Quote of the Day 11-22-10
I’m about as pro-choice as you can get; I’m even willing to say that I’m pro-abortion, and would like to encourage more people to abort. But I’m also rather shocked by… Pete and Alisha Arnold, who have decided to allow people to vote on whether they should get an abortion. Way to trivialize a significant life decision…!
… I don’t care how you vote; what’s at stake is a mere embryo, so it’s no big loss if it’s flushed and incinerated, and I don’t have any illusions about whether this is deciding the fate of a human life — it’s not. There’s no person in Alisha’s belly yet.
… I had to vote to abort, not because of any consideration about the embryo, but because I’m looking at… the full-grown, conscious, decision-making human beings who are considering whether to take on the responsibilities of a child. And no, they are not….
They’re already lousy parents, and they haven’t even created a child yet.
~Atheist pro-abort PZ Myers, Pharyngula, November 20
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Nothing in this world can change Myers’ calloused, cold heart. I hope for his sake he encounters the Incarnate Word before he dies. I can’t imagine standing before God and saying, “It’s no big loss if it’s flushed or incinerated… I wish more mothers had killed their children…there was no human life there, Lord. Believe me.”
His one phrase of truth however, “They’re already lousy parents.” Indeed, I agree. But they’re only parents precisely because their child already exists.
Lord, have mercy.
Once again, they don’t know what they are talking about and the way they twist the words proves the point.
“significant life decision”
“They’re already lousy parents, and they haven’t even created a child yet.”
Well, at least he’s being honest when he says he’s pro-abortion.
Isn’t this the same guy who somehow got hold of a communion wafer and stabbed it? Sounds like one miserable human being.
“There’s no person in Alisha’s belly yet”
So what is it then? A cabbage? a watermelon? Seriously, my 4 year old niece would know how to answer this question than this man…
Doesn’t this man’s statement sound just like the pro-aborts who post on Jill’s blog. Jill should conduct a comparative analysis and pull up the quotes from the pro-aborts who have said pretty much the same thing on this blog.
Jennifer,
Amen. And shame on him for attacking and killing defenseless “mere embryos”.
I am always amazed and saddened by pro-abortion ignorance. Not a person? How arbitrary. How dangerous. How awful.
Mr. Myers is not so much a biologist, but an acrobat, for it takes quite a bit of jumps, twists, and tumbles to maintain such a narrow and flawed worldview as his post-humanist religion demands. Mind you, speaking of the “awfulness” of his religious views will not convince him otherwise, for he maintains that he has the truth. In this path to conversion, you must first realize that his religion of “non-religion” demands that all reality and reason be kept in a tiny little box of what is observable by extremely limited human senses that we all possess. It is a reduction of reason into vapidity, and a hallmark of the “scientism-pseudo-religion”. It takes an enormous leap of faith and a large amount of hubris for Mr. Myers to assume that all reality is within the senses of a human being only. It is quite sad that such a brilliant man refuses to see beyond his own nose. Paul can look biological truth in the eye and refuse to accept it. I pray for his conversion by way of recognizing the truth. If not here, then when he is face to face with it upon his death. I entrust him to Our Lady for his care, since he has refused to care for himself.
You know, this whole newstory was very interesting so I read a lot of comments around about it. I can’t help but notice that the pro-choice commenters have a much dimmer view of the parents than the pro-life commenters. They mention things like shooting them, taking the child away, and the like. I can’t help but be reminded of how a pro-choicer once walked up to a woman praying with her children outside an abortion clinic. It was raining, and the abortion advocate yelled at the woman for endangering her children by bringing them out in the rain. It’s ok to kill them, but not to raise them differently than an abortionist’s ideal.
It’s hilarious to read how uncomfortable they are with voting for a child’s life. Puleeeeze! I read a comment once where a woman considered aborting her baby so she’d fit in her wedding dress, rather than stay pregnant and buy another dress. Eww. But that’s ok, because it’s the mother’s choice. Double eww.
I have never in all my life met a more hypocritical bunch that abortion advocates.
Ugh, did you guys read the comments? They made me sick to my stomach. THEY JUST. DON’T. GET IT. What an ignorant and hateful bunch.
Praying for PZ.
“what’s at stake is a mere embryo”
Actually, the child is already 17 weeks, and they are voting on whether to murder him when he is 20 weeks. He is a fetus, not an embryo. Not that there is a moral difference between killing an embryo or fetus, but PZ Meyers likes to think of himself as a scientific genius, so it is a little strange he got such a basic fact wrong.
“There’s no person in Alisha’s belly yet.”
I cannot even imagine how hurtful this statement must be to women who have grieved miscarriages. What a cold, callous man.
ninek,
At least two different PRO-LIFE commenters, on this very site, echoed the desire to have these parents shot. Which seems a tad more hypocritical to me. Or at somewhat ironic.
Len, while it’s true that some of the pro-lifers had said as much, the overwhelming number of violent or take-the-kid-away-from-them comments are coming from pro-choice commenters.
And while, yes, pro-lifers aren’t immune to hypocrisy, I find the abortion advocate’s outrage even more so. If a woman can get an abortion for any reason, then any reason is any reason. Don’t come on the internet and suddenly get indignant about the reasons. I mean, they do go all over the internet getting indignant. That’s because the reality of how and why some people choose abortion is not the way abortionists want to sell it. Oh, all the poor young women, forced to be pregnant against their will, oh boo hoo. That’s the story they want you to buy. In practice, some women find it a tragic decision, and some are as cold hearted as many of our trolls.
It is also true that one can be pro-death and pose in a comment section as a pro-life person, specifically to cause detraction. It would not be the first time, and to assume otherwise, is to admit that this is one’s first time on the internet.
i hope this man doesn’t have a wife! Can you imagine if he was married and his wife WANTED the baby if they were to conceive? How would he react?
WOW…..this man is just sick. What is on the ultrasound machine then? A dog? a cat? a mouse? a rabbit? a fish? an elephant? perhaps its a purple people eater!
someone needs to send this man a biology textbook that has embryology and fetal development pictures.
That’s because the reality of how and why some people choose abortion is not the way abortionists want to sell it. Oh, all the poor young women, forced to be pregnant against their will, oh boo hoo. That’s the story they want you to buy. In practice, some women find it a tragic decision, and some are as cold hearted as many of our trolls.
I remember reading this article about ten years ago about people having abortions just for the sake of convinience, not because they couldn’t raise a baby. There was this one married couple who had a son who was maybe seven or so. When they found out the wife was pregnant, they decided to get an abortion because – wait for it – they were planning on moving into a new house in another seven or eight months, and wanted to settle down in their new house before having any more kids. Yeah. Then there was this woman who was engaged and found out she was pregnant a few months before the wedding. She and her fiance actually really wanted kids, but she had an abortion because she wanted to wear a bikini on her honeymoon and not be visibly pregnant.
Wasn’t there somebody on this site a couple of years ago who knew a woman who purposely got pregnant so she could have an abortion and “celebrate her right to choose”?
It isn’t a ‘person’. And PZ Myers would probably have a fair, equal and rational discussion with his wife if she were pregnant. Ultimately it is the woman’s choice.
So it’s more important to save a fetus than have a living child die of pneumonia is it?
Wow, what’s it like to go through life with such a large set of blinkers attached to all your senses?You just don’t get it do you.
I’m sorry Cran- but kids don’t generally get pneumonia by standing in the rain. I can’t count the number of times I stood in the rain waiting for a bus, or walked home in the rain when I was in school, and I never developed pneumonia. My sons and millions of other kids play soccer and football in the rain all the time, while their parents watch, often getting just as wet. Me thinks thou dost protest too much.
Interesting that you acknowledge that the simple act of a mother and her children praying outside an abortion facility has the potential to save an unborn human from death. I know it can- there’s a lady who prays outside a local abortion provider about once a week and five times in the past few months, she has brought a woman to my agency for help. We’ve offered hugs, a listening ear, an ultrasound scan, ongoing assistance including medical care, mentoring, parenting classes and baby gear, all for free, and all five women have decided to let their pregnancies end naturally in a live birth rather than forcefully with an abortion.
I’m on the front lines of this issue, and I don’t have blinkers on. I totally get why women want abortions and the pressure they are facing. I want to make sure I understand so that I can genuinely help them. I also understand that science proves and our hearts testify that abortion kills unborn humans and damages their mothers. Ultimately it damages all of us. You can’t make the world a better place by killing innocent, defenseless humans and then defending that choice with euphemisms, lies and anger.
Love wins. The truth will set you free.
PZ Myers, at what point in your life did you become a person, as in not a ‘worthless’ embryo or fetus? When did your life start? I’m dying to hear your answer.
Saying it’s the woman’s choice is the coward’s way of saying I don’t have to do anything to help. I can step back and wash my hands and let a woman choose something in what could be her most desperate time of need. It sounds rather noble, cran. But it isn’t.
Abortion.
It is not choice when it’s forced/coerced.
It is not choice when a teenager is aborted and sent right back to a pedophile.
It is not choice when a woman feels like she has no choice.
It is not choice when a woman is not shown the ultrasound and the abortion procedure is not explained in detail.
Keep hiding behind your slogan, dude. We can all see right through it. You offer abandonment while Michelle offers hope.
Here’s the logical next step to PZ (and Cran, Artemis, Robert Berger, Joan etc)’s rationalisation of “termination of life” (proud of me, Cran?)
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2010/11/23/peter-singer-says-full-moral-status-not-earned-by-babies-until-after-2-years/
What does a developing human have to do to prove to you that no one has the right to “terminate” him or her?
Michelle said: “What does a developing human have to do to prove to you that no one has the right to “terminate” him or her?”
Michelle – thanks for the link – but this is not about developing humans proving themselves. In fact, I would say there is little rationality or request for proof involved. Proof that’s provided about the equality of human beings at all stages of development is rejected.
Here is Singer’s quote Smith pulled:
Notice he says “Maybe the law has to have clear bright lines…”.
Maybe?
To really comprehend where Peter Singer is coming from, you must understand his perspective that the law, like life, is only valid when he (and others like him, such as Myers) consider it “functional.” Otherwise, it can be changed to suit their purposes. For them, the ultimate arbiter of the law is whatever is most functional here and now.
But who is to say what is functional, and what does functionality have to do with morality? Does morality need to be rational? ”Who is to say…?”
Notice the argument is not about what morality is, or whether one idea is better than another – it ultimately comes down to “who is to say”.
You’ll see that pattern/phrase/idea repeated endlessly by pro-aborts/pro-choicers because that’s the end point of their demands. Ultimately, it’s about accountability – not being accountable to anyone.
Accountability comes down to 2 distinct world-views:
“Might makes right” (possession of absolute power) (In-equality)
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Equality)
I contend that only the second view (the Golden Rule) is rational. The other is ultimately self-refuting and irrational to mortal man. Man doesn’t possess absolute power, and only deludes himself to think he does. When one seeks inequality over others and does not follow the golden rule, destruction results. This is true of individuals all the way through nations. Seeking such power is madness.
Note Singer’s last sentence: “If we accept abortion, we do need to rethink some of those more fundamental attitudes about human life.”
What attitudes about human life is he talking about and why are they fundamental? Notice, it’s an appeal to “who’s to say?” with himself as the “voice of wisdom”.
All who claim they are pro-choice do not find themselves on the dying side of someone else’s decision. They wouldn’t rationally select “Might makes right” knowing they were going to be killed. They wouldn’t want their functionality/contribution questioned. None of the great empire builders ever thought they were expendable.
Is Peter Singer expendable or valuable?
What if the answer was no? Would he then kill himself for the betterment of society? Would he be willing to let society terminate him?
Somehow I think when it comes down to arguing for his own life – he would want to be treated equal with the decision makers.
I think he would find his interests line up with those of a Savior who came to earth as an equal and then laid down His life, that others might truly live.
And PZ Myers would probably have a fair, equal and rational discussion with his wife if she were pregnant. Ultimately it is the woman’s choice.
Cran, I doubt if someone who admits he is “pro-abortion, not pro-choice” would have a calm rational discussion about this issue.
I remember reading this article about ten years ago about people having abortions just for the sake of convinience, not because they couldn’t raise a baby.
We’re often told that abortion is something that “women don’t take lightly,” but this is not always the case. I once read about a woman who had an abortion because she and her husband were holding a big “quinceañera” for their daughter (which is a big celebration that is held for on a girl’s 15th birthday in many Spanish-speaking communities) and they couldn’t afford both. Also, Nat Hentoff also said that he knows of women who became pregnant on purpose so they could earn their feminist credentials by aborting.
If PZ’s mother doesn’t even want or like him now, does that mean he doesn’t really exist?
I’m only guessing becca, but he’d probably say at birth.
phillymiss, you will understand if I say that I find your position to be the one lacking the ability to have a calm rational discussion. PZ would respond to the situation, not react. If he and/or his wife decided to continue the pregnancy I’m sure he would undertake anything that anyone else would to do so.
There is no logic to your question ninek.