meh. not a bad article, much, much better than some.

Wouldn’t it just be easier if we lived in Saudi Arabia where strict Wahhabism made issues like this clear? Next election. let’s appoint a fascist religious leader to solve all our problems. Who’s with me?

Kyle’s mental contortions notwithstanding, there is no moral equivalence between innocent infants and guilty death row inmates.

Moreover, it is perfectly consistent to applaud both anti-infanticide Christian protestors AND our brave American soldiers who liberated millions of innocent Iraqis from Saddam’s genocides, Qusay’s torture chambers, Uday’s rape rooms and al-Qaedists mass murderers.

American “progressivism” has, as a core “value”, what they like to call a “pro-choice” agenda. But, what are the roots of this agenda? What was the original intent? Is the intent and the outcome substantially different today?

Margaret Sanger created the institution which would become Planned Parenthood. Margaret Sanger was an avowed Socialist. Nazi was an acronym for “National Socialist German Workers Party.”

Margaret Sanger was an overt, outspoken, rabid racist who openly advocated for (quoting my previous observation) “a purely racist form of negative Eugenics.” Margaret Sanger favored forced sterilization as a means to her racist ends.

Margaret Sanger, who favored forced sterilization as a means of pursuing her rabidly racist eugenics agenda, was actually opposed to abortion (proving, I suppose, that she had some vestigial concept of morality). Sanger quoted herself in her 1938 autobiography to have said:

“abortion was the wrong way— no matter how early it was performed it was taking life”

Okay, it is historically and objectively undeniable that the original agenda of the individual who founded what would become Planned Parenthood was both deplorable and remarkably similar to the agenda of the Nazi Fascists. But, what about today?

FACT: Black babies, today, are about 3 times more likely to be aborted than white babies. Okay, facts are facts. But, are the above FACTS mere happenstance?

FACT: Approximately 80% of Planned Parenthood clinics (where abortions are performed) are located in minority neighborhoods. Why? To “serve” minority communities? Or, to decimate them? ALL adherents of Eugenics earnestly believe they are doing both their targets and humanity at large a big favor by providing their Eugenic “service.”

See also “Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning” http://liberalfascism.nationalreview.com/

This from the same unrepentant asshat who applauded the terrorists’ “right” to kill American soldiers. http://badgerherald.com/oped/2007/09/25/iraqiinsurgentshav.php

Why does Wisconsin academia discredit itself by continuing to give this Marxist extremist a stage to climb up on his hind legs and howl these refried, preachy, “progressive” missives?

I am not a “right-wing Christian fundamentalist.” I oppose the UW-Madison sponsorship of late-term abortions. You don’t have to be religious, right-wing, or conservative to see a baby born at 22 weeks go from premature natal care to survival, to High School, and on to success in life. Or, to see a baby at 22 weeks be surgically dismembered and aborted by UW-Madison professors. In the first case you call the baby a premature infant and fight for her survival. It the other case you call the baby a fetus and end her life.

“Depending on the method, the fetus may be poisoned, burned or crushed. Often, the fetus will come out of the uterus still alive, forcing the doctor to finish it off on an operating table.” Kyle, what are you on about? These don’t describe any of the second-trimester abortion procedures (D&E, hysterotomy, or rarely, instillation, and in life-threatening emergencies, ID&X). I’m usually behind most everything you have to say but it looks like you got taken in by some propaganda sites. You also forgot to mention that pain is imperceptible until myelinization at ~26 weeks.

“Forcing the doctor to finish it off on the operating table”? Once it’s out, it’s called a baby and should be treated as such. I’d like to see a cite that this actually happens, avoiding abort73, abortionno, CBE, or Jill Stanek (or anything that links to these sites).

“Their concern was only with “women’s rights,” not even bothering to consider that a fetus may be entitled to some type of “rights” as well.” A fetus does have some basic rights, yes, but the fetus’s rights end where the woman’s rights begin. With your emotionally loaded (and factually dubious) descriptions of second-term procedures, it seems that you’re interpreting abortion as some sort of hostile act or punishment; it’s actually the removal of a rights violation. A fundamental human right is bodily autonomy, which is why nonconsensual violations like rape, murder, and assault are illegal. If a fetus is violating a woman’s right to bodily autonomy without her consent, she has the right to remove it.

Until it’s possible to end a nonviable pregnancy without the fetus dying (eg, transfer into a surrogate mother or “artificial womb”), there is no way to end the rights violation without the fetus’s death.

The woman has every right to not have a baby if she doesnt want one…just don’t get knocked up in the first place.

@7:49: Sanger’s been dead for near half a century. She’s not influencing PP anymore. In fact, PP blatantly rejects Sanger’s notions on their website.

Disproportionate black abortions stem from disproportionate unplanned pregnancies of black women. Black women aim to have a number of children similar to white women, but get unexpectedly pregnant more often. (“Forty percent of pregnancies among white women, 69% among blacks and 54% among Hispanics are unintended.” http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fbinducedabortion.html)

If people want abortion to go away they should eliminate the need for abortions. Like pro-women and pro-family support systems so a low-income mother can care for a child while working. We talk about oh condoms will help. But what about given a woman the voice to say no in an abusive relationship where she doesn’t have the option of birth control of any sort? Where is the morality in forcing a child to be brought into this world and then society turning a blind eye to it and its mother?

@10:20: The majority of abortions were conceived after birth control failed.

We’re a nation that loves something fervently… well, at least until that something is no longer cute and cuddly.

Here’s a solution. Outlaw abortion and then all the pro-life people can adopt all of these babies, providing they even live, since they care so much what other people decide what to do with their own bodies. Adoption for all! Oh my gosh, it’s so simple and easy.

Since we are all well educated, here is a list describing the characteristics of life: - Homeostasis: - Organization: - Metabolism:
- Growth: - Adaptation: - Response to stimuli: - Reproduction Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Definitions This is a very typical textbook definition of life. I feel that we should respect women’s rights, but at the same time the baby is alive and has rights also.

When two rights come conflict, the right to life typically proceeds. I am interested to hear what other right ever takes precedence to the right to life.

Great Article Kyle. The best ive read in the herald lately.