Thursday, January 29, 2015

While I'm loathe to use anything Daniel Ruth has written . . .

. . . for anything other than drubbing him for being a pretentious ass. There was something in his op-ed today in the Tampa Bay Times in referencing the remembrance of the Holocaust 70 years ago.

Discussing Hitler's systematic mass murder of innocent Jews, Ruth writes:
"We will never know how many of a future generation of artists, scientists, statesmen, husbands and wives were forever lost to the world merely because the were Jews..."

What lept to my mind instantly was this permutation of that quote:
We will never know these future generations of artists, scientists, statesmen, husbands and wives, now forever lost, as over 50 million innocent children have been murdered in the name of convenience since Roe v Wade was passed into law in 1973.

Funny how this ongoing holocaust is tolerated by so many supposedly enlightened people.

Not funny, actually.


Tuerqas said...

I have always been a bit more tolerant on the second 'holocaust'. I believe number one that there should be no legislation concerning prevention and only third trimester legislation concerning abortion at most. God supports free will, it is a key part of Christian teaching. If who is born is "God's choice", doesn't that break free will? I mean, we can't control which sperm gets through or whether one from a certain person ever gets through. So one must believe that God directs all of these things, which is directly against his teaching concerning free will. It is a paradox unless you allow that while God knows everything, intentionally He does not control everything. If you don't allow that, then I posit that you don't really believe in a free will mandate by God. He may be disappointed in a young teen's decision to abort, but is it murder? If it is, is an eptopic pregnancy by God murder? I do not support abortion at any stage, but I do not think it is Man's place to make laws concerning it. If you are a Christian or belong to any religion with strict canon, you don't need the law and if you are an atheist, we should not be making theocratic laws. If you believe that conception is scientifically the point where new life begins with full independent rights then don't bring God into it all in the first place, use a constitutional argument. As my second wife had 3 eptopic pregnancies and lost both fallopian tubes, I have a hard time believing conception is the place where God puts his metaphorical foot down the whole abortion thing. And if I can draw the line on when a baby is a person with full rights, how can I judge another for drawing a different line at a rape, for instance?

postaldog said...

Sadly, most people are more tolerant of this situation. As long as it doesn't look like a baby, folks don't really care if that life is destroyed. Part of my problem with this situation is that it is part and parcel of this whole no consequences world we're now living in. While abortion rights were sold on the premise of protection after rape, incest, or life threatening situations, it has become instead, and even supporters refer to it as simply emergency contraception. As though wiping out this life was no different than putting on a condom. Why bother taking control with your life when you can erase any unwanted consequences? Can't pay your mortgage -- the gov't will do it for you. Can't pay your student loans -- the gov't will do it for you. Want to have rampant consequence-free sex -- the gov't will pay for your condoms and murder that inconvenient baby for you, so rock on!

I have to undergo an FBI background check and endure a five day waiting period to purchase a 2-shot .22cal bb cap derringer even though I couldn't hurt someone with that unless I tied it to a rope and swung it around like a mace! But we cannot even speak about asking women to think about or engage in counseling prior to an abortion even though there is a 100% chance she will destroy life! It's just not right! While I'm not in favor of arbitrarily overturning Supreme Court decisions, I do agree with Levin that some mechanism should be in place to correct activist legislation from the bench. And we should be able to offer women free info on other courses of action besides the destruction of innocent life when abortion is considered.