The Complexities of Life

I am extremely pro-life. I can barely think of an instance in which I'd support an abortion, although perhaps rape or incest. I'm mostly opposed to what abortion has become in this country, just another form of birth control. Life is so devalued by so many. While I'm always thrilled by how many conservative students I have in class, I'm horrified sometimes by the aggressive and/or nonchalant student attitudes toward killing the unborn.



That said, I remember especially when my first son was born. I hoped for a healthy child because I didn't know if my wife and I would have the strength and resources to raise a child with mental or physical challenges. I was less concerned when we were expecting my second son, but it's something that always kind of bothered me, to think that way about having a child, say, with Down syndrome.



In any case, my oldest is fifteen now. Science has progressed. By this time questions of "choice" among prospective families are more widely available (options for "fetal-DNA testing"), and frankly, more of a shop of horrors for the designer-child movement. It's all more horrifying, and I keep using that word because all this about whether we should kill. Whether parents should take the life of an unborn child, a baby not yet born into God's physical space. I cry sometimes when I read those "happy abortion" stories I blog about occasionally. It's so deathly.



Anyway, I'm just reminded of this by reading this incredibly intense and personal story at Toronto's Globe and Mail, "I’m glad I never had to decide whether my strange, lonely boy ought to exist." It's a longish piece but worth a few more minutes than normal. Ian Brown's son Walker was born with cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome (CFC). Ian asks his wife Johanna if she'd have aborted Walker if at the time they'd had the availability of current genetic testing:

“Would you have taken the test and had an abortion,” I once asked my wife, “if there had been one?” It was his loneliness I couldn't bear, the boy's own sad sense of how different he was. Somehow he knew that.



“If there had been a test when I was pregnant that revealed what Walker's life would have been like, I would have had the abortion.”



“But then you wouldn't have had Walker,” I said.



Suddenly Johanna began to move around the kitchen a little faster. “You can't say that after I've known Walker – would I have done something to get rid of him? It's one thing to abort an anonymous fetus. It's another to murder Walker. A fetus wouldn't be Walker.”



“What do you think the world would be like without people like Walker?” I asked. It was an obnoxious thing to ask. “Without kids like him, I mean, kids who have real setbacks.” Fetal-DNA testing makes this more and more of a possibility.



I'll always remember her answer. “A world where there are only masters of the universe would be like Sparta,” she said. “It would not be a kind country. It would be a cruel place.”



By then she was crying.

Ian Brown is the author of The Boy in the Moon: A Father’s Journey to Understand His Extraordinary Son. There's a review at New York Times, "What Disabled Children Teach Us." It's a wise essay, and it ends peacefully. And all of this makes me count my blessings and also gird myself for the next challenges for me and my family, for surely they will come.

Conditional Pregnancy

I have a lot of pro-choice women in my classes, so this story just seems so foreboding. DNA tests can now determine the sex of the child at 7 weeks, so it's quite easy for a pregnant mom to decide to abort. Audrey Chapman, a health bioethicist cited at the piece, says this:

“I think over the long run this has the potential of changing attitudes toward pregnancy and to family” ... “Women may be less invested in their pregnancies earlier than they are later, and the question has been raised whether women will look at their pregnancies increasingly as being conditional: ‘I will keep this pregnancy only if.’ ”

Read it all at New York Times, "If You Really, Really Wanted a Girl ..."

The Two Minus One Pregnancy

I saw this at New York Times last week.

For all its successes, reproductive medicine has produced a paradox: in creating life where none seemed possible, doctors often generate more fetuses than they intend. In the mid-1980s, they devised an escape hatch to deal with these megapregnancies, terminating all but two or three fetuses to lower the risks to women and the babies they took home. But what began as an intervention for extreme medical circumstances has quietly become an option for women carrying twins. With that, pregnancy reduction shifted from a medical decision to an ethical dilemma. As science allows us to intervene more than ever at the beginning and the end of life, it outruns our ability to reach a new moral equilibrium. We still have to work out just how far we’re willing to go to construct the lives we want.



Jenny’s decision to reduce twins to a single fetus was never really in doubt. The idea of managing two infants at this point in her life terrified her. She and her husband already had grade-school-age children, and she took pride in being a good mother. She felt that twins would soak up everything she had to give, leaving nothing for her older children. Even the twins would be robbed, because, at best, she could give each one only half of her attention and, she feared, only half of her love. Jenny desperately wanted another child, but not at the risk of becoming a second-rate parent. “This is bad, but it’s not anywhere as bad as neglecting your child or not giving everything you can to the children you have,” she told me, referring to the reduction. She and her husband worked out this moral calculation on their own, and they intend to never tell anyone about it. Jenny is certain that no one, not even her closest friends, would understand, and she doesn’t want to be the object of their curiosity or feel the sting of their judgment.



This secrecy is common among women undergoing reduction to a singleton. Doctors who perform the procedure, aware of the stigma, tell patients to be cautious about revealing their decision. (All but one of the patients I spoke with insisted on anonymity.) Some patients are so afraid of being treated with disdain that they withhold this information from the obstetrician who will deliver their child.

Of course they can't tell anyone. What they've done is an abomination. There's more at that link above, but I'm reminded of the story by David French, at National Review, "‘Selective Reduction’ and Self-Indulgence."

Libertarians on Abortion

I'm going to having more on libertarianism in an upcoming essay. I don't see it as a governing ideology, although certainly we could improve a lot of public life, especially economic life, by adopting a way more libertarian programmatic agenda. That said, I've always disliked the rejection of a lot of social morality in libertarianism, and Matt Welch and Nick Gillespie capture some of the moral spinelessness at the clip:

It's enough to say, as Matt Welch does, that one supports the freedom element of the right to an abortion. That part is fine. I've never argued we should have 100 percent criminalization of abortion. The squishy ground is where Nick Gillespie treads, and I don't think he acquits himself well. In fact, he's so squishy he harms even the liberty case for the pro-choice position. Libertarianism becomes a license for perverse libertinism. It's sick to think about what happens to the baby when a woman exercises that sliding scale for the termination of pregnancy. But again, that's why I'm neoconservative on domestic issues.

Ed Morrissey, who prompted the clip, has more: "Video: What is the libertarian position on abortion?"

Michelle Goldberg: 'A Feminist With Paranoid Fantasies About Christian Fundamentalists Taking Away Her Sacred Right to Choose'

Robert Stacy McCain has an outstanding piece on journalist Michelle Goldberg: "Daily Beast Writer Claims Obama Is a Victim of Washington’s ‘Pundit Class’."

Stacy says he's never heard of Michelle Goldberg, and he writes:

So she’s a “senior contributing writer” for media grand dame Tina Brown, a feminist with paranoid fantasies about Christian fundamentalists taking away her sacred Right to Choose, and an award-winning author who has written for a half-dozen other liberal outlets.

I can't claim the same ignorance of Michelle Goldberg. I own a copy of Goldberg's book, The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and the Future of the World. I read the first few chapters but had to put it down because I was getting nauseous at the literal campaign of death Goldberg advocates.

Anyway, here's Goldberg on communist Amy Goodman's Democracy Now!

Planned Parenthood Takes on the States

From Charmaine Yoest and Denise Burke, at Wall Street Journal, "A majority of Americans tell pollsters they do not want taxpayer dollars to subsidize abortions."

Without a doubt, measures to defund the abortion industry will remain a top priority for states in 2011 and will re-emerge in 2012. Legislators are responding to the majority of Americans—72% in a 2009 Quinnipiac University poll—who say that they do not want taxpayer dollars to be used to directly provide or indirectly subsidize abortions. Planned Parenthood and the administration appear committed to obstructing these efforts. Clearly, they prefer the status quo of taxpayer-funded largess for abortion providers—a bounty that amounts to $363 million annually in federal and state funds for Planned Parenthood alone.

RELATED: At Life News, "Judge Blocks Indiana Law Stopping Planned Parenthood Funding."

Where's NOW and Planned Parenthood? Anthony Weiner Stands for Women?

I meant to post this earlier. I promised I'd have more on my dislike of Anthony Weiner, which goes beyond his epic personal moral failures. His policy advocacy is way, way to the left. His fall is thus a major defeat for Democrat party progressivism, and I'm glad.

Here's the embattled congressman speaking at the New York Planned Parenthood's Rally to Protect Women's Health in February.

I don't see statements from NOW or Planned Parenthood, but if they comment I'll update.

Meanwhile, see Jenn Taylor at FrontPage Magazine, "Anthony Weiner's Feminist Rhetoric Meets Reality."

Thers at Whiskey Fire, Genetic Mutant and Trig Truther, 'There's all sorts of lines here I wouldn't have crossed'

Look, the guy says he's a genetic mutant:

I (and both of my children) have a genetic illness that has the potential to cause a lot of suffering and illness. It causes lung and liver disease that sometimes necessitates lung and/or liver transplants which are very pricey endeavors. Where do we draw the line for acceptable and unacceptable genetic differences? How perfect is perfect enough? And what unintended consequences will arise from our pursuit of a perfection that is after all culturally defined and shifting in some cases? How long will it take us to move from eliminating disease to choosing eye colors, heights and IQs? The elimination of disease in humanity is objectively a wonderful goal. The trouble of course is that people are so much more beautifully complex and composed of so much more good stuff than their diseases.

And that's after arguing that parent's of potential Downs children should have abortions.

Dick.

And about those lines being crossed? Genetic Mutant Thers lies, says "I Don't Care But...," and then slaps down some classic Trig-trutherism:

I honestly don't care one way or another ... But ... if the picture of Palin up at Sullivan's site right now really is from 3 weeks before the kid's birth, it's just not her kid, because no way is she that pregnant in that picture.

And Genetic Mutant Thers on the WeinerGate scandal:

If Weiner is a swine or not -- he may be. But the sheer joy taken in finding and punishing someone not at all in the public eye, and then dropping nukes on them, based upon circumstantial speculation, unweighed against anything resembling the public good except sheer partisan scalp-hunting, is creepy as hell.

I have no trouble myself with partisan scalp-hunting, but there's all sorts of lines here I wouldn't have crossed.

The American right started a war based on lies, and is currently lying about climate change. I find revolting their ideological goals and methods, and their bullshit about their bullshit defenses of their ideological goals and defenses. Other than that, the less I know about Vitter's or Giuliani's dicks, the happier I am.

Right. Lines that shouldn't be crossed.

Like the lines crossed in exploiting a Downs baby to destroy Sarah Palin's family.

Progressives. Suck. Dick.

RELATED: At The Other McCain, "The Curious Case of the Weiner-Following (And Weiner-Followed) Teenage Girl." Plus, from Roy 'Bikini Burlesque' Edroso, "WANK SQUAD."

GOP Threatens Shutdown Over Planned Parenthood

And I'm glad.

The New York Times is spinning the debate as a "non-budget" issue, but $75 million or $75 billion, it's public funding and more power to the Republicans calling out Dems on government-sponsored death to the unborn. And quoted there is former welfare recipient Patty Murray:

“I am really stunned, and I am angry as a woman,” said Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, “that we have come to this after weeks of negotiating on numbers, where we have in principle an agreement on numbers, that there are those in the Republican Party in the House who are willing to shut down the government, take people’s paychecks away from them, because they want to deny women access to health care in this country.”

"Health care."

That's a nice rhetorical trick. Planned Parenthood is a death mill. Ground zero for the enormity of progressive pro-abortion evil. And leftists are manning (or womanning) the barricades on this one, since they know that abortion is to social policy as unions are to economics: Lose there and the Democrat-socialist-anti-life-coalition takes a knockout blow, with repercussions all the way up the electoral ladder (think President Barack "Infanticide" Obama).

Also, at Wall Street Journal, "Abortion Returns to Center Stage."

'The Mystery Shit-Talker is Dana Loesch'

Ha!



That's Amanda Marcotte taking "umberage" at Dana Loesch. I was there, by the way, and it was the freakin' best, "CPAC’s Brightest Shining Stars":

Dana Loesch, Editor in Chief of Big Journalism and radio talk show host, gave a wonderful speech about the new media and truth-telling. The greatest moment of her speech was when she went off topic and officially earned herself a target on the dart-wall of the femisogynists by declaring how hypocritical they are by declaring they are for women’s independence while at the same time demanding that Uncle Sam act like a sugar daddy and pay for their abortions and their birth control and any other goodie they “need.” This immediately sent Amanda Marcotte (the feminist messiah in question) into hateful diatribe further proving that all progressive feminists are out of their minds.)

The mystery shit-talker is Dana Loesch. I had to look her up. Unsurprisingly, she works for the Big Lie factory. It is true that we at Pandagon are not friendly to professional liars.



Don’t think the Republicans’ move to get America’s vaginas back to cherished 50s-era restrictions will end with banning abortion and restricting contraception. After that’s done, the next step is moving us back to the god-fearing age when women wore thick pads and belts. Proper ladies know that menstruation is god’s reminder that we’re evil, and should be dealt with in a way that maximizes discomfort and humiliation.

And they wonder why we think leftism is a mental disorder?

RTWT at the link.



And visit Dana Loesch at Big Journalism.

Planned Parenthood Fires Employee After Video

I posted a video of Live Action's Lila Rose a week or so back. This was before news of the big Planned Parenthood video sting broke. It's huge story. I've been busy with my Egypt reporting, and haven't had a chance to comment. The progressives have been mounting a intense push-back campaign, which has been successful to the extent folks are impugning the credibility of Lila Rose. (Allegedly, Planned Parenthood notified government authorities a week before the Live Action video went viral.) But I watched Ms. Rose on O'Reilly's last night, and she indicated that the Democrat-Media-Complex is freakin' at the magnitude of the national pro-life wave, and any negative exposure has been attacked as either un-newsworthy or right wing extremism. Anyway, if the New York Times is reporting on this now, then Live Action can definitely chalk up a victory:

Planned Parenthood has fired a clinic manager who was seen on videotape advising a man posing as a sex trafficker, and anti-abortion groups seized on the episode to step up their campaign to cut off public financing for the organization.

The manager was videotaped covertly in a clinic in Perth Amboy, N.J., by actors working for an anti-abortion group, Live Action. The manager gave advice on how to get medical care for under-age prostitutes. The tape’s release on Tuesday embarrassed Planned Parenthood, which provides contraceptives, gynecological care, cancer screening and abortions across the country, mainly to low-income women.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America said that immediately after the “highly unusual” visit, its affiliate had notified prosecutors.

The organization said last week that people claiming to be sex traffickers visited at least 12 of its clinics in six states in January and that it had concluded that the visits were a hoax by Live Action. But Planned Parenthood officials expressed dismay at the statements of the office manager in the videotape, and fired her on Tuesday night.

“We were profoundly shocked when we viewed the videotape,” Phyllis Kinsler, chief executive of the agency’s central New Jersey branch, said in a statement. Ms. Kinsler said the tape “depicted an employee of one of our health centers behaving in a repugnant manner that is inconsistent with our standards of care and is completely unacceptable.”

Stuart Schear, vice president for communications of the national federation, said in an interview on Wednesday that Planned Parenthood had “zero tolerance” for unethical behavior and that the behavior filmed in the video was “very isolated.”

“We cannot lose sight of the bigger picture that we have opponents who are in many cases opposed to birth control, honest sex education and legal abortion, and are coordinating with allies on Capitol Hill to defund Planned Parenthood,” Mr. Schear said.

See what I mean?

It's the pro-life forces who're portrayed at the bad guys, and the meme is that the director at the Perth Amboy clinic was an aberration.

I should have more pro-life reporting soon. Egypt is dominating the news and I've been extremely fascinated by developments. So, more on that as events warrant, and then some social issues as well.

RELATED: At The Blaze, "Vid Shows Planned Parenthood Advising Pretend Pimp About Underage Sex Slaves":

Kermit Gosnell and Roe v. Wade

The video features Lila Rose from LiveAction.org (via The Blog Prof). It's powerful:

As I keep learning, there are few things greater than abortion that more fundamentally separate normal, life-loving Americans from the death-loving dregs of progressivism. Scott Lemieux is simply a vile man. As a college instructor he's made abortion politics one of his pet projects. Rarely is the conventional evil of Democrat-progressive politics better represented than in Lemieux's posts at LGM. See for example, "Once You Get Your Position Sorted Out, Perhaps We Can Talk." There's no need to quote it. He's attacking Darleen Click at Protein Wisdom. As can be seen at the title, Lemieux's all about elaborating all the tired public policy explanations for the enormity of the Kermit Gosnell murders. And that's the thing: It's just superfluous. No explanation is needed. As Michelle wrote previously:

Deadly indifference to protecting life isn’t tangential to the abortion industry’s existence – it’s at the core of it. The Philadelphia Horror is no anomaly. It’s the logical, blood-curdling consequence of an evil, eugenics-rooted enterprise wrapped in feminist clothing.

This is how mass murder gets a pass from progressives like Scott Lemieux and his evil hordes at LGM. And there's yet more here. It's all very clinical. What never comes into the picture --- never, ever --- is the idea that killing the unborn is an enormity of world historical evil. To commit abortion is to violate the command of the absolute truth of goodness: honor life. Our own Declaration of Independence bears this, that governments are established to preserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. All progressives want is more death, destruction, and desperation. I find it horrifying. But then, I look at politics from a stance of fundamental morality, and that separates me --- and my allies like Darleen, Lila, and Michelle --- from the heathen left. And where I may differ from others is that I don't question the civil liberties of abortion, and frankly I'm not necessarily down with the greater criminalization that's alleged by pea-brained progressives. The question is of moral agency. Of moral choice. People of goodness have to persuade women to choose life. That's the imperative, because whatever happens in the law --- whether the remote possibility exists for vacating Roe v. Wade, for example --- the final foundation of both moral right and popular will is in the realm of ideas, popular ideas. So in this sense, it's no contest. Progressive can't win on the merits, they can't win the debate, because they've got no case for life. When you see people like Barbara O'Brien claiming that the system worked in Philadelphia, you know how deep are the evils of these ghouls who are unfortunately fellow Americans.

RELATED PROGRESSIVE DEBAUCHERY: From American Prospect, "A Response to Saletan on Late-Term Abortions."

Leftists Get Lifeline to Hell With Philadelphia Abortion Case

I've probably said it before, but I'm simply blown away. Is there no bottom too deep for the progressive left? The politicization of the Arizona shooting was pure evil and hard to beat. But after yesterday's news of the arrest of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, I think progressives got a lifeline to Hell.

I commented yesterday on Barbara O'Brien's cheers for Dr. Kermit Gosnell. And now coming back to it, it turns out the line on the progressive left is that the Philadelphia case is an argument for more abortions, that is, more support for purportedly legal and safe abortion, rather than legislation to further restrict access. I don't make a case either way. Perhaps there are some extreme medical circumstances in which obtaining an abortion is absolutely necessary. But over the past few years it's been clear that the right to an abortion has become the equivalent to a license for death. And while it's impossible to imagine a more heinous case, the Philadelphia horror is the direct result of the left's destruction of the sanctity of life. One thing leads to another. God help the poor women who come into the wrong circle of people, who direct them to the clutches of the likes of Dr. Gosnell.

Of course, progressives couldn't care less about God, so it's pretty easy for them to choose up sides. Notorious atheist PZ Myers sums up progressive thinking on the case:

No one endorses bad medicine and unrestricted, unregulated, cowboy surgery like Gosnell practiced — what he represents is the kind of back-alley deadly hackery that the anti-choice movement would have as the only possible recourse, if they had their way. If anything, the Gosnell case is an argument for legal abortion.

The statement's false, if not an outright lie. Gosnell was practicing for thirty years, and clinics like that are sustained by huge networks of pro-choice activists. This is the logical outcome of the left's culture of death. Unrestricted access is exactly what progressives want, screw the quality, obviously. Myers simply drills the point home by suggesting this is the case for legal abortion.

And go read Scotty Lemieux at Lawyers, Gays and Marriage. He's a clinical monstrosity himself, not only stupid but completely unoriginal. And I've responded to dim bulb Malaclypse at the post.

The Tolerant, Compassionate Non-Violent Left

Here's a couple of interesting posts, from Nice Deb, "Leftism Really is a Mental Disorder." And at Kathleen McCaffrey at Legal Insurrection, "Evil Schmevil." Kathleen examines the question of whether Jared Loughner is "insane or just evil?"

At the comments, I suggested that Loughner's crazy. The left's exploitation of him is evil.

The System Worked: Mahablog Cheers 'House of Horrors' Abortion Doctor Who Killed Seven Babies by Severing Their Spinal Cords With Scissors

The main story is at Wall Street Journal, "Philadelphia Abortion Doctor Charged With Murder":

Warning: The following will likely be the most disturbing story you read here all day all month.

With that disclosure, here goes.

A Philadelphia doctor who provided abortions for minorities, immigrants and poor women has been charged with eight counts of murder in the deaths of a patient and seven babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors, prosecutors said Wednesday. Click here for the AP story; here for the Philadelphia Inquirer story.

Working out of his Philadelphia office (pictured), Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 69, made millions of dollars over 30 years, performing as many illegal, late-term abortions as he could, prosecutors said.

Gosnell “induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord,” Williams said.

Nine of Gosnell’s employees also were charged ...

And at Lonely Conservative, "Abortionist Charged With Multiple Murders":

This has to be one of the most horrific things I’ve ever heard .... Ghastly doesn’t begin to describe it. Good Lord.

And it's true. Here's this from the Grand Jury report:

This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.

Let us say right up front that we realize this case will be used by those on both sides of the abortion debate.We ourselves cover a spectrum of personal beliefs about the morality of abortion. For us as a criminal grand jury, however, the case is not about that controversy; it is about disregard of the law and disdain for the lives and health of mothers and infants. We find common ground in exposing what happened here, and in recommending measures to prevent anything like this from ever happening again.

I'm glad the Grand Jury placed that disclaimer at the beginning of the report, because for me, this isn't so much about abortion politics as it is the normalization of evil. I wish women didn't have abortions, although I'd never deprive a woman her right to make the decision. But this isn't about that. What happened in Philadelphia, over a period of years, it turns out, is what happens when life itself becomes cheapened and coarsened at the altar of civil liberties. Just because one has the right to do things doesn't mean they ought to do them. And here the case could be made that that right itself is illegitimate if not exercised with the same kind of common sense and professionalism that we'd expect of those providing any kind of medical service, from routine doctor visits to open-heart surgery. That is to say, if one's going to perform this service, shouldn't it be treated with the same kind of dignity as any other operation? Instead what's revealed here is the production of death, and for what reason I can't possibly fathom. It's not so that women can exercise "choice." If someone is on the fence on the question of abortion, here's a case study of how badly things not only can go wrong but will go wrong, since taking scissors to just-born babies is the next logical step in the agenda of moral annihilation at the center of the pro-choice movement. And I think the point is illustrated at The Mahablog, where not once do we witness Barbara O'Brien's condemnation of the slaughter, but we instead gasp at her first impulse, which is to blame the right: "It appears to me this is not a bogus charge concocted by 'Right to Life' operatives." Seriously. Read the whole thing, especially this jaw-dropping conclusion:

This is the system working. If abortion is criminalized, thousands of clinics like this will spring up like mushrooms, operating underground, out of sight of the law.

No, Barbara, the system didn't work. But I will pray. I'm saddened by the industrial-scale death that you promote with your radical pro-choice ideology. And I'll pray for those babies --- and for you as well.

See also, The Other McCain, "Abortion Is Murder, and Sometimes We Are Brutally Reminded of That Fact." And Dr. Melissa Clouthier, "Abortion Abomination - Murder. Vile, evil, disgusting, loathsome murder." (Via Memeorandum.)

Today's Happy Abortion Story

At the comments from a previous post on "happy" abortions, which is heartbreaking to me:

I got an abortion yesterday, I knew right away that was what I wanted to do. But I did have thoughts of keeping it, unrealistic as they were. My boyfriend and I have been together nearly two years, we have a stable happy relationship but we do live with his mom. I am 18 and he 20. We have some money not a lot by any means. But I made a mistake and maybe it was a pretty big one but should the consequence for a bad mistake at a young age be a baby? I mean come on really, that is not fair to a child. I was not ready for a baby, I did not want a baby. I would never want to hold that kind of resentment for a poor child. I just honestly want to say I am so happy for my decision, I know what I did was the right choice. Today I woke up with a new sense of empowerment. Today I am a new woman who is proud of not only this but all the other big decisions I've made in my life.

The childish irresponsibility here is staggering.

I fear for the youth of today. There's an utter collapse of morality that leaves me grieving. This is not empowerment. It's murder.

I will say a prayer when I go to sleep in a little while.

RELATED: Darleen Click, "Narcissism."

Susan B. Anthony List Lobbies GOP on Strong 'Pro-Life Language' in Party's Upcoming 'Contract' Campaign Manifesto

Check out this piece from Erin McPike at RCP, "Some Supporters Fret as GOP Readies Agenda." Here's the key passage:

Just weeks before House Republican leaders are set to announce the contents of a proposed governing agenda if they retake the majority, some GOP politicians and grasstops activists are growing nervous about those plans ....

So far, House Republicans have shown discipline and stayed on message on jobs and the economy; there are 16 mentions of the word, "jobs," in the packet. But there are two problems with the current effort: One is the wing of activists primarily concerned with social issues, and the other is the possible size of the incoming class of GOP freshmen who collectively would be the reason for the party's return to power.

Many high-level conservative activists agree that the most pressing issue of this cycle is the economy, but some are not willing to let up on matters close to them, either.

In an interview, Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser warned: "To only lead on one issue at a time is a non-sequitur." She added, "That's not real leadership." Dannenfelser's group advocates on behalf of women in politics who are pro-life, and she hopes to see substantial pro-life language in the House Republicans' agenda but is not entirely optimistic.

The 22-page recess packet of trial balloons does include an explicit ban on all federal funding for abortion. That's one item on Dannenfelser's list, but she has two more: requiring parental notification for abortion-seeking minors, and requiring physicians who perform abortions to notify women who are at least 20 weeks into their pregnancies that fetuses can feel pain in the process.

Said Dannenfelser, "The conservative base of the Republican Party is so strong at this moment, the most divisive thing that could happen would be to leave out the family values third of the issue base." Her group has undertaken its own small media blitz, "Life Speaking Out," to lobby the House GOP on abortion issues and prevent the omission. A release announcing the campaign noted, "Missing from the GOP's original Contract in 1994 was any emphasis on policies protecting the unborn. Pro-life legislation was not made a priority in the following Congress."

The group sent a letter to House Minority Leader John Boehner on September 2nd, arguing that:

The protection of women and their children from the violence of abortion and the protection of taxpayers from funding it must be an integral part of any legislative blueprint released by the leadership of the GOP, and should be included under a specific plank addressing family values.

As readers will recall, I take the big view on pro-life issues. And I expect the GOP to take the concerns of groups like Susan B. Anthony List very seriously.

Cultural Suicide and Choosing to Live Again

From Melissa Clouthier, at Right Wing News:

I hope Americans change their hearts and see the goodness and the possibility again. I hope they live life and abundantly. I hope they renew themselves and choose life over death. The world needs a happy, good, loving America. Leave self-loathing and cultural suicide to the Europeans.

The link there goes to Elizabeth Scalia, "Hating Ourselves to Death."

And take your time.

Campaign Memo Reveals Steve Poizner as Far-Left Candidate in 2004

He's a nice guy, but GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner advocated far left-wing positions on a range of issues in his 2004 campaign for California Assembly. The document is here: "2004 Poizner for Assembly Policy Positions." The Los Angeles Times obtained the report. See, "Document shows Poizner reversed course on public services for illegal immigrants," and "Poizner's positions have shifted more than was widely known."

Taking a look at his positions, Poizner's radical pro-abortion platform would make President Barack "Infanticide" Obama blush. On crime, Poizner advocated "reform" of the "Three Strikes" law and called for a moratorium on the death penalty. On civil rights Poizner favored "hate crimes" legislation and reparations for slavery. He's a radical progressive of gay and lesbian issues. And on healthcare he supports expanding Medi-Cal, Healthy Families, and WIC to the "one million California children who are eligible and not yet enrolled" and he wanted to "Encourage all 3 million people who are eligible for public healthcare services to enroll." I don't see mention of extending these services to illegal residents, but according to the Times' interpretation, the document "shows he took liberal stands on abortion, services for illegal immigrants and reparations for slavery while running for Assembly in 2004."

The guy's pure RINO.

Laura Bush on Larry King Live

I respect this women immensely, and that goes for her opinions on abortion and gay marriage. And as we can see with her discussion, it's much easier to discuss the hot-button social issues of the day when not worried about political calculations or reelection to high office. God bless Laura Bush: