I received many responses via email to yesterday's WorldNetDaily.com column, "Sioux Tribe plans to scalp its own." Some follow below; I'll post more tomorrow.

Many respondents appear intent on carrying on the theme of yesterday's piece - stupidity. I'm not surprised but have no patience for pro-aborts who will say anything to detract from a discussion of abortion.

In this case, I presented factual and I think compelling reasons why the Oglala Sioux should reject their president's plan to place a Planned Parenthood in their midst, which will undoubtedly do more harm than good.

But instead of discussing abortion and genocide, some would rather discuss Custer and Bush... or even my "deranged" photo.

See page 2 for letters.

In 1876, the Oglala Sioux were responsible for massacring Gen. George Custer and his men at Little Bighorn, mutilating and scalping them as they went.

Stupid is...

Continue reading my column today, "Sioux tribe plans to scalp its own," on WorldNetDaily.com.

_______________

Link to article on South Dakota and Native American law: www.lifenews.com/state1532.html

New America Foundation fellow Phillip Longman in USA Today on March 13 (synopsized from a longer piece in the March/April issue of Foreign Policy magazine) says basically this: Population equals power; therefore, conservatives/traditionalists have historically and will soon again inherit the earth. Writes Longman:

Childlessness and small families are increasingly the norm today among progressive secularists. As a consequence, an increasing share of all children born into the world are descended from a share of the population whose conservative values have led them to raise large families....

This dynamic helps explain the gradual drift of American culture toward religious fundamentalism and social conservatism.

Juxtapose that to this massive Zogby poll** (30,117 respondents in 48 contiguous states with margin error of +/- 0.6%) conducted March 10-14, and you'll see why the pro-abortion position is a growing loser for Democrats.

*The logo, right, is from the environmentalist website Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Its motto, "May we live long and die out," could not more aptly demonstrate why liberalism is a dying concept.

**The Zogby poll is detailed in today's LifeNews.com.

Most interesting about the controversy surrounding Harvard Right to Life's preborn poster campaign is what pro-abort students are saying about its "Elena" poster series. This educational effort has resulted in repeated vandalism....

From the Oh Harvard blog, February 16:

I think I have a right to not see that crap on my way to breakfast, lunch, and dinner....Ethically charged posters like that have no place in common spaces. Quite simply, if one is pro-choice, they make you uncomfortable and annoyed.... Some things aren't suited to cute posters with girly fonts and doodles. Some things don't serve a real purpose....

_______________________________________________________________

From an article entitled, "Pro-Life Posters Spark Debate: Students rip down controversial pro-life posters in protest," in the Harvard Crimson, March 6:

"I personally find the image disgusting and don't want to walk past it everyday,"” said Nichele M. McClendon '06, who said she did not tear down any posters. "It doesn't have to do with abortion as an issue or free speeh; it's about being decent and not being disgusting."

Jamie R. Smith '08... said in a phone interview that she felt the combination of a shocking picture and controversial message made the posters disagreeable to students. However, she felt that groups have the freedom to poster about causes that are important to them.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

From an editorial entitled, "The Right To Reason: Recent campus abortion posters are purposeless," by Harvard Crimson staff writer Alexandra Atiya, March 10:

The "Elena posters" are the newest tactic of Harvard Right to Life. They feature a little fetus saying, "Oh, HI! I was just celebrating all my organs and me being 56 days alive!" I am not a fan....

They seek to cause anger, not excitement. In doing so, they reveal their antagonistic purpose, implicitly admitting that their primary function is to irritate pro-choice supporters on campus.

This kind of purposeless aggression is a hurtful and unproductive way of expressing opinions....

[I]t is simply a statement of anger to express your ideas in the way of the "Elena Posters".... [I]t's unnecessarily divisive.... [T]his deliberately flattens an intensely painful and complicated issue. It also happens to misrepresent the pro-choice members of this campus as bloodthirsty baby killers.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

I'm reminded by this story of the recent flak created when a newspaper considered ultrasound photo ads "too graphic" to run.

The pro-life movement has apparently discovered something infuriating to pro-aborts: ultrasound photos of preborn humans.

Gotta the story headline in today's Sunday Times out of London: "US states join abortion revolt to bring back ban."

"I might say, 'This is Pete; he juggles. Your son will never juggle because he won't have any arms. He'll be cut to pieces.'"

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Scheidler's favor for the third time in the landmark case, NOW vs. Scheidler. NOW sued in 1986 for conducting sit-ins at abortion mills.

NOW's filing under the RICO statute alarmed protestors of other venues and thus brought together strange bedfellows with Scheidler against NOW, including Martin Sheen and PETA.

In 2003, the Supremes ruled 8-1 in Scheidler's favor, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals incredibly refused to implement the decision in 2004. Yesterday's unanimous ruling dealt a death blow to NOW's case... hopefully.

"It's over now," Scheidler said, according to the Trib. "I think it's over."