.

The Black Bush is a brilliant politician who saw this as an opportunity to rev up a very frustrated base and make the opposition simultaneously support a politically unelectable ass wipe.

Z said...

Hugh: You said "as in leaving a newborn out to die if it was too inconvenient."
That's reminiscent of Mr. Obama's history of voting four times in the Illinois Senate not to save the life of a baby who survived an abortion attempt. Everything old is new again.

Anonymous said...

I think almost all of us non-liberals agree that WHATEVER issue on which the left chooses to express "concern," and focus the harsh glare of its searchlight, the TRUE motivation behind the subject is to find yet-another excuse for WRESTING more POWER from the PEOPLE, and CEDING it to CENTRAL COMMAND and CONTROL.

It doesn't matter whether the issue is the Health and Safety of Workers, Civil Rights for Negroes, Reparations for Victim Groups, Women's Rights, Bilingualism or Multilingualism for Unassimilable Foreigners in Our Midst, Universal Healthcare, Public Safety -- you name it -- ALL these "causes" -- and I mean ALL these causes -- have been USED to further the aim of turning our once-free society into a TOTALITARIAN state run by ELITISTS.

[NOTE: For once I am in complete agreement with you, Finntann.;-]

~ FT

Anonymous said...

To carry the argument to a reductio ad absurdum:

In the ostensible interests of conserving the water supply the left would gleefully mandate the creation of a National Bureau of Bathroom and Comfort Station Affairs where doubtless the necessary equipment would be manufactured, set up and supervised to make certain only the GOVERNMENT had the power to flush each of the nation's toilets and turn each of the nation's taps at designated times deemed "In the Best Interests of the Public Good" each day.

The option to defy Central Command would be eliminated, because all relevant equipment would be owned and operated by the State at the State's discretion.

YOU would have NOTHING to say about it, even if you and your wife and your eight children were suddenly infected with a severe case of infectious diarrhea.

STATE CONTROL SANS RECOURSE is The Name of the Game.

Disbelieve that at your peril.

~ FreeThinke

Finntann said...

Did you read the 'Other fun links' Ducky? Specifically "Careful what you wish for"?

And I quote:

"Imagine, as Jonah does, that Rick Santorum is elected president and becomes the reincarnation of Cotton Mather".

As both parties drift left and right to extremes while sharing only statism as common ground the vast bloc of us in the middle are left unserviced, unrepresented, and left picking between the lesser of two evils.

Cheers!

Always On Watch said...

FT,
STATE CONTROL SANS RECOURSE is The Name of the Game.

Exactly so.

If the state can mandate payment for abortions, then the state can mandate the abortions themselves.

The slippery slope -- and we're halfway down now.

I remember when people were advocating ONLY THE LEGALIZED ACCESS to safe, medical abortions during the first trimester. Now look where we are!

Anonymous said...

CONUNDRUM

The Marxicrats want all our money
Christicrats to say whom to call, "Honey."

Both factions would have us be slaves
From our cradles right on to our graves

To a form of ideology
That denies our right to be free.

Neither a Nannycrat or a Theocrat
Can tell ME where to be at

And so
EACH party has become our foe.

The lust for Power and Control
Is careening now on a roll.

Oh how I yearn
To know where I should turn!


~ FreeThinke

Ducky's here said...

Not likely Finntann, independents simply are not going to vote for a religious freak.

His candidacy would draw votes to the Dems in Congressional races.

Jersey McJones said...

Silver,

The theological underpinnings of the Pro-Life movement are substantial. There's no arguing that. In fact, you could theoretically bring back stoning, polygamy, slavery, child and spousal abuse, dietary law, and all sorts of other fun things, all with perfectly substantive theological underpinnings.

You lunatic.

The freedom to have a safe, early, responsible, legal, regulated elective abortion, like any other serious medical procedure, seems like a fair and consistent application of cultural norms as viewed over the course of human history to today. That's just reality. You can't argue that. You can't actually study history, or even just look around you today, and argue that.

You can wiki or Google or whatever you want, just because religious texts sometimes forbid certain behaviors, people behave in those ways anyway, and abortion has been a ubiquitous behavior for millennium.

When you read the books, when you study the subject, when you meet and work and live among people from all over the world, you can not come away with a different perspective on this. That is why you Pro-Lifers are a tiny minority in the developed world. You have more in common, on this subject, with the most backwards and regressive regimes on the planet.

Abortion must be a serious personal issue. I couldn't imagine having to deal with such a decision. The last thing I'd want or need, if I were faced with such a decision, is the imposition of the opinion of a minority of people who hold what I consider wacky views on the subject, and a whole slew of wacky views on top of that.

Why are you such a statist, Silver?

Come out from under the Religious Right Rabble Rousing Rhetorical Rock! ;)

JMJ

Silverfiddle said...

Well Jersey, you've changed your argument since yesterday. Glad you've admitted you were wrong.

I was not using the Didache to argue against abortion, but to point out to you that you were wrong in saying abortion used to be ok with Christians. That document, among other writings, proved you wrong.

Your "cultural norms" argument is weak and tautologous (because people do it, it's ok for people to do it), but I get your point.

Abortion is a private matter, and if people had kept it private we wouldn't be debating it, now would we?

Anonymous said...

Just TWO questions for Pro-Abortion crowd:

1. Exactly WHAT HAPPENS -- in scientific terms -- when the SPERM hits the EGG?

2. Could there ever be an occasion when tERMINATING the LIFE of a fellow HUMAN BEING is justifiable?

Not trick questions. Please answer.

Oh and a THIRD question:

WHY do you believe that close adherence to the explicit tenets of one's faith makes one a "religious fanatic" -- a "zealot" -- a "bigot" -- or a "nut?"

~ FreeThinke

dmarks said...

FT asked: "2. Could there ever be an occasion when tERMINATING the LIFE of a fellow HUMAN BEING is justifiable?"

I quickly named it. Self defense.

Jack laughed at this. But yet again he thinks abortion is good if the father is guilty of a certain type of crime, or if there is consanguinuity. A bizarre zense of justice there.

Right Wing Theocrat said...

"Well, so has murder and theft, so I can't imagine what his point could have been."

Maybe he was trying to justify murder as well.

Simple Observer said...

Please stop forcing the truth that abortion on demand is not a woman's right, but moreso a convenient way to act like a whore and get away with it, no strings attached.

Until Planned parenthood and the baby-killing Democrats can statistically prove that the majority of their 'services' are directly the result of rape/incest, that emotion card has no strength.

Liberal women want to be sexual sperm donation stations for their latest flavor-of-the-month boyfriends, and abortion is the best contraceptive they know about, seeing how taxpayers won't give them the morning-after pills for free.

I weep for this Nation.

Teresa said...

Excellent post, Silverfiddle!

Anonymous said...

A certain Arabian womb
Was used to nurture a bomb.
The thoughts of the mother
Never would bother
To stop this mad rush to the tomb.

Surely it would have been better
For this overzealous go-getter
To have had an abortion
Thus reducing a portion
Of Sharia observed to the letter?


~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Simple,

Women have been "acting like whores" for countless centuries without resorting to abortion for the privilege.

There are plenty of others ways to avoid pregnancy and still have a fabulous time fornicating to your heart's content.

Take a gander at the Kama Sutra, if you don't believe me.

~ FT