Libs try to get Duggar show canceled after holocaust/abortion comparison
When I went to RH Reality Check yesterday to read an article, I was greeted by this (click to enlarge)…
Sure enough, liberals are up in arms about a comment Jim Bob Duggar made during Family Research Council’s recent Values Voter Summit…
[youtube]http://youtu.be/QU46Q38rgRw[/youtube]Transcript:
I heard Governor Huckabee speak and he was sharing how he had taken his daughter Sarah over to one of the concentration camps…. He said, as they were walking out of that concentration camp, he said little Sarah… looked up at him and said, “Daddy, why didn’t somebody do something?”
And, you know what? That’s where we’re at in our nation. Do we want our children, when we’re going to tell them about how great America was, they’re going to look at you and say, “Why didn’t somebody do something?”
Asked later to clarify what he meant, the 19 Kids and Counting patriarch specified he was indeed speaking about the abortion holocaust. From the Daily Press:
… Duggar did not back down.
“Let me clarify,” he said. “We have since 1973 (when Roe v. Wade was decided) had 55 million abortions, so what we have going on is a baby holocaust,” Duggar said.
For the record, here’s the definition of “holocaust”:
So the term “holocaust” can be appropriately used to describe the mass genocide of babies via abortion, and it can also be used to compare abortion to the Jewish Holocaust, although as tragic as the latter was, its death toll pales in comparison to the former.
It’s fascinating how abortion supporters heard Duggar’s comment. Note that RH Reality Check – a website dedicated to promoting abortion – totally missed a point that would have hit it on the head if a hammer:
[T]his is both unacceptable and insidious. Unacceptable, because there is no way in which losing a democratic election is akin to genocide. Unacceptable because there is no way in which tolerating a health care policy you don’t like is comparable to having soldiers rip families from their homes and send them to camps where slave-labor, starvation, and gas chambers were the norm. And it’s insidious, because oceans of pain and suffering can be dismissed if the injustice that caused them has to be ‘like the Holocaust’ before it’s worth fighting.
Jezebel whined:
[O]ne might think Duggar had realized that perhaps he went a little far with his comparison of liberal Americans to Nazis.
How, exactly? Credo concluded:
There is no way in which it’s acceptable to suggest that a mom deciding not to add to a family that may be struggling is committing a crime of genocide. There is no way in which the medical professionals who help her are like soldiers ripping families from their homes and sending them to camps where slave-labor, starvation, and gas chambers were the norm.
Yes, way.
[Bottom photo by Dr. Monica Migliorino Miller]
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.
“Jezebel whined”
Well, that is about all they do around there.
I don’t think Holocaust comparisons are REMOTELY helpful, at all, but it’s rather ridiculous to whine about conservatives on a conservative valued reality show being against abortion.
The pre-born children killed in abortion all have pre-born in common. That makes the slaughter of them, which I am quite sure exceeds 55 million in the US alone, quite comparable to the slaughter of so many post-born people of a certain ethnic group.
The comparison pricks them, hurts them. I say, good, it’s a sign that some small vestige of a conscience is struggling to survive in their grinchy little hearts.
The comparison is absolutely helpful because it is absolutely accurate.
The slaughter of people= the slaughter of people.
Accurate and helpful are not equivalent terms. It may be accurate that your wife or girlfriend looks five months pregnant in her new dress, but heaven help the guy who stated it that way, “helpful” wouldn’t be the word to describe it lol.
I don’t think the Holocaust comparisons “prick their conscience” at all ninek, from what I can tell they just end up deflecting with a comparison of sentient suffering (which the WWII Holocaust arguably has more of) instead of a focus on the massive lost of life (which abortion undeniably has more of). It’s a useless argument in my personal opinion and I’ve never seen it lead to productive dialogue. Before people jump on me that’s just my personal opinion and I’m not dreaming of telling people they can’t use it.
Comparing the murder of life that has had the opportunity to be to life that awaits that opportunity in the womb is logically sound.
But knowing libs they will make this into a “controversial issue” for as long as they can, as they do everything else…
I agree, Jack, the Holocaust comparisons are not helpful.
I am not a fan of the Duggars, but he didn’t even make the comments on the show and they want it cancelled? Free speech for me, but not for thee . . .
It’s like complaining that Jersey Shore has depictions of alcohol consumption. I mean, for realz, it’s not like people don’t know what these shows are about before they watch them (and why anyone wants to watch any “reality” show I have no idea).
they were in Nashville last night at a fund raiser for a local prc. They are clearly loved by the public by the MSM with the liberal bent and all the commenters clearly hate them for the fact that they have a large family. The comments were vicious.
Speaking as an ethnic Jew (who happens to have been raised Catholic–my mother is Jewish, though, and her ancestors were from Eastern Europe; many of them apparently died in the Shoah [i.e. the Nazi extermination of Jews and other “undesirables”), I’m rather annoyed at those who try to FORBID the comparison between the Shoah and the mass slaughter of the unborn, today. No one–I repeat, NO ONE–has given me any convincing reason why the Shoah should be set on a pedestal, apart from the fact that it was horrific, systematic evil done on an mind-numbing scale. And this differs from the evil nature of abortion… HOW, exactly?
The comment is quite apt. Abortion has it’s roots in an ancient assyrian worship practice in a ritual to the god Molech. Shrine prostitutes would be inseminated, and the babies produced would be sacrificed to Molech on The Topeth, which was a super-heated statue with outstretched arms for placement of the babies for immolation. They would beat drums to drown out the screams of the baby as she died a horrible death.
This ritual was performed to insure that Molech, the god of Agricultural Fertility, would be appeased and crops would be fruitful, insuring the success of the future. We now who have women who are deceived into thinking that a child will negatively affect their financial prospects for the future, so they are now sacrificing their children on that same altar.
This practice is made even more horrific in that drums are no longer necessary as it is all done within the secret, silent chamber of creation. It also results in remains that are stored in red bags and disposed of as trash. Even the assyrians had the decency to bury the burnings. It is said that there were large cemeteries where the burnings were excavated to a depth of six feet…
BTW… There are also other distinctions in the comments that are “unhelpful” to the cause. The distinction between the pre-born children is unhelpful. They are ALL children or babies. The “opportunity to be life” is also counterproductive. Children are living human beings that have their beginnings as a zygote and continue to live (God willing) until a ripe old age. There are many stages, but the birth is no less nor any more than the first kiss, or the learner’s permit.
The “True North” is to tell the truth. If 55 million children had been snuffed out in school shootings, they would be an outrage so loud that the drums of the Topeth couldn’t drown them out. Comparison to the Holocaust with it’s 6 million deaths make the shoe fit on the other foot. It is a travesty to compare the death of a pittance of 6 million people to the great evil that has killed 55 million and has doomed a once great nation to demographic suicide.
A “pittance”? 6 million lives isn’t a pittance, and it’s more like 12 million when you add in non-Jewish lives lost. And speaking of demographic suicide, in addition to the Holocaust WWII killed off a huge percentage of Russian young men, screwing their demographics up to this day (aided to by abortion as well). And that’s not even mentioning the massive lost lives in China due to Japanese occupation. Learn2history.
Paladin I wouldn’t dream of telling someone tey can’t use the comparison, it’s just my opinion it does nothing to further dialogue or advance the cause.
And Paladin I don’t limit my distaste to Holocaust/abortion comparisons. I find it crass and unhelpful when people play the “which tragedy is worse” game regardless of what tragedies are being compared, I don’t think it makes anyone see your point when you call other tragedies a “pittance” when it comes to dead people.
Animal rights activists are definitely the worst at that, pro-lifers are a close second.
libs have an apparent lack of sincerity crying us a river regarding this comparison but use similar arguments to attack us on so many fronts…
Yeah, I know we can’t shake them up a little because - you know - it makes them think…
Holocaust deniers are a strange lot.
“I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, form the time of its conception; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity; I practice my profession with conscience and dignity.”
Declaration of Geneva
Hippocratic Oath
Following the Nazi Doctors Trial at Nuremberg
So what you are saying is that there is a government initiated and instigated policy to terminate each and every fetus on an ongoing basis? As quickly as feasible?
That some group of direct government employees or agents, soldiers or whoever, are made to carry out the termination of each and every fetus?
That this is to continue until there are no fetuses? Births are not and will not be allowed to take place?
You would have thought that by now at least one president would have called a halt to this central mandate to terminate each and every fetus, wouldn’t you? A Bush maybe? Or Reagan?
But please, continue to attempt to compare them, it does your campaign so much benefit in trying to change the minds of those who are pro-choice.
Don’t be obtuse, Reality. Most people who make the comparison are talking about the amount of lives lost, not claiming there’s a “abort every baby” campaign. You know that, though.
The holocaust was a government driven policy to kill every single jew Jack. It’s self-defining.
The government allowing women to make their own individual choices in regards to ending a pregnancy or not is nothing of the sort.
Yeah, you’re deliberately being obtuse because I know you’re not dumb. People say that abortion is “a” holocaust because it fits one of the definitions (the massive loss of life one). They compare it to “the” Holocaust on purely a basis of bodies buried and burned. And some people go that route of comparing you guys to Nazis, but not everyone who makes the comparison does that. The main part people are trying to get at is the sheer amount of humans killed, not the methods or the governmental policies/political climate (though some people do those comparisons too, which I don’t think is applicable).
But of course the main reason I think this is a hopeless line of argument is you (the general “you” as pro-choicers) simply don’t care about 55 or so million fetuses dying because you don’t see them as human beings. I think people have to see the humanity of the babies first else the magnitude of their deaths seriously doesn’t mean anything to them.
I disagree Jack. I believe those in the anti-choice movement who have initiated the comparison have done so in a deliberate attempt to allude to there being some sort of master plan targeting fetuses.
A holocaust is the deliberate attempt to extinguish as many as possible of an entire group as quickly as possible. That’s not abortion.
And what was it that Dr. Josef Mengele was arrested for in Argentina again?
Oh yeah, two murders – that’s what……..
Reality,
As I recall, abortion was going to eliminate the unwanted, imperfect, inconvenient, unplanned, the burdens on society, potential criminals, the poor, the abused, you name it. Sounds pretty targeted and deliberate to me.
BTW, I am NO fan of that controlling tyrant Jim Bob Duggar and his dimwitted wife, but we do have freedom of speech in this country. I may not like you or what you have to say, but you have a right to say it.
Hi Jack,
While I have you here, I would like to correct something I said to you on a previous thread.
You spoke of your wife being stalked while walking home at nite by two guys in a car. I said she was wrong not to call 911 and you instead. I WAS WRONG BIG TIME!!
As I have mentioned my brother, a former police officer, often gives me a police officer’s perspective on things. Yes, its easy for me to sit behind the safety and comfort of a computer keyboard but that in no way compares to the terror of being followed on an empty street in the dead of night, when life and death decisions must be made and whatever you decide can be fatal. There is no right answer.
Your wife’s situation was a no win extremely dangerous and terrifying situation, where, no matter what decision she made could prove fatal. She had no idea, and could make no assumptions, as to who was stalking her or what they were capable of.
Call 911 and she could be gone or dead by the time police arrive. Make a dash for her home and her stalkers could have gone after her, knowing she was trying to escape. Or else they would know where she lived, not so good either. She chose to call you and thankfully your presence scared them away. Again, it could have been the wrong decision and fatal to you both.
When people escape a criminal attack and ask my brother if they did the right thing he always asks, “did you escape a dangerous situation? If the answer is yes, then my brother responds, “you did the right thing”. There is no right or wrong answer to that question, its what saved you.
So Jack, I stand corrected and wanted to let you know that. Very thankfully, your wife made the right decision that nite.
Mary I knew you couldn’t resist a Duggar thread!!
“I disagree Jack. I believe those in the anti-choice movement who have initiated the comparison have done so in a deliberate attempt to allude to there being some sort of master plan targeting fetuses.”
Yeah there are some that do that, but I don’t agree with their reasoning there (I see the vast majority of pro-choicers as misguided and deluded rather than deliberate). I do think that they may have a point with those who actually work in the industry (not that they are trying to wipe out unborn babies, but that they have a vested interest in abortion not being rare at all). I stand by what I said before, I think many people are using the Holocaust as a comparison point for the loss of life, to point out the massive amount of human lives lost. I know YOU can’t see why we would see it as similar from a loss of life standpoint, but WWII (not just the Holocaust, but military and civilian deaths otherwise, and war crimes in China) wiped out over 60 million people, something around 14% of the Soviet population for example. That amount of people dead is roughly around how many abortions have been performed in the US since Roe v Wade. If you understand that fetuses are human beings, that is pretty horrifying. But like I said, yall have to understand that the fetuses are humans first, or you’re never going to care about that huge amount of them being killed. And plus, I find the comparisons rude as well, but that’s more personal taste than anything.
Thanks for the explanation, Mary, I didn’t take offense before btw. I honestly wished she would have called 911 before she called me. I had no idea how many people were possibly in that car and I was only one guy and I can only shoot one gun if something went down, but thankfully they just drove off. Like I said, most likely they were just creepy dudes or dumb teen guys checking out an attractive women walking home and took off when they see her husband, but it’s very possible they could have had very ill intentions and luckily it didn’t turn out badly.
You either stand with the prosecutors at Nuremberg, or you stand with the Nazi doctors.
Like it or not, the Nazi’s were abortion’s founding fathers and pioneers of the medical procedure.
http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=lusol_fac_pubs
Another point Jack,
We have to remember that those who ran the death camps viewed themselves as performing an important social service. They were eliminating the undesirable, dregs, inferior, unwanted, and societal burdens. They did not see themselves as mass murderers. Much like the people who work in the abortion clinics.
we do have freedom of speech in this country. I may not like you or what you have to say, but you have a right to say it. – totally Mary. That would be why I said “But please, continue to attempt to compare them, it does your campaign so much benefit in trying to change the minds of those who are pro-choice.” :-)
Hi Jack,
Any decision you make in a situation like that can prove fatal. Thankfully for all concerned your wife made the right one.
When taking my usual walk, it was later than I realized and getting dark. It occurred to me I’m on this dark rural road, alone, and the perfect mark for a predator. There just seemed to be this sudden eerie silence. Something told me to bolt for home and I did.
Big Joe’s words of wisdom: Trust your instincts!
I don’t mean to be critical but it wasn’t just the Jews that Nazis wanted to get rid of, it was ANYONE who didn’t fit into their master plan, such as disabled and gay people. That would bring the figure more to 10 million I’ve read.
And as far as the Duggars, some people have been whining about them forever but as far as I know this family hasn’t started any “let’s all have 16 (biological) kids” trends among the general public in the years since they’ve been on TLC, so I don’t see what damage they could have possibly done.
“I don’t mean to be critical but it wasn’t just the Jews that Nazis wanted to get rid of, it was ANYONE who didn’t fit into their master plan, such as disabled and gay people. That would bring the figure more to 10 million I’ve read. ”
You’re right, it’s about 12 million give or take. And it’s not nearly close to the full amount of the citizens who were killed during WWII in atrocities other than the Holocaust (seriously, the Japanese crimes were just as bad as the Nazis, the Soviets were certainly not saints, and the US and British troops did some horrors of their own), and that’s not even getting into the death toll for actual troops. Like I said, it’s an estimated over 60 million total dead, and that’s not counting the non-death consequences of the war. I certainly don’t think anyone who is pro-life should call anything to do with either WW a “pittance”.
Human Rights, Scientific Honesty: And don’t forget Mengele’s post-Nazi career was as an abortionist: https://www.jillstanek.com/2013/05/gosnells-trial-offers-glimpse-how-mengeles-trial-would-have-looked/
Reality wrote:
I believe those in the anti-choice movement who have initiated the comparison have done so in a deliberate attempt to allude to there being some sort of master plan targeting fetuses.
Come, now. This is an example either of hyperbole on your part, or of paranoia. I use the comparison regularly, and I don’t attribute a universal “extermination of fetuses” motive to the “collective of pro-legal-abortion people”. I do not even attribute malice/evil intent, or even (necessarily) moral culpability, given the rampant campaign of deception/brainwashing in our culture on the subject. I assert only that the practise is utterly evil, and it needs to stop immediately.
A holocaust is the deliberate attempt to extinguish as many as possible of an entire group as quickly as possible. That’s not abortion.
You make two errors, here: first, you take only one possible definition of “holocaust” (whereas Jill gave you four from which to choose, and there are others beyond that) and insist that the metaphor fulfill that definition exactly, on pain of invalidation… which is silly. Second, the metaphor is, in fact, a METAPHOR; and metaphors are, by definition, limited and inexact (or else they would not be metaphors at all, but simple restatements of the original). To insist that a metaphor must be perfect is, in fact, to demand of a metaphor what it is not at all obligated to give.
Jill and Human Rights thanks for pointing out the research with the link of abortion to Nazis. Thanks for providing the pictures at the bottom of this article demonstrating this is a perfect analogy, “a picture is worth a thousand words”. Pictures of mounds of mangled, mutilated dead bodies speak for themselves. No pro-aborts you cannot rewrite history and you cannot blot out the writings and interviews of Margaret Sanger, PP’s eugenic-loving founder, her crusades to get rid of the “human weeds” are well documented aka “The Negro Project”. Paladin thanks for your clarification of the use of the term “holocaust” but you know the pro-PP, pro-abortion commenters will not back down on defending abortion “no apologies, no restrictions” as long as a woman wants a dead baby she deserves to get one.
There have been many heartless and brutal genocides in history. This genocide could be compared with any of those.
I say that it is a great mark of honor that the Nazi genocide against the Jews of Europe has become the exemplar of human cruelty and the mass murder innocents. Every time we look at the horror of mass killings, we will remember the senseless hatred of the Nazis and the suffering of the Jews.
It is fitting that any time that a government stands by idly and even protects the killers as thousands or millions of innocent persons die, it is called a holocaust. There is no better name for it.
I use the comparison regularly – then you do so unjustifiably. It doesn’t qualify. Individual people making individual decisions based on a vast array of reasons, acting only on an individual level does not constitute a holocaust.
You make two errors, here: first, you take only one possible definition of “holocaust” (whereas Jill gave you four from which to choose, and there are others beyond that) – no, it’s invalid against all four.
Second, the metaphor is, in fact, a METAPHOR; and metaphors are, by definition, limited and inexact – which is why I said “But please, continue to attempt to compare them, it does your campaign so much benefit in trying to change the minds of those who are pro-choice.”
Nor does it qualify as genocide Del.
Every time reality uses faulty logic, my old math professor cries.
Now your old math professor is psychic? Wow!
I would have thought he’d run out of tears quite some years back ;-)
“Every time reality uses faulty logic, my old math professor cries.”
It must be difficult to live a life of literally constant tears.
Reality, WHY do you think the Nuremberg trials dealt with abortion crimes on such a grand scale? Can you tell us when and where abortion was instituted as a tool of genocide elsewhere? It seems we have all the facts and history going on here – all of it linked or quoted – but all you have are some philosophical musings that just amount to a long winded denial.
If your thesis that it is all nonsense is true, then you should be able to come up with numerous other times and places where abortion was introduced as a major government run initiative in modern western legal thought and process.
Where?
When?
Did you notice, like we did, that you were not fond of discussing what Dr. Mengele was arrested for In Argentina AFTER the war?
http://uvalies.org/mengele
“it will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics.”
Adolf Hitler
Well JDC, when you consider the students that had to be dealt with…
WHY do you think the Nuremberg trials dealt with abortion crimes on such a grand scale? – grand scale? Compared to what? The prosecution considered all abortions to be illegal and because they took place during a war, war crimes. Even voluntary abortions. Most of us would consider forced abortions in a war to be a war crime. “After summarizing evidence of voluntary abortion policies in its Judgment, the Greifelt tribunal found two defendants guilty and one not guilty of forcible abortion and seven not guilty simply of abortion.”
Can you tell us when and where abortion was instituted as a tool of genocide elsewhere? – elsewhere from where?
It seems we have all the facts and history going on here – all of it linked or quoted – it seems not. Quoting yourself doesn’t count.
but all you have are some philosophical musings that just amount to a long winded denial. – clear, logical, well defined and succinct.
If your thesis that it is all nonsense is true, then you should be able to come up with numerous other times and places where abortion was introduced as a major government run initiative in modern western legal thought and process. – why? You appear to be at cross purposes. It never has, that’s the point. That’s what makes abortion not a holocaust.
Did you notice, like we did, that you were not fond of discussing what Dr. Mengele was arrested for In Argentina AFTER the war? – did you notice, it is completely irrelevant to the ludicrous attempts to compare abortion with the holocaust? Did you also notice, mengele wasn’t convicted in argentina after the war?
Denial, distraction, and diversion is all you folks are ever left with in your strenuous attempts to defend beheadings – here in the year 2013.
Abortion was illegal everywhere in Europe and North America before the Nazis. Then came the Nazis. They pioneered the actual procedures, and made it more survivable for the mother. They also pioneered it’s legal defense, for the good of the nation (same argument made today – less “undesirables.”)
The Nazis were prosecuted for it at the Nuremberg trials. Afterward, human rights accords meant to last forever (i.e, “never again”) were written and agreed to that very specifically forbade elective abortions.
You came here thinking you were only going to have to argue the comparison of pictures, and the 55 million killed vs. 6 million killed. But you got an education about where your agenda has its rots in western law, thought, and action. The origins fit as well as the results do now.
Holocaust deniers are a strange lot, but they will never be able to erase history. Nor, in this case, are they able to erase medical science or physical modern reality. Dead human bodies are still dead human bodies. This is why they go so bananas when they see their victims bodies..
That is all.
“Abortion was illegal everywhere in Europe and North America before the Nazis.”
Wasn’t it legal in the USSR (some of which was in Europe) since around 1920?
Please correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it, gas chambers were already in use in the mental hospitals and institutions for the disabled before the Nazis took power. Euthenasia of the disabled at birth and every age, and the “undesirables” was in full swing and instituted by Germany’s most respected doctors and professors. While the Nazis certainly didn’t stop this, they didn’t start it either.
Also, Hitler outlawed abortion for Aryans but required it for the “undesirables” which included racial and ethnic groups. His outlawing of abortion had nothing to do with pro life and everything to do with “racial purity”.
I would like to point out that I read an article years ago, and am sorry to say I can find no source now, about women in France referred to as “angels”. These were women who for generations learned the “art” of abortion from their mothers and grandmothers, and were sought out by pregnant women who wanted to abort. However illegal, I would suspect officials turned a blind eye, maybe even availing themselves of their services for wives and daughters with unwanted and embarrassing pregnancies. I doubt that Nazis pioneered techniques, but more likely borrowed on techniques in use for centuries, not just in France but throughout Europe and the world.
According to the article, the “angels” had a good track record, were trusted by women, and legal abortion failed to put them out of business. Women still sought their services. Likely the better protection of privacy and no questions asked.
I believe that many countries and cultures over the centuries have had various versions of ‘angels’ Mary.
Just like the women elders who would provide sachets of animal blood for young women to use on their wedding night.
Reality,
Well that brings up an interesting issue. French officials were trying to get women to have legal abortions and they didn’t want them. They preferred going to the “angels”. People don’t always do what we assume is the logical sensible thing, at least to us anyway.
Maybe those conducting the business illegally knew they had to be much more careful or face prison terms, not something that seems to concern legal abortionists, at least not in this country. It also shows that simply legalizing abortion doesn’t put the illegal practitioners out of business. Likely women preferred those they had known and trusted for generations, and could better protect their privacy with, in this case the illegal practitioners.
Jezebel whined:
The things “reality” will say to justify abortion. Even after HRSO posted on November 6, 2013 at 7:47 pm, a statement from Hitler. Everyone here understands thus the connection btw Holocaust and abortions but yet he continues to blindly ignore reality. So much for the moniker…
Reality wrote, in reply to my comment:
[Paladin]
I use the comparison [of abortion vs. the Shoah/Nazi Holocaust] regularly
[Reality]
then you do so unjustifiably. It doesn’t qualify. Individual people making individual decisions based on a vast array of reasons, acting only on an individual level does not constitute a holocaust.
So you say. But, despite the fact that your definition (of an intentional genocide/master-plan) DOES fit at least one common definition of “holocaust”, we are not obligated to use your specific (and rather esoteric) definition of “holocaust”, and thus we are not unjustified in using other definitions/uses. “Sufficient” does not imply “necessary”, in logic.
[Paladin]
You make two errors, here: first, you take only one possible definition of “holocaust” (whereas Jill gave you four from which to choose, and there are others beyond that)
[Reality]
no, it’s invalid against all four.
How so? Given Jill’s four definitions (and there are more, as I mentioned)–1, 2, 3a and 3b–it certainly seems to satisfy (2) and (3b). You’ll need to explain how our usage does NOT satisfy those.
[Paladin]
Second, the metaphor is, in fact, a METAPHOR; and metaphors are, by definition, limited and inexact
[Reality]
which is why I said “But please, continue to attempt to compare them, it does your campaign so much benefit in trying to change the minds of those who are pro-choice.”
There are at least three clear problems with this statement of yours:
1) It evades/misses the original point completely: you were claiming that, since the abortion mass-slaughter did not (in your mind, at least) satisfy every last detail and nuance of every definition of “holocaust”, it was unjustifiably used to refer to such… and that’s nonsense, which your current comment doesn’t even pretend to address.
2) Those who seek to live a morally upright life speak the truth, first and foremost, BECAUSE it’s the TRUTH; only secondarily do they seek to persuade by it. No one on this board, I think, is under any delusion that “speaking the truth” will always and everywhere make converts. Free will does come into play, you know.
3) This rather smug- and prim-sounding comment of yours is rhetorical fluff, saying nothing at all of substance.
Reality says: November 5, 2013 at 7:30 pm
“So what you are saying is that there is a government initiated and instigated policy to terminate each and every
.
fetus
.
on an ongoing basis?”
.
Real-stupid-ity,
.
To which species of ‘fetus’ are you referring?
.
The German eugenicists did not start with the Hebrews. The first 275,000 people they murdered were gentile Germans with birth defects, a family history of mental illness, and persistent health problems.
.
When the National Socialist German Worker’s Party gained control of the German government through the democratic process, they deified their Führer and with vaunted German efficiency they transformed mass murder into an art form. But the first group of people Hitler singled out for destruction were not the political opposistion, but the ‘brown shirts’, the idealistic zealots/usefull idiots who had intimidated any dared to oppose to their goddess. It was called ‘the night of the long knives’.
.
You will see the same thing repeated in this country when the succeeding generations, strapped with paying the bill for health care for everyone and not encumbered with ‘religious restraints’, are no longer able/willing to ‘afford’ the ‘Affordable Care Act’ and begin to rid themselves of their fellow citizens who have lived beyond their ‘productive years’ and become, as the German eugenicists called them, ’useless eaters’.
By Jove, I think reality fully admitted to being illogical. Fascinating, Captain. There may be a spark of life in his Grinchy little heart, too.
:) Bonus points for a Star Trek (original vintage) reference, 9ek!
Everyone here understands thus the connection btw Holocaust and abortions – perhaps you should change your moniker to ‘fantasy’.
But, despite the fact that your definition (of an intentional genocide/master-plan) DOES fit at least one common definition of “holocaust”, we are not obligated to use your specific (and rather esoteric) definition of “holocaust”, and thus we are not unjustified in using other definitions/uses. – the problem you have here is that I don’t disagree with the definitions and/or descriptors of ‘holocaust’. It’s just that abortions don’t meet them, there is no genocidal master plan.
How so? – the way abortion occurs simply does not meet any of these.
you were claiming that, since the abortion mass-slaughter (there is no ‘mass slaughter’) did not (in your mind, at least) satisfy every last detail and nuance of every definition of “holocaust” (any actually), it was unjustifiably used – yes, and that is why I’m happy for anti-choicers to do so if they wish.
Those who seek to live a morally upright life speak the truth, first and foremost, BECAUSE it’s the TRUTH; only secondarily do they seek to persuade by it. – works for me.
‘prim-sounding’? – ‘prim’ normally goes with ‘proper’ doesn’t it? ;-)
The central premises of what constitutes a ‘holocaust’ or even a ‘genocide’ are that it is centrally derived and driven and that the intention is the complete removal of a particular group. Abortion is neither.
To which species of ‘fetus’ are you referring? – if you need to ask that question kentheburper….
You will see the same thing repeated in this country when the succeeding generations, strapped …..begin to rid themselves of their fellow citizens who have lived beyond their ‘productive years’ and become…..’useless eaters’. – please, put it on a placard.
By Jove, I think reality fully admitted to being illogical. – and here I was thinking your comprehension may have improved.
Note that, while strenuously denying that there is a *connection* between abortion and the holocaust – they cannot really even face up to the fact that it was *part* of the actual holocaust itself. The Nazi’s were abortion’s medical and legal founding fathers.
So the actual debate as to whether or not the two are just connected is, essentially, silly. Like arguing if there ever was a connection between racism and the Jim Crow laws.
One more thing before I forget.. The headline for this article is juvenile, petty, and self destructive. There are plenty of pro life “Libs” as well as plenty of pro abortion “Cons.”
So the prevalence of gun crime is a holocaust too HRSH.
Distraction.
How is it a ‘distraction’?
You don’t think gun crime matters or do you think the fact that vast numbers of holocaust victims were killed by guns in an order of magnitude way beyond abortion doesn’t count?
What about knife crime?
There. That’s what distraction looks like.
Your other comments are so absurd so as not to be worth my time. Good luck finding gun ownership being legalized for the first time in the West EVER by the Nazis, or gun ownership prosecuted at Nuremberg.
I think a few victims of the holocaust were killed with knives. Doesn’t interest you?
Who said anything about gun ownership, how absurd. You try to make connections and then miss most of them.
HRSH, as much as I admire your efforts, they are futile. You can’t reason with the unreasonable. “Reality” is one of the least reasonable people I’ve ever met.
JDC isn’t in a position to judge HRSH, she doesn’t read my comments :-)