January 19, 2014

Democrat candidate fudges personal history? [Darleen Click]

Wendy Davis’ (D-Gosnell) story of divorced, teen mom in poverty makin’ it all on her own doesn’t quite meet the facts. Quelle surprise!

FORT WORTH — Wendy Davis has made her personal story of struggle and success a centerpiece of her campaign to become the first Democrat elected governor of Texas in almost a quarter-century.

While her state Senate filibuster last year captured national attention, it is her biography — a divorced teenage mother living in a trailer who earned her way to Harvard and political achievement — that her team is using to attract voters and boost fundraising.

The basic elements of the narrative are true, but the full story of Davis’ life is more complicated, as often happens when public figures aim to define themselves. In the shorthand version that has developed, some facts have been blurred.

Davis was 21, not 19, when she was divorced. She lived only a few months in the family mobile home while separated from her husband before moving into an apartment with her daughter. […]

In an extensive interview last week, Davis acknowledged some chronological errors and incomplete details in what she and her aides have said about her life.

My language should be tighter,” she said. “I’m learning about using broader, looser language. I need to be more focused on the detail.”

High cheekbones, “composite” girlfriends, struggles that were not as dire as portrayed …

What difference does it make anyway?

Posted by Darleen @ 11:33am
467 comments | Trackback

Tags: ,

Comments (467)

  1. - Finally….A post racial president, what a relief…..

    “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black president,” Obama said in the article by David Remnick, appearing in the magazine’s Jan. 27 edition.

    “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black president,” Obama said in his most direct comments on how race has affected his political standing since he’s been in office.

    – “Because hey now, its just not possible that all the snafus’s and scandles, and gov outright unlawful activities are simply happening because I a 24 carat fuck-up, no way.”

  2. Obama is such a tool.

  3. I tried to slog my way through that Remnick piece in the NYer. I had to quit since it was making me queasy.

  4. Another Democrat lying about their background? Hell, that makes her the prime contender for Fauxcahontas’ VP slot…

  5. Davis filed the divorce papers on her second husband the day he paid off her student loans. Nice gal.

  6. I’ll bet she used the money he gave her for other things (like rent or utilities) to file, while she was at it. And probably bought her new gal-toy some fripperies with one of his credit cards, too.

  7. leigh

    And she handed over custody of BOTH kids to 2nd hubby. Can’t have little punishments hanging around when you have a career to build.

  8. “Davis filed the divorce papers on her second husband the day he paid off her student loans. Nice gal.”

    It was kind of her to set him free when she was done milking his wallet.

  9. Can’t have little punishments hanging around when you have a career to build.

    She didn’t get off scot-free though, since second hubby hit her up for child support.

    Heh.

  10. Davis’ behavior as a spouse and parent seems exactly what I’d expect based on her tireless support for late-term abortion. That Wendy, she sure didn’t let kids or family stand in the way or her education (skipping off to Harvard) or career! Embrace your feminist priorities!

  11. So if her background had been more accurate, you’d have no issue with her? No, of course not.

    Why do you sots always complain about something that’s very distant from your real beef with someone? You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.

    Davis’ behavior as a spouse and parent seems exactly what I’d expect based on her tireless support for late-term abortion. That Wendy, she sure didn’t let kids or family stand in the way or her education (skipping off to Harvard) or career! Embrace your feminist priorities! – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    Keep digging. Because if men make babies, it’s the women who automatically have to forgo a demanding education and career.

    I have a book recommendation for you: http://www.amazon.com/Lean-In-Women-Work-Will/dp/0385349947

  12. Ah, but men don’t make babies, child. They are solely, completely and entirely the product of a woman’s choice. There is no child until Mommy says so, right?

    Can’t have it both ways, toots.

  13. >she made a name for herself standing up for killing babies in the womb women’s pro-choice rights.<

  14. Sorry, doll. I have news for you: we can’t have it all.

    Ms. Davis proves it by abandoning her family to champion the slaughter of the unborn. When did she give up her career?

    That’s a great message for her daughters, btw. “Sorry girls. Mama is just too busy to live with you and raise you. Be gone!”

  15. “Why do you sots always complain about something that’s very distant from your real beef with someone? You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.”

    Right. You can only be upset with someone for one single reason at any given time. It’s impossible to see a heap of faults associated with one person. One does not composite multiple faults, one merely chooses the heaviest and discards the rest as irrelevant. The mind just doesn’t work that way, especially when one is stretching to make a rather thin and gossamer point out of the rapidly dispersing foam of a dimly forced idea. Because rules. Also Squirrel.

  16. You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.

    Funny how your side always refers to murdering an innocent as a “choice”. Did the unborn baby have a “choice” in the matter? He or she is the one paying the price, after all. (Meanwhile, she is against “choice” when it comes to schools, religious expression, gun ownership, etc…)

    Oh, and what she was “standing up for” was sub-standard murder mills, a la Gosnell. Back alleys were safer than what she was advocating.

    “Liberals” aren’t, and “progressives” don’t.

  17. I always find it amusing that those who are for murdering unborn infants (calling it a “choice”) are almost unanimously against application of the death penalty for the very worst criminals out there — cop killers, mass/serial killers, murder-for-hire, et alia.

    I can only explain it by how the victim is likely to vote, given the chance. Criminals vote Democratic 90% of the time, whereas an innocent baby has a 50-50 shot of voting Republican. (More if they were paying attention for the first 18 years of life.)

  18. criminal orgs favor their own.

  19. Does Miley helloI’dbetternotbeknownasSteverus have a comment about that, I wonder?

  20. You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.

    No, dear, she “made a name” by opposing bans on abortions after 20 weeks.

    Because, as we all know, the blob of tissue at 20 weeks is just a blob of tissue …

    Right?

    Go ahead. Dare you.

  21. Of course the new troll is steve. He can’t quit us.

  22. Steve never bothers to trim off the attribution thinger at the end.

    The tells will always betray you Steve-O.

  23. So how many stupid restraining premises do we need to blindly adopt/swallow before Davis starts to look like anything like a decent or honorable person? How big of a reality denying handicap does she need to sparkle as she ought?

    Ya came in like a wrecking ball made of shit colored glass.

  24. That and the belligerent pose he strikes.

  25. how many stupid restraining premises do we need to blindly adopt/swallow before Davis starts to look like anything like a decent or honorable person?

    I would be willing to stipulate that she hardly ever speeds, and only occasionally jaywalks…

  26. Continue your culture of death, progressives. Just don’t do it on my dime.

  27. That and the belligerent pose he strikes.

    Indeed, as well as the predictable and boring blind regurgitation of thought free talking points.

  28. You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.

    Abortion Barbie has a name all right; earned for standing up for very-late-term abortions. So late-term that any thinking man or woman has to question how and why they’ve sunk to that heinous level.

    Animals and other Democrats could care less how low they go.

  29. Eingang, have you tried to read the piece about the Wahn in the New Yorker? Talk about cliché packed.

    Oddly, His Nibs doesn’t come off too well as the piece plods on.

  30. That’s a great message for her daughters, btw. “Sorry girls. Mama is just too busy to live with you and raise you. Be gone!” – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051760

    Which is exactly what the father would have been saying if she had kept custody. But that’s OK in your little world because men paycheck career.

    Funny how your side always refers to murdering an innocent as a “choice”. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051760

    Funny how your side calls the moment of conception “a baby”.

    Oh, and what she was “standing up for” was sub-standard murder mills, a la Gosnell. Back alleys were safer than what she was advocating. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051760

    What a fat fucking lie. And it also makes you a hypocrite about wanting a more free market with less regulation. If you can regulate someone’s choices away, because you don’t agree with that choice, you’re fine with that. Fascist.

    No, dear, she “made a name” by opposing bans on abortions after 20 weeks. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051760

    No, dear. She made a name for herself standing up to regulations that would (and did) shutter abortion providers. Pay attention.

    I’d love to hear your enlightened thoughts on things like state mandated trans-vaginal untrasounds. Go ahead, I dare you.

  31. It’s so cute how you fancy yourself a mind-reader, steve.

  32. Fascist.

    Nazi.

  33. and the little gosnell steve just skates by my link.

    Good show and do tell us again how you justify convenience abortions 20+ weeks.

  34. Good show and do tell us again how you justify convenience abortions 20+ weeks. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051793

    I’ll happily give you no abortions after 20 weeks if you drop all the bullshit regulations on abortions before 20 weeks. Is it a deal? Didn’t think so.

    Next!

  35. little gosnell steve, you trying to peddle that myth in order to avoid taking responsibility for pushing late-term abortions?

  36. hellomynameiscuomo

    liars who what lie news:

    >Open Letter to the Editor Regarding New York Post Story “Gov. Cuomo to conservatives: Leave NY” published on Saturday, January 18th, 2014.

    The New York Post distorted Governor Cuomo’s words yesterday, saying that the Governor said “conservatives should leave New York.” The Governor did not say that, nor does he believe that.

    If you read the transcript (below), it is clear that the Governor was making the observation that an extreme right candidate cannot win statewide because this is a politically moderate state (either moderate Republican or moderate Democratic).

    In the same response, the Governor went on to say “it is fine” to be anti-gun control, and anti-choice” – as he respects both positions.<

    link

  37. That isn’t your decision to make, steve. It belongs to the People.

  38. if you drop all the bullshit regulations on abortions before 20 weeks. Is it a deal? Didn’t think so. –

    You ass, but that’s a known. I’m like the majority of Americans. I want to keep abortion legal UNDER certain circumstances.

    the majority is NOT pro-abortion until birth like you, Wendy & misanthropic Progressives.

    But hey, you have your caricatures to maintain.

  39. She made a name for herself standing up to regulations that would (and did) shutter abortion providers.

    Yeah, boldly standing up against the draconian premise that an abortion provider would have to be able to admit a woman to a hospital if the procedure went south.

  40. >I’ll happily give you no abortions after 20 weeks if you drop all the bullshit regulations on abortions before 20 weeks. Is it a deal? <

    anti medicine and anti science in one proggtarded post! shake it smiley you go trans grrl!

  41. Darleen, allow me to restate the question:

    I’ll happily give you no abortions after 20 weeks if you drop all the bullshit regulations on abortions before 20 weeks. Is it a deal? Didn’t think so.

    Next!

  42. boldly standing up against the draconian premise that an abortion provider would have to be able to admit a woman to a hospital if the procedure went south.

    That practice just tramples on the rights of PAs to perform surgical procedures, Eingang, and you know it.

  43. Funny how your side calls the moment of conception “a baby”.

    Because it will sometimes end up as a tricycle. Or a potted plant. Or a rock. Only every once in every thousand births is a fertilized human ovum ever going to actually become a “baby”. Isn’t that what you are claiming?

    What a fat fucking lie. And it also makes you a hypocrite about wanting a more free market with less regulation.

    http://tinyurl.com/lwpvyjb

    The law that the Legislature passed in July also bans abortions at 20 weeks and, beginning in September 2014, requires doctors to perform all abortions in surgical facilities.

    Which means that the “non-surgical” centers would have to close. Abortion mills, in other words, that have no other purpose than killing unborn babies. Hell, they can’t even do botox or mammograms. Like I said, the back alleys would be safer.

    She made a name for herself standing up to regulations that would (and did) shutter abortion providers.

    And exactly what regulations was she opposing? Be specific, steve… (Hint: The term “20 weeks” is important in this context.)

  44. Yeah, boldly standing up against the draconian premise that an abortion provider would have to be able to admit a woman to a hospital if the procedure went south. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051808

    Don’t even try to claim that this had any use beyond closing abortion providers. Because if you do, you’re either stupid or a liar.

  45. if you drop all the bullshit regulations on abortions before 20 weeks

    You mean like 14 year olds being allowed to have one during school hours without parental permission or notification? When the school nurse can’t even give them an aspirin? Why don’t you just come out and say “I like killing babies”?

  46. Like I said, the back alleys would be safer.

    Another complete lie. How many Texan women died from complications arising from these abortion providers? Take your time.

  47. >Because if you do, you’re either stupid or a liar.<

    big anti medicine this one. probably a fan of fgm. allan ackbar!

  48. It’s public record, steve. You tell us.

  49. Because if you do, you’re either stupid or a liar.

    when desperate, the progressive gosnell will resort to projection

  50. Don’t even try to claim that this had any use beyond closing abortion providers.

    The use was increasing safety by reducing marginally or unqualified abortionists, and/or abortion parlors without adequate access to tertiary care.

    Why do you hate women and want them to have substandard care ?

  51. Since I haven’t seen you cite one “bullshit” regulation, why should I agree to anything?

    Let’s see 12 y/os can get abortions without even one parent in the loop … I’d say that was a bullshit standard that should be outlawed.

  52. >How many Texan women died from complications arising from these abortion providers? Take your time.<

    does that include the baby?

    “Texas Gosnell” will NOT be indicted for regularly committing infanticide

  53. Why don’t you just come out and say “I like killing babies”?

    He doesn’t have to, it comes standard with his ProggCard™, as to the proggs, “women’s health” means nothing but abortion.

    If the proggs spent half the money and effort on breast cancer as they do on abortion, there would have been a cure by now.

  54. does that include the baby?

    No, they are fetuses until they are 26 and off their parent’s obamacare.

  55. The use was increasing safety by reducing marginally or unqualified abortionists, and/or abortion parlors without adequate access to tertiary care.
    Why do you hate women and want them to have substandard care ?
    – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051813

    Why don’t you think women are smart enough to make these choices for themselves, Mr. Free Market. How many women in texas died of complications from an abortion?

    So are you stupid or a liar?

  56. How many babies died from abortions in Texas, steve? Just a clump of cells that will turn out to have been nothing but a model train, right, steve? Or maybe it will grow up to be nothing but a ham sandwich, right? No chance at all of it actually becoming a human being, right? Hell, we still haven’t seen any evidence of YOU being a human being, steve…

  57. Since I haven’t seen you cite one “bullshit” regulation, why should I agree to anything? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051823

    Seriously?

    Waiting period
    Required ultrasound
    Required counseling
    Admitting privileges
    Ambulatory surgical center
    Limits on medication

    So is it a deal? No abortions are allowed after 20 weeks, but before 20 weeks all that shit goes away?

  58. is good for women to make their own choices

    me i make my own choices all the time

    it’s a lot of pressure but it’s also very gratifying

  59. >So are you stupid or a liar?<

    are you hitler, stalin, pol pot or mao?

  60. How many babies died from abortions in Texas, steve? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051826

    If you hate abortions so bad, don’t have one. And stay out of other people’s lives. But that’s not good enough for you. You need to dictate the decisions others make. Especially if those people are women.

  61. She specified “bullshit” regulation, steve. Try and keep up.

  62. Wendy Davis is another media creation, nothing more, nothing less. Davis is a typical lying leftist who parrots the leftist line and manages to look half-way decent while doing so.

    The only thing Davis has going for her is her looks, because the crap Davis spews is not original. The whole abortion filibuster as a springboard to a national stage is only possible with a complicit and willing media. The media helped create Obama and thinks they can do it again with Davis.

  63. Why don’t you think women are smart enough to make these choices for themselves, Mr. Free Market.

    You aren’t very consistent, not that that is a remarkable thing for a “progressive”. On the one hand, you want to regulate all aspects of life except sex and drugs because you think people are too stupid to make their own decisions, but you get spilkes when someone suggests that women seeking abortion go to someone actually qualified, and in a place where they can get care in the event of a complication

    As far as stupid or lying goes, you have long since established yourself as the league champ here, buttercup.

  64. I see we have another racist leftist among us spewing nonsense.

  65. And stay out of other people’s lives.

    What about the baby’s life, steve? The baby is the one having to pay the price for that “choice”. Couldn’t she have made the “choice” to just keep her knees closed?

  66. >but before 20 weeks all that shit goes away?<

    yea you baby killers were given a "red line" : no infanticide after this date. oh for the glory days of pounding the suckers heads on rocks you twisted faggot.

  67. A proponent of “Obamacare” is whining about “staying out of other people’s lives. How quaint.

  68. You need to dictate the decisions others make.

    Such as “not allowed to own scary-looking guns”, “not allowed to buy incandescent bulbs”, “not allowed to home-school”, “not allowed to enforce immigration laws”, “not allowed to have toilets/showerheads that use water”, “not allowed to pray in school”, “not allowed to eat trans-fats/smoke tobacco/refuse GLBFTLSABC123 anything at all”, etc., etc.

    But requiring places performing medical procedures to actually have qualified medical staff and equipment on hand? FASCIST!

  69. Our resident leftists hates blacks. Otherwise, why would he push for a procedure that falls disproportionately on the black population?

    Typical racist douchebag leftist.

  70. >You need to dictate the decisions others make.<

    like obamacare clowndisaster?

  71. The only thing Davis has going for her is her looks, because the crap Davis spews is not original. The whole abortion filibuster as a springboard to a national stage is only possible with a complicit and willing media. The media helped create Obama and thinks they can do it again with Davis. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051829

    I think you missed how that whole thing played out. The MSM was ignoring it while social media went wild. But don’t let that stop you from being demeaning and dismissive.

    You aren’t very consistent, not that that is a remarkable thing for a “progressive”. On the one hand, you want to regulate all aspects of life except sex and drugs because you think people are too stupid to make their own decisions, but you get spilkes when someone suggests that women seeking abortion go to someone actually qualified, and in a place where they can get care in the event of a complication – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051829

    How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?

    Couldn’t she have made the “choice” to just keep her knees closed? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051829

    Because the guy that fucked her is apparently absolved of all responsibility in your world. Lets say she had “kept her knees closed” (you fucking asshole) – the outcome would be *exactly the same*. No baby born 9 months later.

    But requiring places performing medical procedures to actually have qualified medical staff and equipment on hand? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051829

    How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?

  72. >How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?<

    how many babies? fuck head

  73. >How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?<

    babies die you lie

  74. How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?

    There is more than death, you know, how many suffered non-fatal complications ? DSHS didn’t start collecting this data until January 2013 and hasn’t released statistics yet.

    Because the guy that fucked her is apparently absolved of all responsibility in your world.

    That is a fantastic bit of projection, even for you.

    The fact that the Gosnells of the world exist proves that there are those who cannot make informed decisions about abortion.

    Why would you deny protection to the least among us who are unfortunate enough either to share the left side of the IQ Gaussian distribution with you, or to have been as badly educated as you ?

  75. Because the guy that fucked her is apparently absolved of all responsibility in your world.

    Not in my world. It’s in your world of “it’s only the woman’s choice” that absolves the man of all responsibility. Hell, with Planned Parenthood, he doesn’t even have to pay the bills, and if it happens to be statutory rape of a minor, PP will even help cover up his crime.

    Try “Just Say ‘No’.” Of course, that’s not what “your side” wants.

    How many women in texas died from complications related to an abortion?

    How many babies died in Texas abortion clinics?

  76. Waiting period There’s a 3 day cooling off period for buy a car or a house. They’re more valuable than human life?

    Required ultrasound The only way to adequately assess the gestation age. You’re anti-information?

    Required counseling Informed consent is not for women? Really?

    Admitting privileges Why do you want women dying of abortion complications?

    Ambulatory surgical center Wow, women getting abortions should NOT have the same level of care as women getting boob jobs or liposuction?

    Limits on medication I have no clue what that means.

    Again. Your “bullshit” is really about privileging abortion far beyond the health and welfare of the women involved.

    thanks for playing. There’s a fruit basket for you upon exiting.

  77. come on steve, look at the pictures at the link I provided and tell me that is NOT a baby.

  78. There is more than death, you know, how many suffered non-fatal complications ? DSHS didn’t start collecting this data until January 2013 and hasn’t released statistics yet. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051841

    Well – How many pregnant females died of abortion-related causes in 2011? None was reported, while 116 females died of pregnancy complications. The last abortion-related death was reported in 2008. Five such deaths have been reported since 2002, according to DSHS. It says all details are confidential.

    But you know what’s more dangerous than abortion? Carrying a baby to term and delivering it. So much for the safety of women being your big concern. Why don’t you join your fellow godbrothers here and just admit that you think any abortion is murder, and drop all the bullshit.

  79. >Carrying a baby to term and delivering it. So much for the safety of women being your big concern. Why don’t you join your fellow godbrothers here and just admit that you think any abortion is murder, and drop all the bullshit. <

    effin' darwinian proggtarded

  80. Darleen, just admit it. You want no abortion after 20 weeks, and no abortion before 20 weeks either.

  81. But you know what’s more dangerous than abortion? Carrying a baby to term and delivering it.

    your moral compass isn’t just broke … it’s 180 degrees out of whack.

  82. proggtarded: anti scientific knowledge all the time.

  83. But you know what’s more dangerous than abortion? Carrying a baby to term and delivering it.

    So I guess it’s a good thing that middle-aged men have to have maternity coverage under ObamaCare (which is nothing about forcing people to do things they don’t want to do, right, steve?)

    How many babies died because of abortions, steve?

  84. >You want no abortion after 20 weeks, and no abortion before 20 weeks either. <

    you tell me : sandra fuck

  85. >How many babies died because of abortions, steve?<

    stop doing genocide on black babies steve!

  86. btw dear, abortion deaths are under-reported because of politics. Deaths are usually passed off as something other than abortion, like due to “general anesthesia”.

    Kinda like the false stats on American v EU infant mortality rates.

    The EU doesn’t count live born babies under a certain weight AS live born babies. So pulling a gosnell on official “still borns” doesn’t make the stats.

  87. Steve is just playing coverup for Obama, too, and his support of letting babies who survive abortion to die in linen closets.

  88. “Darleen, just admit it. You want no abortion after 20 weeks, and no abortion before 20 weeks either. ”

    Why do we have to change the subject anytime a lib gets a hair up their ass? Is this supposed to pass for some kind tactical pivoting ? Is it just a problem with concentration?

  89. Deaths are usually passed off as something other than abortion, like due to “general anesthesia”.

    Good thing that they don’t have to have any medical personnel or equipment (such as defibrillators) around when putting women under general anesthesia, something not even dentists are allowed to do, and all they are doing is pulling teeth.

  90. “Well – How many pregnant females died of abortion-related causes in 2011? ”

    Is ‘abortion related causes’ even a published metric ? Of course not.

  91. The last bastion of the dim witted is to say, “Your stats are junk, and I have no better stats to offer.”

  92. Darleen, at what point are you OK with abortion?

  93. Oh. Stevie is back. And he’s brought his “D” game!

    I would have given him an “F”, except everyone gets a trophy for participation.

  94. “I think you missed how that whole thing played out. The MSM was ignoring it while social media went wild. But don’t let that stop you from being demeaning and dismissive.”

    Ine dismisses that which deserves it and demeaning is you crying “waaaah.”

    They put her stupid failed filibuster and the riot outside on the news. It was not ignored by the press. And no one gave a rats ass about the social media. It was some dopes on titter who didn’t remember tweeting a week later. You’re a n idiot steve. Just fuck off.

  95. >Darleen, at what point are you OK with abortion?<

    why you like killing babies steve? you killed puppies and kittens in your yout?

  96. The last bastion of the dim witted is to say, “Your stats are junk, and I have no better stats to offer.”

    How many people have signed up for ObamaCare in Oregon, steve? Or are you admitting to being dim-witted? (We already knew it, but admitting that you have a problem is the first step, etc., etc.)

    http://freebeacon.com/oregon-health-exchange-yet-to-complete-one-enrollment/

    Back to how Wendy Davis is a lying skank who wants late-term babies killed, and how you are defending the murder of babies…

  97. “The last bastion of the dim witted is to say, “Your stats are junk, and I have no better stats to offer.”

    No the last bastion of the dim, much like their first, is to present stats that are junk and to offer none better when called on it. It’s hockey sticks all the way down with you sad, self impressed, cloistered chumps. You can’t manage anything else.

  98. Darleen, at what point are you OK with abortion?

    I would argue “only in the case of rape or incest”, but that would prevent PP from covering up any crimes, so you aren’t okay with that, clearly.

  99. Why don’t you join your fellow godbrothers here and just admit that you think any abortion is murder, and drop all the bullshit.

    Actually, I am an Apathetic Agnostic (We Don’t Know, and We Don’t Care), and am not against all abortion.

    However, having seen way too many things go wrong because medical procedures were carried out by a variety of “providers” who were either insufficiently trained or working beyond their scope of practice, I am all for abortions being carried out by qualified personnel in a suitable setting. I am a monster nazi fascist that way.

    We have long ago established that you know nothing of medicine or health care delivery, so why do you deny the possibility of complications, and that the risk of same increases with gestational age up to 50% by the second trimester.

    How many pregnant females died of abortion-related causes in 2011?

    In the United States, mortality rates per 100,000 abortions are as follows: fewer than 8 weeks, 0.5%; 11-12 weeks, 2.2%; 16-20 weeks, 14%; and more than 21 weeks, 18%.

    Contrary to your uninformed fantasy, abortion is not a benign procedure, particularly if performed by the ill-qualified.

    Why do you hate women and not want them to get adequate care ?

  100. And why is it that the people insisting on as many abortions as possible are all here in the first place because their own mothers disagree?

    I would have happily chipped in for steve’s mom to have one, just to prevent such unalloyed stupidity from existing…

  101. Another bastion of the dim witted is changing nics after being banned for being a lame, ignorant, childish, twerp who brings nothing of value to the argument. Now, g grow up and fuck off.

  102. Ein – From that very same link:

    In the United States in 2005, 7 women reportedly died from complications of legal induced abortion.[3]

    In the United States, mortality from septic abortion rapidly declined after legalization of abortion. Death now occurs in less than 1 per 100,000 abortions. Figures for most European countries are similar to US rates.

    Again – it’s FAR safer than carrying a baby to term and delivering.

    Actually, I am an Apathetic Agnostic (We Don’t Know, and We Don’t Care), and am not against all abortion. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051863

    What abortion are you OK with? Be specific.

  103. How many babies died because of abortions, steve? Be specific. (or at least within an order of magnitude)

  104. What abortion are you OK with? Be specific.

    What restrictions on abortions are you OK with? Be specific.

  105. Why should anyone have to be okay with abortion? Where’s the preening opportunity in that? What are the good abortions? Rape? Hitler clone? Maybe a 2 Megaton nuke baby? Maybe when the kid is a squid because you boffed a black goo infected dude on LV-223 ? Aren’t you going to jabber on stupidly about how without abortion the Earth’s crust would collapse under the weight of our teaming peasant multitudes ?

  106. What restrictions on abortions are you OK with? Be specific. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051874

    Society can determine how many weeks into a pregnancy abortion should be allowed. I’d be OK in seeing it go as low as the end of the first trimester.

    Parental notification and consent is also appropriate.

    You cool with that Drum? No, of course not.

  107. Darleen, at what point are you OK with abortion?

    Again, you seek to define the frame.

    The vast majority of abortions are convenience based. That makes them immoral.

    Abortions for rape, incest, or therapeutic ones done on fetuses with mortal deficiencies (e.g. no brain) are tragic, a moral neutral. Still nothing to celebrate as “Ok”.

    I will reluctantly accept the legality of seeking an abortion up to about 12 weeks gestation FOR adult women of sound mind, unmarried or separated, with the only restrictions being for the health and safety of the woman. I will never find it morally or ethically “OK”

    But I’m at least honest about what an abortion entails … the death of a unique human individual.

  108. You were asked to leave. Fuck off. Stay gone. Get a life.

  109. I’d be OK in seeing it go as low as the end of the first trimester.

    What utter bullsh*t since you’ve spent the better part bleating your undying love for late term abortions.

  110. The vast majority of abortions are convenience based. That makes them immoral. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051880

    And here we disagree. But I’m cool with society reaching a consensus on where, exactly, to draw the line. I’m also cool with that line moving over time. FWIW, the trends are in your favor. As premature deliveries are survivable at a younger and younger age, you’re going to see late term abortions become vastly less popular. But you’re also not going to see much support for that “moment of conception” business.

  111. What utter bullsh*t since you’ve spent the better part bleating your undying love for late term abortions. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051886

    You might have assumed that, but if you check, you’ll see I never said any such thing.

  112. I don’t care what you are cool with. You were banned. YOU. Not a fake name. Fuck. Off.

  113. Society can determine how many weeks into a pregnancy abortion should be allowed.

    But not if they are in Texas? You were just arguing that abortions should be allowed much later than society has chosen. Pick a side, steve.

    Parental notification and consent is also appropriate.

    But that isn’t what Wendy was pushing for, nor what is the standard today. Why are you against women’s right to choose to kill their babies, steve? Pick a side, steve.

    I’m perfectly fine with restricting it to first-term and mandating that parents be notified and be required to consent to underage abortions (with prosecution of the male partner for statutory rape/sexual abuse where legally appropriate – and any time a parent-of-the-girl is involved, it is likely appropriate).

    I also think that for medical procedures that carry a risk — such as abortion — that the patient be fully informed of the procedure and its risks, and that it be performed in an actual surgical center. You don’t want that. Why do you hate women so much that you would encourage them to seek substandard care, steve?

    Admit it, steve, you just want to kill babies, and don’t care whether the mother is okay afterward or not.

  114. “But not if they are in Texas? You were just arguing that abortions should be allowed much later than society has chosen. Pick a side, steve. ”

    And this is coming from Mr. “we won, law of the land, democracy” too.

  115. But I’m cool with society reaching a consensus on where, exactly, to draw the line

    How about if the society in one State draws the line at 0 weeks? Are you still okay with that?

  116. You aren’t welcome around here, steve. Don’t you understand that?

    You are a proven liar. You will accomplish nothing.

    Go away.

  117. But not if they are in Texas? You were just arguing that abortions should be allowed much later than society has chosen. Pick a side, steve. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051887

    Texas (for me at least) was a lot less about 20 weeks, and a lot more about bullshit regulations that would shutter abortion providers altogether (because they were designed to shutter abortion providers). If Texas wants 20 weeks, cool with me.

    How about if the society in one State draws the line at 0 weeks? Are you still okay with that? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051887

    I’d think they were idiots, but you should get the government you deserve, and if you’re that dumb, so be it. All the smart people are free to move.

    I also think that for medical procedures that carry a risk — such as abortion — that the patient be fully informed of the procedure and its risks, and that it be performed in an actual surgical center. You don’t want that. Why do you hate women so much that you would encourage them to seek substandard care, steve? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051887

    I’ll ask again – how many women in Texas have died from complications related to an abortion? That question actually has bearing on your assertion that it needs to be done in a surgical center. You are aware that early abortions are often performed by taking a couple medications over the course of a few days, right?

    Are you in favor of outlawing home deliveries or midwives and do you insist that all deliveries be performed in a surgical center? Because if not, it’s not really about the health of the woman, and all about making it harder.

  118. In the United States, mortality from septic abortion…

    Is there anything about which you have no knowledge that you will not hold forth on ? Do you have any clue what a septic abortion is ?

    Deaths of women associated with complications from abortions for 2009 are being investigated under CDC’s Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System. In 2008, the most recent year for which data were available, 12 women were reported to have died as a result of complications from known legal induced abortions.

    However,

    …because a substantial number of abortions have been documented in states that did not report to CDC during 1998–2007 (3,12) [including California], the total number of abortions was not available …

    IOW – at least 12, which means that, again despite your fantasy, abortion, particularly by the unqualified, is not a benign procedure ? Why do you want women to have less than optimal care ? Do you hate them ?

    Society can determine how many weeks into a pregnancy abortion should be allowed.

    The lying liar lies. Were that true, you wouldn’t have your knickers in a twist over society determining the qualifications of abortion providers and facilities.

  119. You are a lying sack of shit. You were banned. Why can’t you conform to that banning and find something else to do with your time?

  120. “bullshit regulations”

    Obamacare is nothing but bullshit regulations. Idiot.

  121. Texas (for me at least) was a lot less about 20 weeks, and a lot more about bullshit regulations that would shutter abortion providers…

    Three questions: Can a woman in Texas get an abortion ? If the answer is yes, why do you so upset that standards of care have been increased ? Yu claim to be in the People’s Soviet of Oregon, why do you care about Texas ?

  122. “I’ll ask again – how many women in Texas have died from complications related to an abortion? ”

    Don’t ask, just fuck off, you banned idiot.

  123. Who’s got the ban stick tonight? Please use it.

  124. (because they were designed to shutter abortion providers)

    No, they were designed to mandate that surgical procedures (which abortion is, let’s be clear about that) be performed in actual surgical centers with emergency equipment available in case it is needed. Whodathunkit? Why do you insist on substandard care for women?

    All the smart people are free to move.

    Which explains why more people are moving to Texas and out of those suck-ass blue states. But you would be okay with banning the procedure entirely, as long as a majority of citizens agree? What other things would you be okay with letting society determine, with those that feel strongly about the opposite being able to move elsewhere? (Say, the definition of Marriage?)

    And as Eingang points out, you might be okay with setting a limit, but you are then forbidding that society from making sure the procedure is carried out in a safe place and by people who can respond to unusual events. How many is enough before you agree that substandard centers be closed?

    Conclusions: Compared to women who delivered, women who had an early or late abortion had significantly higher mortality rates within 1 through 10 years.

    http://www.medscimonit.com/abstract/index/idArt/883338

  125. Drum,

    That is an interesting article – the average age of the women having late abortions was 5 years less than those having a normal birth (SD about the same for both), but over the span of the study, the death rate for the late abortion cohort was 3 time higher. Age for early abortion is again 5 years less (SD about the same again), but the death rate 1.8 times higher.

    From the article:

    Examination of death rates associated with abortion over longer periods of time is especially warranted by the need to more accurately identify abortion related deaths…

    One of the theories for the difference, again from the paper:

    For example, abortion is associated with an increased risk of suicide [4], substance abuse [13], post-traumatic stress disorder [14], and a lower assessment of general health [15]. In addition, it is notable that the elevated rates of mortality associated with pregnancy loss observed in this study are on the same order of magnitude as the elevated rates of mortality among women who experience the death of a child under 18 years of age [16].

    Be interesting to see if I can find a similar US study, but if this is accurate, abortion related death is probably underreported.

    Thanks for the link.

  126. The numbers on that link are from Finland, so are somewhat smaller as to terms of population, but the accuracy — and conclusion — is irrefutable. And the under- and non-reporting of abortion-related deaths in the US is long since established, but to what degree is the question, and entirely for political reasons.

    You’re welcome, btw…

  127. I’m waiting for DV to chime in and bash those stats, so I can point out that “The last bastion of the dim witted is to say, “Your stats are junk, and I have no better stats to offer.” ”

    Unless he’s already been banned. Again.

  128. Drum,

    Denmark – but your point is still valid, particularly given that the population is far more homogeneous than the US, speaking of which, the authors, interestingly enough, are American.

  129. Only Jeff wields the ban hammer, and he is quite reticent to use it.

    I genuinely applaud his self-control.

    These days, I have no patience with any of the trolls. However, the progressives/fascists are the ones who ultimately want to control speech. Classical liberals want to make sure that all speech is heard, even in this case when the progressives are freeloading.

    At least, that’s my guess as to what is going on.

  130. Sure, but once you’re banned you’re banned. Coming back doesn’t unban you. Changing your name doesn’t unban you. We should not be arguing with the host as to whether we are banned or not.

  131. What I mean is: not taking the explicit hint that you aren’t wanted, from actually being banned, especially after a damned thread about it, isn’t clever or puckish or brave or impressive. It’s childish, boorish, insular, and pathetic. It’s the move of a loser and an antisocial pest. The site and Jeff have nothing to prove on that front. The banned need to learn that they are quite seriously no longer welcome and should just swallow their “l’esprit de l’escalier” bile, ignore their base stalker impulses, and simply admit that it’s over, and well past time for them to fuck off.

  132. palaeomerus says January 19, 2014 at 11:49 pm

    Hear, hear.

  133. “If there’s one life we can save, we’ve got an obligation to try.” – Barack Hussein Obama

  134. * – unless it’s a useless clump of annoying cells, like a rapist or a troll

  135. “Slavs, Latin, and Hebrew immigrants are human weeds … a
    deadweight of human waste … Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a menace to
    the race.” – Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood and noted champion of women’s rights racial purity

  136. But I’m cool with society reaching a consensus on where, exactly, to draw the line. I’m also cool with that line moving over time.

    You are just always cool by definition, aren’t you?

    I’d think they were idiots, but you should get the government you deserve, and if you’re that dumb, so be it. All the smart people are free to move.

    It appears there are limits to your coolness, but not to your capacity for inconsistency.

  137. Why do you sots always complain about something that’s very distant from your real beef with someone? You don’t like her because she made a name for herself standing up for women’s pro-choice rights.

    Ba haaa haaa haaa …

    You see, her personal “story” reveals that she is nothing but an ambitious, selfish, politician. Which jives perfectly with our opinion of her.

  138. Deaths are usually passed off as something other than abortion, like due to “general anesthesia”.

    Good thing that they don’t have to have any medical personnel or equipment (such as defibrillators) around when putting women under general anesthesia, something not even dentists are allowed to do, and all they are doing is pulling teeth.

    The biggest problem is that the pro-abortion side sees ANYTHING qualifier to be an attack on a woman’s right to HER BODY. In Michigan, the lawmakers wanted to require abortion centers to have sinks in the room where abortions were performed (among some other such things) – and that’s what set off the huge VAGINA deal here in Michigan.

    Sinks. Can’t mandate that they have sinks in there. Woman are going to resort to back alley abortions.

  139. sinks are pretty cool but if i got to pick between a sink and a mini-fridge I’d go with the mini-fridge

    it’s all about choices

  140. Gee, thanks for that profound contribution, Happyfeet.

  141. He’s an extra deep thinker.

  142. Our resident fascist complains about abortion regulations yet doesn’t blink an eye about all the regulations promulgated by the EPA and Obamacare.

    I think the fascist troll might not be arguing in good faith and is intellectually dishonest.

    Probably just a one of. After all, if it’s one thing we can expect, it’s a robust discussion, I mean, robust recital of talking points by leftist trolls.

  143. Yes, and he also talks about what “society”, and “the people” “decide.

    What part of circumventing society’s representatives through executive order, judicial decree, and bureaucratic regulation increases our freedom? How can “the people” have any serious say in laws when politically unaccountable people are making the laws in a manner not authorized by the Constitution?

  144. Society is good and fair and wise, except when it’s idiotic. Apparently.

  145. Here’s my offer: Women can do anything they want with their bodies. Doctors can’t kill unborn children.

    Have at it.

  146. The Chihuahua states:

    Because the guy that fucked her is apparently absolved of all responsibility in your world. Lets say she had “kept her knees closed” (you fucking asshole) – the outcome would be *exactly the same*. No baby born 9 months later.

    Your first sentence has nothing to do with the rest of the quoted (and more odious than usual) comment.

    I don’t understand why you would call someone who believes that a woman can choose to have sexual intercourse or not a “fucking asshole”. I don’t understand why you think the “outcome would be *exactly the same*” if you actually went through (from what you’ve written) at least 1 and maybe 3 pregnancies with your wife.

    The amusing idea that “the guy that fucked her is apparently absolved of all responsibility” is so 1970’s. There’s this thing called “DNA” and another thing called “paternity test” which uses the first thing. Men don’t get the free pass any more. Of course, unlike the woman involved, the male cannot absolve himself of the responsibility. For the equality, or something.

  147. Oh dear, looks like I missed a lot. Though it’s safe to guess that the rest of you have rebutted hellomynameiswhatevs well and good, I’ll just add this: in my humble experience as a wife, mom & working professional, I’ve found that , A] we make decisions as a team, that are B] based on what is best for the family, so that C] we all come out winners even when one of us doesn’t get exactly what we want. See, we’re winners because we have each other, our highest priority.

  148. Our resident fascist complains about abortion regulations yet doesn’t blink an eye about all the regulations promulgated by the EPA and Obamacare.

    Abortion regulations are bad because we think women are too stupid to make their own choices, but EPA (et al.) regulations are good because everyone is to stupid to make their own choices.

    If you reichwingnazifascistrethuglicanxtianstwingnutteabaggers weren’t so thick you would see the crystal clear geometric logic of it.

  149. It’s because this discussion is all about regulating ladyparts as a means of furthering the patriarchy, Richard.

    Maybe I oughtn’t have typed that where everyone can read it.

  150. palaeomerus says January 19, 2014 at 11:49 pm

    I agree as well.

  151. I wonder if steve’s “wife” has one of those “I’m Proud of my Abortion!” tees?

    She could wear it to PTA meetings.

  152. In Michigan, the lawmakers wanted to require abortion centers to have sinks in the room where abortions were performed (among some other such things) – and that’s what set off the huge VAGINA deal here in Michigan. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    So you’re saying that as long as it’s as uber safe as possible for the woman, you’re OK with abortion? Didn’t think so. Next!

    No, they were designed to mandate that surgical procedures (which abortion is, let’s be clear about that) be performed in actual surgical centers with emergency equipment available in case it is needed. Whodathunkit? Why do you insist on substandard care for women? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    So as long as abortions are safe and we’re putting the woman first, you’re cool with it? Didn’t think so. You’d mandate all kinds of upgrades for abortion clinics, and then still want them closed. The so called needed upgrades are just a way to drive up the costs to the point where the business isn’t feasible.

    But you would be okay with banning the procedure entirely, as long as a majority of citizens agree? What other things would you be okay with letting society determine, with those that feel strongly about the opposite being able to move elsewhere? (Say, the definition of Marriage?) – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    Why do you think the definition of marriage is changing? Because of changing societal views.

    And as Eingang points out, you might be okay with setting a limit, but you are then forbidding that society from making sure the procedure is carried out in a safe place and by people who can respond to unusual events. How many is enough before you agree that substandard centers be closed? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    Again I ask for evidence of deaths from abortion related complications. Again I ask, so if every abortion were done in a full hospital setting, you’d be OK with it???

    Because what you’re really saying is, “I want it to be safe”. Ok, it’s safe. “I hate it because it’s baby murder, and needs to be banned entirely”. So that “safe” part was really just a bullshit pretext.

    The lying liar lies. Were that true, you wouldn’t have your knickers in a twist over society determining the qualifications of abortion providers and facilities. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    I’m actually not in a twist over it. It’s simply that, in *every* case, the person putting forward these “we just want women to be safe” regulations is someone who’s adamantly pro-life. They can’t outlaw abortion because of the supreme court, but they can chip away at it through one onerous regulation after another until they’ve defacto outlawed it.

    Enjoy that shoe when it’s on the other foot in regards to guns, and every gun owner has to take a class at a facility so regulated that none exist because why don’t you want gun owners to be safe.

  153. It’s simply that, in *every* case, the person putting forward these “we just want women to be safe” regulations is someone who’s adamantly pro-life.

    This is false. If you had bothered to read the archives (sidebar to the left), you would know that we have talked about abortion quite often on PW and have a wide range of views.

  154. Again I ask for evidence of deaths from abortion related complications.

    They are called links; that you will neither read them, nor can understand them, is not something with which we can help you.

  155. Why do you think the definition of marriage is changing? Because of changing societal views.

    Because unelected folks in black robes are overriding the wishes of voters. Ask the voters in California. Or Utah. Or Oklahoma. Or New Mexico. Or Massachusetts. Or even in the Federal Congress. More than 30 States have had the freely expressed views of the actual citizens of their states overridden because of that black robe.

    Enjoy that shoe when it’s on the other foot in regards to guns, and every gun owner has to take a class at a facility so regulated that none exist because why don’t you want gun owners to be safe.

    You mean like in Washington, DC? Or Chicago? Or New York City? How’s that iron-fisted control working out in their murder rates? (And which Amendment guarantees abortions again? I must have missed that one, and there are only 27 to look at. Be specific.)

  156. They are called links; that you will neither read them, nor can understand them, is not something with which we can help you. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051987

    I have read them. The mortality rate is less than 1 per 100,000. You’re a doctor. Does that sound unsafe to you, or does that put it in the range of having wisdom teeth extracted?

    Don’t you find it odd that abortion providers, one type of medical facility, where deaths are exceedingly low, are subject to such a huge effort to improve safety?

    This is false. If you had bothered to read the archives (sidebar to the left), you would know that we have talked about abortion quite often on PW and have a wide range of views. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051987

    Show me someone who’s adamant about increasing the safety of abortion providers who’s also pro-choice.

  157. Because unelected folks in black robes are overriding the wishes of voters. Ask the voters in California. Or Utah. Or Oklahoma. Or New Mexico. Or Massachusetts. Or even in the Federal Congress. More than 30 States have had the freely expressed views of the actual citizens of their states overridden because of that black robe. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1051992

    And this:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx

  158. Show me someone who’s adamant about increasing the safety of abortion providers who’s also pro-choice.

    This obviously excludes Wendy “Kill ‘Em All” Davis, as this entire thread shows. Just a clump of cells, right, steve? Never going to become a baby, because it’s just a fertilized human ovum, and we all know how often that just develops into a dozen roses in a beribboned box…

  159. What the death rate on raw milk consumption?

    Knock yourself out, miley.

  160. Hey, y’all! Pitbull is the best singer in the country!

  161. Doctors are statistically 9,000 times deadlier than the average gun owner, while I’m thinking about it.

  162. I have read them.

    No, you didn’t:

    In the United States, mortality rates per 100,000 abortions are as follows: fewer than 8 weeks, 0.5%; 11-12 weeks, 2.2%; 16-20 weeks, 14%; and more than 21 weeks, 18%.

    I realize that you have never studied either math or statistics and are thus incapable of having anything resembling analytic thought, but if you were, you would realize that those most at risk of complications and/or death are those not having a pharmacologic abortion, but those having surgical procedures. You would also realize that those are the later stage abortions with the highest mortality rate as seen above and mirrored in the full text (which I know you didn’t look at) of the Danish study.

    Just because bodies are not stacked like cordwood outside abortion “clinics” doesn’t mean that you can throw out minimal standards of care which is all the Texas law specifies.

    Show me someone who’s adamant about increasing the safety of abortion providers who’s also pro-choice.

    As your definition of “pro-choice” is abortion anywhere, anytime, by anybody, that would be a logical impossibility.

  163. I think that if you’re going to sanction the murder of the unborn, you should at least have the courage to admit that you’re encouraging the murder of genetically unique individuals whose only crime is inconvenience. You should have the honesty to admit that your counterparts who honestly abhor these murders are arguing in good faith, using arguments consistent with their beliefs. You should recognize that your position is advocating for evil, and premise your arguments on persuading others that it’s a necessary evil.

    The idea that you should saunter into a roomful of strangers and accuse them of hating women and freedom and democracy just because they think murder is wrong and should be against the law? That’s just silly, especially when those strangers have a lengthy track record in support of women, freedom, and democracy. The idea that people who think killing the innocent is wrong should feel guilty about such beliefs is equally silly, and rather insulting to boot, which is a big part of the reason why your side has such a hard time making a persuasive case.

    Finally, the fact that you’re going all-in to support this odious excuse for a popular hero says worlds about your priorities in life. If you had any decency or honesty, you’d admit that Abortion Barbie is a horrible human being, and you’d admit that you’re only cheerleading for her because she makes you feel better about murdering unborn children.

    But, of course, you have neither of those qualities, which is why you’ve been banned in the past, and will continue to be banned until you reform or give up.

  164. To be fair, EA, I’m not sure how to read a percent of a per hundred thousand. Are they saying that it’s 1.8 out of a million at 21 weeks?

  165. Steve apparently thinks that appeal to ridicule is a winning debating tactic.

    Someone needs to bone up on their logical fallacies, instead of parading them.

  166. steve

    Gallup poll is not voter poll.

  167. Also: majority rule does not run unchecked.

    See also: pretty much the entire Civil Rights movement. It’s a good day to be thinking of that.

  168. If I recall correctly there have been a lot more states that have become SSM states through judicial action than from action by their legislatures whatever any poll claims about what people want.

  169. Squid,

    Mortality rates from anything are usually expressed as “X/100,000″, and not percentages, so “18%” is a little clumsy. Regardless, the important thing is the trend wherein, as would be expected, late term abortions, which require greater intervention to perform, have greater risk.

    The problem in defining an exact rate is that, as was noted earlier, even the CDC does not get good stats. Looking at the Danish study which does have good stats, the 1st year mortality rate from late term abortion is 110/100,000, compared to a live birth mortality rate of 17.9/100,000.

    The best US stats I can find for late term abortions is around 14,000 (splitting the difference between highest and lowest estimate found). If we use the 12 deaths SWAG noted above, that gives a US mortality rate for late term abortions of 86/100,000, which compares favorably with the Danish study.

    So, to reiterate, though all risk cannot be eliminated, it can be mitigated by the far from draconian Texas proposals.

  170. Judicial action that has overturned the clear will of the voters, I should add.

    Except in the case of Massachusetts, where a judge claimed that the Constitution of that Commonwealth guaranteed SSM. Considering that it was written by John Adams (yes, THAT John Adams, co-author of the Declaration of Independence, first VPOTUS, 2nd POTUS, et alia), I somehow doubt that SSM even existed, never mind being contemplated or actually mentioned, but what do citizens know? It’s a good thing we have these unelected yabbos to tell us what the law REALLY means, or else We The People might actually start getting ideas above our station…

  171. i wonder if there’s a place where you can get special mlk day sausage-on-a-stick

  172. if you have an abortion scheduled for later you should probably only get a special mlk day sausage-on-a-stick if you feel like you’re hungry enough to eat the whole thing cause almost for sure you can’t wrap it in a napkin and just stick it in the mini-fridge while you’re having your procedure done

    this is because of short-sighted regulations which preference the installation of sinks over mini-fridges

  173. Did you have a point, happy, or are you just being an idiot ?

  174. yes and no

  175. No you don’t have a point, and yes you are being an idiot – got it.

  176. I think he’s trying to make us reconsider our opposition to abortion.

  177. abortion is controversial Mr. mondamay

    ain’t no lie

  178. Murder ain’t so controversial.

    Except to progressives and idiots (BIRM).

  179. The best US stats I can find for late term abortions is around 14,000 (splitting the difference between highest and lowest estimate found). If we use the 12 deaths SWAG noted above, that gives a US mortality rate for late term abortions of 86/100,000, which compares favorably with the Danish study. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    This assumes that all 12 deaths are from late term abortions. Even so, I have no issue (and American’s increasingly have no issue) with making later term abortions harder to obtain or eliminating them all together.

    Again, I’m fine with society drawing the line at 20 weeks, or 16 weeks, or even 12 weeks, if that’s what the people want. I don’t think you’re going to find a majority of people supporting 0 weeks in most states.

    But I also have no problem with a representative of the people standing up for a percentage of the population that prefers looser restrictions on abortion to try and block onerous measures aimed at shuttering abortion providers. Which is what Wendy Davis did. Good for her. Seems a number of people took her side. Representative Democracy!

    I think that if you’re going to sanction the murder of the unborn, you should at least have the courage to admit that you’re encouraging the murder of genetically unique individuals whose only crime is inconvenience. You should have the honesty to admit that your counterparts who honestly abhor these murders are arguing in good faith, using arguments consistent with their beliefs. You should recognize that your position is advocating for evil, and premise your arguments on persuading others that it’s a necessary evil. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    1. I don’t consider terminating a pregnancy early to be murder.
    2. It has exactly the same outcome as if contraception had worked – a genetically unique individual who doesn’t exist.
    3. Reasonable people can discuss where to draw the line and say it is murder. Reasonable people can agree that it’s some time before birth and after conception.
    4. My counterparts are not arguing in good faith. They say that all they want is for abortions to be more safe, when that is, in fact, a lie. Layering regulations on abortion providers is a tactic to drive as many as possible out of business. That, by definition, is not a good faith argument.
    5. If they admitted that these kinds of regulations are the best they can do to chip away at what they consider to be murder, then *that* would be good faith.
    6. Terminating a zero week pregnancy is as evil as using contraception. Terminating a 1 week pregnancy is as evil as using contraception. 3 weeks, 4 weeks, and so on.
    7. Terminating a pregnancy at 39 weeks is definitely more evil than using contraception, so is 38, 37, 36. Why don’t you trust your fellow Americans to figure out where to draw the line?

  180. I like it better when his name is “skip over this comment.” It makes reading comments easier.

    Usually I have to decipher what the latest fake name is before I can skip it. That way I can avoid all that straw flying through the air. I have allergies.

  181. abortion is much less controversial than pizza but it’s really rare that you have commercial real estate what is zoned for both so you have to decide before you sign the lease whether you’re gonna sell abortions or pizza

    if you decide to sell pizza you have to decide whether or not to offer white pizza

    some do some don’t, and there’s not really any rhyme or reason to it, near as I can tell anyhow

  182. This assumes that all 12 deaths are from late term abortions.

    Yes, see “SWAG”. It also assumes that as the CDC doesn’t have good numbers because some states, to include California, are not reporting, the actual number is higher, and that any delta between 12 and the actual number can be attributed to the lower risk procedures.

    Again, I’m fine with society drawing the line at 20 weeks, or 16 weeks, or even 12 weeks, if that’s what the people want.

    You are such a liar, were that true, you wouldn’t have serious issues with the people of Texas having voting for increased standards of care. Representative Democracy !

    Just admit you want unlimited abortion, anytime, anywhere, and performed by anybody.

  183. 1. I don’t consider terminating a pregnancy early to be murder.

    Ending a human life solely for the convenience of another, with no other valid justification, is murder. By definition, a particularly vile crime.

    2. It has exactly the same outcome as if contraception had worked – a genetically unique individual who doesn’t exist.

    Except that contraception prevents the conception in the first place. There is no need for a surgical procedure. By the way, using this logic, killing a 30-year-old man has exactly the same outcome as though his parents had never had him in the first place – a genetically unique individual who no longer exists. Solely for the convenience of another person.

    3. Reasonable people can discuss where to draw the line and say it is murder.

    Which definition immediately excludes Wendy Davis (remember her?), given that she insists that there be no line to discuss, up to and including the moment labor begins.

    Layering regulations on abortion providers is a tactic to drive as many as possible out of business.

    But the EPA should be given even more power. And the ATF.

    Why don’t you trust your fellow Americans to figure out where to draw the line?

    You mean like the people defining marriage? Or deciding to ban abortion entirely? Or enforcing immigration laws, or ObamaCare. Et Cetera. Talk about “bad faith”.

    I, OTOH, would be more than happy to put the legality of abortion up to a vote. Up or down, yes or no. Care to try? Or are you going to let the unelected robe wearers continue to write laws?

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/162374/americans-abortion-views-steady-amid-gosnell-trial.aspx?utm_source=google&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication

  184. Somehow it looks like a rational decision may be subtended by the quality of the crust, where good crust can stand the whiteness-attention in exposure, and poor or marginal crust gets well overridden by stronger stuff like the tomato sauces, multitudinous toppings, (anchovies, onions, bacons, sausages, sweet peppers,mushrooms, etc.). Maybe another hide the decline dealio.

  185. that’s a good point

    I don’t think any of the big chains with mediocre crust offer white pizza at all, but I’m not 100% on that

  186. You should learn to make your own pizza. It’s cheaper and you can control the toppings.

  187. Of course, none of that accounts for the irrational wreckers out there who just don’t give a shit about their crust reputations, and hence will offer any old thing at all without a care in the world. But these are easy to avoid. In fact, they may do everyone a kind of unwitting service.

  188. And it’s very easy to see which kind of crust Wendy Davis is offering.

  189. it’s too late is on the way

    I got mexican and white

    the pizza from these guys has always been superlative so I’m expecting big things from the white

  190. wendy has stanky crust but I don’t take her seriously has a candidate

    and it’s not cause of massageyness it’s cause she’s just a one-issue candidate and Texas is a very sophisticated and multifaceted state

  191. this was a good movie I saw it this weekend on Amazon

    i really enjoyed it and I bet you would enjoy it too if you like sweet quirky heartwarming comedies then this is the movie for you

    the musics were very interesting too that they picked

  192. Reasonable people can discuss where to draw the line and say it is murder. Reasonable people can agree that it’s some time before birth and after conception.

    I admire how baldly you assert that those who honestly believe that the unborn are human beings with rights are by (your) definition “unreasonable,” on exactly the same footing as those who believe that “aborting” 6-year-olds should be copacetic. It’s a cute move, and you might get away with that in your underwater basket weaving classes, but that sort of rhetorical shortcut won’t fly here. Nice try, though!

    By the way, using this logic, killing a 30-year-old man has exactly the same outcome as though his parents had never had him in the first place – a genetically unique individual who no longer exists.

    So its logic is just as hollow as its rhetoric? Why, one might almost be tempted to reconsider the assertion that the typing telephone pole is so much smarter than the rest of us, non?

  193. C. Abbado has died, and some kind y-tube posters have taken notice. This is a fine example: heartstringy Mahler stuff. But there’s plenty else to choose from.

  194. “Reasonable people” is a category that is usually defined to suit the convenience of the utterer’s argument.

  195. I realized that I couldn’t draw a line somewhere after conception and before birth and say that on one side killing the baby was murder and on the other it wasn’t, since any decision I made was arbitrary.

    So, I don’t draw one. I have not the wisdom.

  196. Ending a human life solely for the convenience of another, with no other valid justification, is murder. By definition, a particularly vile crime. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    You consider the moment of conception to be a human life. That’s an opinion.

    Except that contraception prevents the conception in the first place. There is no need for a surgical procedure. By the way, using this logic, killing a 30-year-old man has exactly the same outcome as though his parents had never had him in the first place – a genetically unique individual who no longer exists. Solely for the convenience of another person. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    You only say that because you’re an idiot. Killing a 30 year old is obviously different. First the 30 year old is capable of having an opinion on the matter. Then there’s all the additional lives that that life is entwined with. You really can’t see the difference between a 30 year old and “i peed on a stick and I’m pregnant”?

    Layering regulations on abortion providers is a tactic to drive as many as possible out of business. But the EPA should be given even more power. And the ATF. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    Layering regulations on businesses isn’t a tactic designed to drive them out of business. The regulation has merit on it’s own. For example, you can’t poison the groundwater.

    I, OTOH, would be more than happy to put the legality of abortion up to a vote.

    Me too.

    I admire how baldly you assert that those who honestly believe that the unborn are human beings with rights are by (your) definition “unreasonable,” – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    I would baldly assert that those who believe it’s a human life with rights at the moment of conception have never used a microscope.

    I’ve proven it here, many times, with a simple thought experiment.

  197. I believe you were banned. Do you understand what that means? It means you are not welcome here any more.

    Why don’t you act like an adult for once in your life and obey the restriction to not post here?

  198. You consider the moment of conception to be a human life. That’s an opinion.

    Barring accident or medical intervention, what else could it become? Provide examples for each such assertion.

    Layering regulations on businesses isn’t a tactic designed to drive them out of business. The regulation has merit on it’s own.

    Such as requiring surgical procedures to be performed in a surgical facility? FASCISM!

    Killing a 30 year old is obviously different. First the 30 year old is capable of having an opinion on the matter. Then there’s all the additional lives that that life is entwined with.

    Oh, so only those capable of expressing a wish to live should be protected against wanton slaughter for someone else’s convenience? So you are arguing that they have to be able to speak before they should be protected? Really?

    And you think it’s only the woman who is involved with the decision to end a pregnancy? No parents or siblings or grandparents of cousins or friends or neighbors might want to express an opinion?

    Me too.

    Which only proves that you never follow links. Since “your side” has never gotten a majority in all the years they’ve been asking the question. EVER. (I think they had it up to the low 30s a few years back, but polls always trend more liberal than actual elections do. Which means you actually had less.)

    I’ve proven it here, many times, with a simple thought experiment.

    But no actual, y’know, DATA. Just that famous “logic” whereby only those that agree with you are reasonable, and that it isn’t murder until the victim can actually argue coherently to the contrary. Right.

  199. I would baldly assert that those who believe it’s a human life with rights at the moment of conception have never used a microscope.

    I, unlike you, have actually used a microscope. As soon as the zygote is formed with 46 human chromosomes, there is no reason to call the zygote anything but human as it is not going to develop into an aardvark, artichoke, aluminum ingot, slime mold, or anything but a human.

    I’ve proven it here, many times, with a simple thought experiment.

    In order to conduct a thought experiment, you would need to be able to think which, as you have proven here many time, you cannot.

  200. “First the 30 year old is capable of having an opinion on the matter.”

    So, is it allowed to kill children that have severe intellectual disability (since they would be unable to have an opinion on the matter)?

  201. In order to conduct a thought experiment, you would need to be able to think which, as you have proven here many time, you cannot.

    Beat me to it, Eingang. This, after all, a guy who believes everything his leftie talking points tell him.

    What’s your stand on prostitution, steve?

  202. I would baldly assert that those who believe it’s a human life with rights at the moment of conception have never used a microscope.

    I’ve owned one since I was twelve. Used it too.

    You have no clue on the type of people that post here.

    (Fixed that for myself. Or had HTML fail.)

  203. Richard, if it is merely convenience we are talking about as rational for ending human life, then what’s the hold up with getting rid of all persons who are “defective”, either from birth or poor decision making, by steve and his ilk’s lights?

    I speak of the IV drug user, type 2 diabetics, HIV+ and other drags on societies resources.

    Is humanity a condition to be cherished or snuffed out like a candle?

  204. Leigh,

    What is the hold up ? Not a thing, proggs like to repeat history.

  205. You find yourself in the lobby of a fertility clinic. On the left is a thermos with 1000 frozen embryos in it. On the right are two young children. A fire breaks out. You only have time to save the thermos or the children. Which do you choose?

  206. The cattle car doors closing on them do tend to wipe the smug off their faces, eh Eingang?

  207. Richard, if it is merely convenience we are talking about as rational for ending human life, then what’s the hold up with getting rid of all persons who are “defective”, either from birth or poor decision making, by steve and his ilk’s lights?
    I speak of the IV drug user, type 2 diabetics, HIV+ and other drags on societies resources.
    – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052081

    This is a strawman you created. Have fun torching it. Again, all those people have an opinion about continuing to live. Do you think an embryo at 1 week has an opinion? Go ahead.

  208. i’d save the children no question the embryos might actually even be ok in the thermos cause of doesn’t the thermal insulation work both ways I would think to myself, but I’d not spend a lot of time agonizing over it

  209. The thermos.

    If the choice was a peanut butter sandwich or you, the sandwich would win.

  210. Talk about a strawman, steve. Have one of the kids grab the thermos. problem solved.

  211. leigh, your being intentionally obtuse because you don’t like any of your actual answers. try again.

  212. You are an idiot, steve. I don’t have to answer your ridiculous “arguments”.

  213. The Chihuahua finds itself in the lobby of a fertility clinic. On the left are two mute young children. On the right are two young children with voices. A fire breaks out. The Chihuahua only has time to save the children on the left *or* the children on the right. Which set of children do you choose, Chihuahua?

  214. Wait. Now I know the type of dog HF was talking about in the other thread.

  215. You don’t have to, but you could. Why won’t you? Why do you even find that thought experiment hard to answer?

  216. you should choose the mute kids cause of the vocal kids can still yell for help, which gives them something of a sporting chance

  217. hf might be the smartest one here

  218. I’d assume said fertility clinic was up to code and had fire extinguishers, a sprinkler system and an alarm system that rang to the fire department and fully functioning adults who don’t leave shit lying around like in “thermoses” like fertilized embryos.

  219. Coward

  220. Looking in your mirror again?

  221. I would save the two young children, because instinctively they would seem the more human to me. That being said, I would agonize over the decision later, wondering if I’d made the right choice.

    You, on the other hand, would throw a fucking parade with yourself as the Grand Marshall, wearing a t-shirt proclaiming your glorious victory at performing 1,000 simultaneous abortions.

    Which is what makes me a human — however flawed I may be — and you a monster.

  222. Do you think an embryo at 1 week has an opinion?

    The embryo has 46 human chromosomes and is developing normally. Is it, or is it nor human ? If not, explain why, and give a detailed response. 500 word limit.

  223. Squid – thanks for the honest answer.

    Eingang – care to answer the thought experiment?

  224. Why do you even find that thought experiment hard to answer?

    You misspelled “strawman” as “thought experiment”.

  225. You might want to look them up in a dictionary. Come on. What are you afraid of? The thermos or the kids?

  226. A thought experiment in return:

    You’re in a nursing home when there’s a terrible fire. In the room with you are a 96-year-old woman suffering from advanced senile dementia, and a 22-year-old volunteer with a nice rack and negotiable morals.

    1) Which do you save?
    2) Does this mean it’s okay to encourage the death of the other? What if she’s really inconvenient?

  227. This question you pose is not a thought experiment. It is an example of the stupid “moral” dilemma discussions usually encountered in Psych 101.

    You know: 12 people are stranded on a lifeboat and there is only enough food and water for 8. Bios of passengers follow and usually include clergy (especially nuns) and infants. Who do you throw overboard?

    They prove nothing and open no minds.

  228. So if a baby cannot speak, should it be given an opinion? At what point are you okay with murdering them? And you keep skipping the “what would it develop into, if it hadn’t been surgically terminated?” question. Gosh, I wonder why? (Not really.)

    Can we call blowing up a maternity ward a “collective surgical termination” since the kids wouldn’t be able to express an opinion? I mean, since that is the standard you set…

  229. You might want to look them up in a dictionary.

    Thanks, but again you need to take your own advice.

    Your problem is that you are as shallow as an oil slick on a rain wet road, and only capable of binary thought. You have been presented by several options to your dilemma including some good ones by happyfeet, you pick one.

    Are, or are not, both the children and embryos humans albeit in different stages of development ? Explain your answer in detail. Word limit is 250.

    Also, just for you because you like false dichotomies so much, Kim Jung Il and a severely mentally handicapped child are in the same inferno, you can only save one, who do you pick ?

  230. It’s neither a thought experiment nor a strawman. It’s a false dilemma.

  231. Let’s have another thought experiment… Similar dilemma, but you can only save one of A) a half-wit Democrat who thinks he is a Boy-King and has ruined the economy of the nation while trying to force people to buy something no one wants, or B) a Nobel Prize winning economist who voted Republican in the last few elections?

    Who do you choose, and why?

  232. C’mon Eingang, Kids or thermos.

    You’re in a nursing home when there’s a terrible fire. In the room with you are a 96-year-old woman suffering from advanced senile dementia, and a 22-year-old volunteer with a nice rack and negotiable morals. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052117

    I’d save the 22 year old, but not because of her rack or morals – those would just be extras.

  233. You are someplace where a fire breaks out. To one side is one kid, to the other side is another kid. One kid, if he lives, will be the next Hitler. The other, if he lives, will cure cancer. You don’t know which one is which, and you can only save one. Go!

    See? Moral thought games are cute and the whole family can play!

  234. Drum, I’ll answer yours if you answer mine. The thermos or the kids. Why is this such a vexing question for you?

  235. C’mon Eingang, Kids or thermos.

    C’mon steve, are both human or not ? Why is this such a vexing question for you ?

  236. Eingang, I’d save the kids. How about you?

  237. Scott, exactly. It’s all wordplay and doesn’t mean a thing. Further, it cheapens the actual problem that needs to be discussed.

  238. I’d save the 22 year old

    So you’re cool with letting a disabled and terrified old woman burn to death.

    Does your mother know these thoughts of yours?

  239. It doesn’t actually. It’s a thought experiment. Just give an honest answer. Why don’t you like the answer that you know is right?

  240. I’d save the 22 year old, but not because of her rack or morals – those would just be extras.

    So you agree that we should simply kill old people when they become inconvenient. That’s the only conclusion consistent with your previous assertions; that it dovetails so nicely with your health care policies (*cough*deathpanels*cough*) is, as you would say, just an extra.

  241. Eingang, I’d save the kids. How about you?

    That is not what I asked, Bojangles, are they both human ?

  242. In truth leigh, it would be morally right to save either the 22 year old or the 96 year old. If you can *only save one* which is what the scenario stipulated, then you’re doing right by saving either. In my experience, however, most 96 year olds would be pissed at the decision to save them instead of the 22 year old.

    Do you see it differently? Who would you save? The 22 or 96 year old? The thermos or the kids?

  243. That is not what I asked, Bojangles, are they both human ? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052142

    One is human embryos, the other is human beings. I don’t see them as exactly the same thing.

    Your turn, which would you save?

  244. It’s a trick question. The embryos were fertilized by skippy.

  245. Squid, answer your own question. Since you asked it.

  246. Why are you so curious as to which option we would choose, Miley? That’s a tangential question at best. The heart of the matter is not whether the value placed on one option is higher than the other; the real question is whether the value of the losing option is low enough that one is comfortable seeing it incinerated. Your assertion that we shouldn’t lose any sleep over a thermos full of embryos is rhetorically equivalent to an assertion that we shouldn’t lose any sleep over an old, senile woman. Which, though you’ll be loath to admit as much, is also functionally equivalent to an assertion that an ugly girl should be allowed to die if she’s compared to a pretty girl, or that an ordinary child should be allowed to die if it’s up against a gifted child.

    Can you look at the rhetorical structure you’ve laid out, and then honestly question why the rest of us are horrified that you and your fellow travelers are taking over our health care decisions?

  247. The point, Miley, is that your argument applies only when circumstances dictate that you can only save one party. You’re trying to argue that an excruciating decision made under the more dire circumstances somehow carries over into the discussion we grownups are trying to have, namely: at what point does a nascent human being acquire the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

    For what it’s worth, I’d also save the pretty 22 year old, on purely utilitarian grounds. I’m still failing to grasp how this decision makes euthanasia acceptable, any more than your previous experiment excuses abortion.

  248. Why are you so curious as to which option we would choose, Miley? That’s a tangential question at best. The heart of the matter is not whether the value placed on one option is higher than the other; the real question is whether the value of the losing option is low enough that one is comfortable seeing it incinerated. Your assertion that we shouldn’t lose any sleep over a thermos full of embryos is rhetorically equivalent to an assertion that we shouldn’t lose any sleep over an old, senile woman. Which, though you’ll be loath to admit as much, is also functionally equivalent to an assertion that an ugly girl should be allowed to die if she’s compared to a pretty girl, or that an ordinary child should be allowed to die if it’s up against a gifted child. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052145

    The fallacy is when you look at the embryo v. human being comparison and try to equate it (which I have never done) to a human being v. human being scenario. It would, of course, be wrong to save a pretty person over an ugly one, or an old person over a younger one, simply because of beauty or age. I’m not saying you need to be glib about the thermos vs kids scenario – just that you pick one.

    You answered honestly – you’d save the kids and be haunted by the decision. I respect you for it.

    But leigh, Eingang, drum, et al. won’t even answer. I take this to mean that they are actually incapable of forming an opinion. That’s not something to admire.

  249. For what it’s worth, I’d also save the pretty 22 year old, on purely utilitarian grounds. I’m still failing to grasp how this decision makes euthanasia acceptable, any more than your previous experiment excuses abortion. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052150

    I don’t recall arguing in favor of euthanasia.

  250. Not explicitly; it’s just that all of your arguments over abortion have used precisely the same logic. I wish you could recognize that.

  251. More horrible still is parents who decide that they cannot (read: don’t want to) bring triplets to term and choose “selective reduction”. Never mind that this procedure can jeopardize all three children.

    Explain how you will explain to the remaining two children why you had their sister dispatched.

  252. It would, of course, be wrong to save a pretty person over an ugly one, or an old person over a younger one, simply because of beauty or age.

    What is a fetus, if not a young person? Your own arguments defeat your conclusion.

  253. One is human embryos, the other is human beings. I don’t see them as exactly the same thing.

    Swell, human, but not really; you have proved you are an equivocating slackwit.

    Among your many malfunctions is that you are neither smart, well educated, or clever.

    I am not going to play your half-assed game. In real life, more times than I care to remember and for reasons and situations you cannot begin to fathom, I have been in the position of having to decide who, among a group of people for whom resources were not sufficient, would get treated and in what order, even though that meant that someone was going to die.

    Even though Happyfeet has blown holes in your sophomoric game big enough to drive an M1A1 through, the ultimate right answer is that you do everything within your abilities to save everyone until the situation is clearly untenable, then you go for whomever is most likely to survive.

    Life is not binary, and the sooner you and your stoner pals in your dorm room grow up, the better off the world will be.

  254. Not explicitly; it’s just that all of your arguments over abortion have used precisely the same logic. I wish you could recognize that. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052151

    They haven’t actually.

    What is a fetus, if not a young person? Your own arguments defeat your conclusion. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052151

    You’re smart enough to figure this one out on your own. It’s why you answered the thought experiment the way you did. Can you figure out the difference between a frozen embryo and a 3 year old happily working away at a coloring book?

    To really say you can see no difference whatsoever would be willful ignorance and self-delusion. You know there’s a difference, and it’s why you chose to save the kids.

  255. The morally correct answer is to save neither. Sheer numbers alone cannot be used in such a moral calculus, and since you don’t/can’t know the any of the other parameters that need to be known to make a fully vetted moral decision, you shouldn’t make one, because you could be wrong (i.e. one of the two kids has a communicable disease that wipes out half the earth’s population -your choice kills 3.5 billion people).

    The practical correct answer is to rescue the kids, because one of them reminds you of your niece.

  256. Do you think an embryo at 1 week has an opinion?

    Neither does my 8 m/o granddaughter.

    And?

  257. Steve

    Here … you look out over a lake and see your dog and a human stranger are both drowning and you can only save one.

    Pick.

  258. In real life, more times than I care to remember and for reasons and situations you cannot begin to fathom, I have been in the position of having to decide who, among a group of people for whom resources were not sufficient, would get treated and in what order, even though that meant that someone was going to die. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052157

    When you’re really stuck, you always fall back on what you think is your trump card. You’re like the war vet that thinks he’s entitled to make every future military decision for the country. I’d hate to think of how those people fared whose lives were in your smart and clever and educated hands since you can’t decide between a fucking thermos and actual children.

  259. Can you figure out the difference between a frozen embryo and a 3 year old happily working away at a coloring book?

    About 3.5 years, give or take a few weeks.

  260. between a fucking thermos

    Aaaand now we know how it came to be full of embryos….

  261. Neither does my 8 m/o granddaughter.

    I guarantee you that your 8 m/o granddaughter has a great many opinions and she lets them be known regularly.

  262. Not according to Pete Singer or Eric Holder’s brother.

  263. Just like an embryo, my granddaughter has no utilitarian purpose, nor does the 85 year old who needs a heart by-pass

    just give them a pill

  264. The pro-choice argument isn’t based on utilitarian purpose. You’re trying to conflate then refute.

  265. Darleen – would you save the thermos or the kids?

  266. you can adopt snowflake embryos and implant them in your uterus and they will grow just like seamonkeys!

  267. “The embryo has 46 human chromosomes and is developing normally.”

    And frozen in a canister? So you want abortion to be legal for externally fertilized or extracted frozen embryo’s stored in canisters? And you think comparing this with a BORN child is somehow instructive? This is the idiotic shit that got you banned steve.

    Now let’s choose between an abortion clinic with no access to a hospital if something goes wrong, and one with and pretend that they are equivalent due to stats that purport to show lack of abortion related deaths.

    Go on, idiot.

    I’m sure it’s very persuasive in a crowd that doesn’t think and just recites.

  268. since you can’t decide between a fucking thermos and actual children.

    I see you are going into meltdown mode. Take another toke, I understand it takes the edge off.

    First, it is clear that you regard the thermos of embryos as trash to be discarded. Second, there is no reason from the information you gave in your puerile game to pick one over the other.

    Rational humans, which clearly leaves you out, assess situations, and act accordingly. If, for example, one child was already 90% burned, one unscathed, and the thermos of not-yet-fully developed humans intact, one could take the viable child and the thermos. If both children and the thermos are intact, take both as happy happy has demonstrated. If the children are unscathed and the thermos already compromised, leave it.

    It must be nice to be as both callow and jejune as you are, totally free of the burden of thinking, but with you, I have never been stuck. If you don’t like my answer, suck it up, buttercup.

  269. same dilemma, pregnant woman or two infants?

    Since the embryos in the thermos are genetically unique human beings, and all…

  270. as happy happy has demonstrated

    Sorry about the extra happy, there happy, a typo with nothing intended – your answers were fine.

  271. Since the embryos in the thermos are genetically unique human beings, and all…

    Maybe not Drum, they could all be Hitler clones. Whoa.

  272. “The pro-choice argument isn’t based on utilitarian purpose’

    There is no ‘pro choice argument’. There is a constantly changing and inconsistent series of ad hoc pro choice arguments.

  273. Rational humans, which clearly leaves you out, assess situations, and act accordingly. If, for example, one child was already 90% burned, one unscathed, and the thermos of not-yet-fully developed humans intact, one could take the viable child and the thermos. If both children and the thermos are intact, take both as happy happy has demonstrated. If the children are unscathed and the thermos already compromised, leave it. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052171

    It’s really not that complicated. The thermos is perfectly fine, as are the kids. Neither is injured. You have time to save the kids, or the thermos, but not both. Whichever you do not save will perish. My opinion of worth shouldn’t affect yours. Which do you save?

  274. Go for it drum, you can play too. Thermos or kids?

  275. You have time to save the kids, or the thermos, but not both.

    Why not ?

  276. “About 3.5 years, give or take a few weeks.”

    And gestation. So, is abortion a process to get rid of frozen embryos in cannisters? No? It’s not? Then we are done here. Remember the ’20 week’ embryo ? No?

  277. “Why not ?”

    Because it’s a thought experiment. That has nothing to do with abortion but SEEMS to if you squint.

  278. The pro-choice argument isn’t based on utilitarian purpose.

    It’s cold political calculation for some, and sheer starry-eyed stupidity for the true believers.

    A society that treats human lives as disposable because they’re in a thermos is likely to regard human lives the same way when they’re walking around in street clothes. Such a society has sold off its soul to save a few bucks in social service spending.

  279. Remember that frozen embryos somehow prove that implanted developing embryos are not human. According to the thought experiment.

  280. Jeff, the banned one needs rebanning. He’s got the stupids. As you predicted. Show him yon door por favor.He has not self control to find it on his own.

  281. And gestation. So, is abortion a process to get rid of frozen embryos in cannisters? No? It’s not? Then we are done here. Remember the ’20 week’ embryo ? No? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052183

    Since it would seem to have no bearing on the abortion discussion, it should be safe for you to answer – thermos or kids?

  282. The pro-choice argument isn’t based on utilitarian purpose.

    But your frozen embryo v children scenario is.

    Both involve humans at different stages of development.

    You’re trying to make it about numbers …

    The needs of the many vs the needs of the few.

    It’s a moral conundrum with no satisfactory answer and, since you’re dealing with actual human beings, you are, indeed, making a utilitarian argument that the two living children are more USEFUL than the multitude of embryos (all of which have parents).

  283. A society that treats human lives as disposable because they’re in a thermos is likely to regard human lives the same way when they’re walking around in street clothes. Such a society has sold off its soul to save a few bucks in social service spending. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052191

    1. you hate social service spending, not me
    2. just pick. thermos or kids? You don’t have to view one as worthless to make that choice.

  284. Back on topic: Skippy’s favorite Texas glamor queen is a perjurer. Apparently she told her “divorced at 19″ lie while under oath in federal court — not just in her campaign bio.

  285. Skippy, why is “have one of the kids bring the thermos” not acceptable to you?

  286. you hate social service spending, not me

    Really? Who here is anti-charity? Please quote.

  287. nobody ever runs back into the burning building to save the embryos

  288. It’s a moral conundrum with no satisfactory answer and, since you dealing with actual human beings, you are, indeed, making a utilitarian argument that the two living children are more USEFUL than the multitude of embryos (all of which have parents). – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052194

    I’m actually not making that argument. I’m asking you to pick and explain your choice. It’s about numbers if you want it to be about numbers. It’s about utility if you want it to be about utility. But I’m not saying what should be important to you. You decide that and make your choice. Or even say, “Either choice is equally bad. I’d save whichever I was closest to.”

  289. Social service spending isn’t charity, Darleen. Social service spending is involuntary by the people whose money is confiscated for the purpose.

    The government gets to decide to save money by letting sick and injured and old people die, only because the government has seized the money to spend on these things in the first place.

    The proper role of the government is to enact and enforce laws to prevent private entities from behaving that way.

  290. “To really say you can see no difference whatsoever ”

    No one said that. But the embryo is human. Destroying it is immoral. Abortion clinics are not lifeboat rescue scenarios in any meaningful sense. They are about destroying embryos in vitro. Abortion clinics are the analog to the fire. Why don’t you want the fire put or or bought under greater control steve? Why are only SOME children worthy of protection from fire? Why can we choose only one when the fire threatens both? What in the abortion procedure is the analog to the choice that forces us to choose only the living child to survive? Is it the convenience of the pregnant mother? The profit motive of theclinic? What forces the choice? Why is leaving frozen embryos to be destroyed or intentionally causing their death a form of liberty to be defended steve?

  291. Skippy, why is “have one of the kids bring the thermos” not acceptable to you? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052202

    Let’s say they’re on opposite sides of the room. Or you use your imagination to devise a way such that saving one makes saving the other impossible. Think as long and hard about it as you’d like. Then pick – kids or thermos.

  292. “I’m actually not making that argument. I”

    That’s not actually important.

  293. I’m actually not making that argument

    Dishonest to the last, I note.

  294. More from my perjury link:

    The case in which Senator Davis testified, State of Texas, plaintiff, vs. United States of America and Eric H. Holder, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, defendants, and Wendy Davis, et al., intervenor-defenders, was tried in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

    Senator Davis testified for more than an hour, beginning at 8:15 on the morning of January 20, 2012. She was led through her direct testimony in questions posed by her attorney, election law expert J. Gerald Hebert.

    There’s also a link to a verbatim transcript, in PDF format.

  295. Do you know what banned means, steve? It means stay the fuck away.

  296. But the embryo is human. Destroying it is immoral.

    Can I put you down for saving the thermos instead of the kids then?

  297. But the embryo is human. Destroying it is immoral.

    Kids or thermos, hun?

  298. Let’s say they’re on opposite sides of the room. Or you use your imagination to devise a way such that saving one makes saving the other impossible. Think as long and hard about it as you’d like. Then pick – kids or thermos.

    Fuck you. In my imagination you’re the one on the opposite side of the room and if you get between me and the door I’m smashing you over the head with a chair and throwing you back into the flames.

  299. “Let’s say they’re on opposite sides of the room.”

    What is the fire representing? Why is is relevant to intentional abortion procedures as regulated by law again ? Why is the truncated thought experiment more important than the issue it is supposed to somehow illuminate? It’s just a squirrel. And a dumb one. An impulse in an emergency does not prove the moral value of something.

  300. Skippy, why is “have one of the kids bring the thermos” not acceptable to you?

    Mainly because he is one of the world’s leading two dimensional thinkers, and I use thinkers loosely.

  301. Because you, skippy, are the son of a bitch who started the fire.

  302. “Kids or thermos, hun?”

    What is the fire event, and how does it differ from an abortion procedure, and why then is it a valid means of determining anything about embryos or abortion? Take us home or get off the pot.

  303. Tell the kid (who can understand) “follow me!”, then grab the thermos and run. If the kid is a future progressive, he/she will say “that’s not possible” and burn to death. If they are capable of understanding and following simple directions, then they might live to pass on their genes.

    Now, if the fertilized embryo isn’t human, what else could it possibly develop into, since it has been shown (by looking through a microscope and all) that it is genetically unique? Why won’t you answer this question?

  304. This is just another false alternatives binary. It’s the same as ‘expand safety-net’ vs. ‘mass starvation’ or ‘Obamacare organ donor priority regulations’ vs. ‘fighting over lungs’ in the street.

    It’s dumb bullshit that distracts from the actual issue. and/or controversy.

  305. Answer the question, steve.

    Why won’t you answer the question you keep avoiding? Are you a coward, steve? Or simply incapable of answering honestly?

  306. I’ll bet Jeff’s host has the means to ban skippy’s IP address. Maybe I should ask them.

  307. “McGehee, with that hat and beard, I wouldn’t take you for being yellow, but you apparently don’t have the sack to decide either.”

    He just knows dumb when he sees it. And he sees it. And rejects it. Which makes you mad because you think your scenario determines moral value of an embryo when it does not and inf act has no relevance. And you’re a coward who can’t leave when asked because you can’t face the public demonstration of the great failure of your critical thinking skills.

  308. The Score so far:

    THE LEFT WING INTERNET ARGUING CHECKLIST
    **Skim until Offended
    **Disqualify that Opinion
    Attack, Attack, Attack
    **Disregard Inconvenient facts
    **Make Shit Up
    **Resort to Moral Equivalency
    Concern Trolling
    When all else fails, Racism!

    Anyone have a bingo yet?

  309. Most people get their IP address from a pool when they connect.

  310. What else could a human embryo develop into, stevie? Answer the question.

    Gee, I wonder why you don’t answer the question. (Not really.)

  311. Now, if the fertilized embryo isn’t human, what else could it possibly develop into, since it has been shown (by looking through a microscope and all) that it is genetically unique? Why won’t you answer this question? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052218

    Is a blueprint a house? What else could it develop into?

    Go try to live in a blueprint.

    In your own language you say that an embryo “could develop into a human being”. That should be a hint that it’s not the same thing as a human being.

  312. Well, the embryo could become a progressive. I guess even they are human, though they lack humanity.

  313. IP addresses do change, but less often from an ISP like Skippy’s, which is a major national cable TV company.

    If he wants to power-cycle his cable modem every time Jeff bans him, that’s his choice.

  314. Oh, I did not know that.

    In that case, I’m pretty sure you can ban IP addresses from commenting/registering in the wordpress software.

  315. Is a blueprint a house? What else could it develop into?

    Oh, so a photograph of a car is the same thing as the car to you? I’ve got a great deal on a brand new Bugatti…

    Still dodging the question, steve. Color me utterly unsurprised. We’re not talking about a 2-D representation, we are talking about a fertilized embryo. What else could the embryo become, if not a human being?

    Why won’t you answer the question, steve?

  316. ok say you have a thermos full of embryos, but your co-worker just got a brand new nespresso machine and he says hey can I borrow your thermos I’d like to make a tasty nespresso to drink later and if I use your thermos it’ll be hot later on and I’m a be able to enjoy my tasty nespresso the way the good lord intended

    So you tell your co-worker ok but you’ll want to give it a good rinse cause it’s had embryos in it all day.

    Ok not a problem, says your co-worker, cheerfully. He really is a very easygoing guy, which is one of the reasons you like him so much.

    So the puzzle for you is – what do you do with the embryos?

    A.) have individual little embryo funerals in the break room

    B.) sneak the thermos into the loo and dump the embryos down the toilet and then light a match so if people come in right after they’ll think you were legitimately using the facilities instead of suspecting you of being one of those furtive embryo dumpers they’ve read about in the Daily Mail

    C.) Hand the full thermos to your co-worker and let him worry about the embryo problem.

    D.) Play that song for the embryos about how TONIGHT WE ARE YOUNG SO LET’S SET THE WORLD ON FIRE and then when your co-worker says hey I love that song you can play a little game with him and say hey pretend you find yourself in the lobby of a fertility clinic. On the left is a thermos with 1000 frozen embryos in it. On the right are two young children. A fire breaks out. You only have time to save the thermos or the children. Which do you choose?

    Record his answer in a small spiral notebook.

  317. In that case, I’m pretty sure you can ban IP addresses from commenting/registering in the wordpress software.

    I use WordPress on my site. That’s why I use IPDeny from my domain control panel when I want to ban a visitor — because WordPress doesn’t seem to have that native capability.

    Which may be why Jeff hasn’t used it on skippy already.

  318. I will answer for steve and his like-minded progressives comprising a portion of the culture of death in this world.

    A person is only human if the State says he or she is human.

    The State bestows the crown of humanity, and the State can and will take it away at its convenience.

  319. I sit corrected, McGehee.

  320. In your own language you say that an embryo “could develop into a human being”. That should be a hint that it’s not the same thing as a human being.

    So the embryo is what ? A guinea pig ? A turtle ? A hammer ? A quartz crystal ? A set of Ginsu knives ?

    It is a human being in an early stage of development, you hack, and you know that is what he meant.

  321. What else could the embryo become, if not a human being?

    What Cranky-d said.

  322. We’re not talking about a 2-D representation, we are talking about a fertilized embryo. What else could the embryo become, if not a human being? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052228

    I have answered it. An embryo is something that can develop into a human being, but it’s not actually a human being. Much like a blueprint can turn into a house, but it’s not actually a house.

    So, in your language, would you save (what you would call) 1000 humans in the thermos, or the 2 human children with the coloring books. I’ve answered your question, now your turn to answer mine.

    So the embryo is what ? A guinea pig ? A turtle ? A hammer ? A quartz crystal ? A set of Ginsu knives ? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052228

    At this point, I’m just putting you down for, “I’d save the thermos and let the 3 year olds burn.” Feel free to change your answer if you’d like.

  323. Dammit, McGehee. Where did you put the Trollhammer™?

  324. >“I’d save the thermos and let the 3 year olds burn. <

    why not grab the thermos with one hand and the 3 year old with the other?

  325. He won’t answer that, nr. That was my solution lo many hours ago when he started this nonsense.

  326. An embryo is something that can develop into a human being, but it’s not actually a human being.

    No, you putz, it is a human being in an early stage of development as it will not fully develop into anything but a human.

    At this point, I’m just putting you down for, “I’d save the thermos and let the 3 year olds burn.”

    That would be consistent with your making shit up which, in this instance, I’ll take as a sign of your submission as it doesn’t resemble anything I have said.

  327. That would be consistent with your making shit up which, in this instance, I’ll take as a sign of your submission as it doesn’t resemble anything I have said. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052248

    So I’ll put you down for saving the kids then? Because that’s the only other option.

    That was my solution lo many hours ago when he started this nonsense. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052248

    Thought experiments often have specific constraints. That’s one in this case. You’re again, just being obtuse.

  328. >Thought experiments often have specific constraints<

    proggtardilated – my clown "experiment" give only one choice: heads i win tails you lose

  329. You’re again, just being obtuse.

    I would be no such thing. You, however, are being obnoxious.

    Be gone.

  330. “Thought experiments often have specific constraints.”

    And questions are often begged. Thought experiments with constraints designed to force one outcome though slanting are actually herd instinct experiments.

  331. “At this point, I’m just putting you down for, “I’d save the thermos and let the 3 year olds burn.” Feel free to change your answer if you’d like.”

    So putting people down for things is how thought experiments work? LOL. See Laffer curve yo!

  332. Wrong again, junior.

    You’re right, there is a third option. Let the kids and the embryos perish. That’s definitely more your speed.

    You’ve lost, and now you’re just insisting on being pathetic in how you lose. Leigh – you too.

  333. And questions are often begged. Thought experiments with constraints designed to force one outcome though slanting are actually herd instinct experiments. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052270

    No outcome is forced. You can choose the thermos. That choice is logically consistent with a pro-life stance.

  334. You’re right, there is a third option. Let the kids and the embryos perish.

    Wrong yet again – how do you do it ?

  335. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1319283/Healthy-baby-boy-born-TWENTY-year-old-embryo.html

    “Up to 2008 it is estimated that between 350,000 and half a million IVF babies have been born from embryos frozen at a controlled rate and then stored in liquid nitrogen”

  336. “No outcome is forced.”

    Contraint does what ?

  337. “That choice is logically consistent with a pro-life stance.”

    Both choices are.

  338. “You’ve lost, and now you’re just insisting on being pathetic in how you lose. Leigh – you too. ”

    No, your thought experiment is just contrived and worthless and your reliance on it and failure to acknowledge multiple and wide ranging criticisms of it demonstrates your inherent dimness, sloppiness, and laziness. Your attempt to spin it into a triumph demonstrates your immature desire for easy answers and a belief in the power of school yard taunts. You suck at this, like you suck at most fields, economics, law, philosophy, etc. You like slogans because they are simple like you.

  339. “I’ve answered your question, now your turn to answer mine.”

    No, you haven’t answered anything at all.

  340. >You’re right, there is a third option. Let the kids and the embryos perish be saved. That’s definitely more your speed. <

  341. Where did you put the Trollhammer™?

    I can delete comments, but I won’t do that when people are already answering them.

    Which hint I have dropped before, but you see how much anyone here listens to me.

    No one has even followed up on this yet, near as I can tell.

  342. You’ve lost…

    Who knew one could lose an experiment ?

    No, you haven’t answered anything at all.

    He never does, though, does he?

  343. steve’s definitely of the “baffle them with bullshit” type troll

  344. I attempted to loosely prequel it McG, if a mere post hoc claim has any credit.

  345. He’s bad at the baffling too, because no one is baffled expect steve.

  346. Or except, even.

  347. The abortion at 20 weeks question is not answered by stored 8-cell embryo’s versus born child peril. Again, a fire is not a decision to kill without due process according to pathological definitions of a human being that exclude examples human beings from the definition.

    The same “thought” experiment IF WE ACCEPT IT AS VALID, using children or even adults of different combinations of ages, sexes, health states, ethnic backgrounds, appearance, etc, should, with enough participants, and some ability to throw out lies, give us a popular aggregate answer that would serve as a spectrum of the comparative value of ALL human beings. Right?

    If the method is so sound, then we should be able to use that to always answer if x and y were in a binary peril scenario then based on their human value who do we pick as a region, a culture, as a species, or whatever. Boy, I bet the Nazis and Lysenkoists would have loved working on something like that, as would George Bernard Shaw.

    The thought experiment is either the philosophical seed of an “objective” (in the contest of its historical moment) human-value assessment proposition (could there be a more dystopian abomination?), or it’s just a dumb cheap stunt.

    The idea that making abortions safer makes them impossible bullshit being used to try and deregulate abortion providers in Texas in the courts is also pretty weak.

  348. The thought experiment is either the philosophical seed of an “objective” (in the contest of its historical moment) human-value assessment proposition (could there be a more dystopian abomination?), or it’s just a dumb cheap stunt.

    Consider the source and your question is answered.

  349. > expect steve<

    nobody expects steve

  350. Pingback: You can’t get away with lying about things in the public record | The First Street Journal.

  351. Le disposal algorithm c’est moi.

  352. An embryo is something that can develop into a human being

    What else “can” it develop into, DV? A model train set? A box of Legos ™? A digital camera? Provide examples.

    Much like a blueprint can turn into a house,

    A blue print can never, ever in a quintillion years develop into a house. Never not once, no matter how specific the architect wants to be, will it ever become a house if left alone where it was created. An embryo, on the other hand, barring accident or medical intervention, will turn into nothing else but a human being. Ending the existence of that helpless human being, just because it is inconvenient for someone else, qualifies as a crime. Guess which one?

  353. this post really has very little to do with fudge and quite a lot to do with a hypothetical thermos

  354. The same “thought” experiment IF WE ACCEPT IT AS VALID, using children or even adults of different combinations of ages, sexes, health states, ethnic backgrounds, appearance, etc, should, with enough participants, and some ability to throw out lies, give us a popular aggregate answer that would serve as a spectrum of the comparative value of ALL human beings. Right ?

    Not really. The central fallacy of the “experiment”, aside from its simple-mindedness, is the “impossibility”. Whatever the impossibility is that creates the “not enough time” will affect anyone’s decision, and is not necessarily reflective of the comparative value of humans v. embryonic humans, cats v. kittens, Romanovs v. Bolsheviks, or anything else presented as a binary (or more) choice.

  355. Over at my joint, my policy is Never Feed The Trolls – and it always works. Ignore the a-holes and they go away because you won’t give them the attention their demented little minds crave.

  356. My house did not follow the blueprint and the blueprint existed after the house was built. Nor did the house build itself nor become metabolically active.

    An embryo is not a blueprint nor a catalyst.

    Identical twins are not the same person.

  357. Well I’d love to save the kid instead of the thermos but she tested INTJ on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator so FUCK THAT!

  358. Won’t happen again, McGehee.

  359. The ‘who would we rather be on fire decision fork’ seems to be a bit weak to me as far as meaningful evidence goes.

  360. The ‘who would we rather be on fire decision fork’ seems to be a bit weak to me as far as meaningful evidence goes.

    I vote for whoever let kids play around the liquid nitrogen vats.

  361. mmmm fudge and nespresso

  362. Mmmmm, guys and gals, I’m with cranky, Bob B and others – if you respond to a troll, it will keep coming back. Clearly OFA steve/Miley/skip/slippery has an unhealthy obsession with this site and its inhabitants. Face it, you are not going to convince him, regardless of all of your well-reasoned arguments – this is not about reason, it’s about a propagandized world view that exists despite the cognitive dissonance required to maintain it.
    Sure, it’s fun to poke the troll, but it’s exactly what he wants – attention.
    Proceed at your own peril, but I’m staying on the sidelines.

  363. Some folk are simply incorrigible, R.I. We just keep trying anyhow.

  364. oh your ” nom de guere” is “gay” trolls

  365. *warblemutter*you leave this place. they are not for you. go. leave. now. *mutterwarble*

    You don’t have to, but you could. Why won’t you? Why do you even find that thought experiment hard to answer?

    Why do you think a dishonest weasel like yourself deserves any sort of consideration beyond mocking?

  366. Oh, and did the troll change it’s name on the new account or did it register for two (or more) new accounts to feed it’s sick need for attention?

  367. I like how you all congratulate yourself on expertly tying yourself in a gordian knot all while not answering a question.

    If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose?

    So far, I think Squid is the only one to give an answer.

  368. >If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose? <

    i question the questioner ofa asshat troll. see that thermos: apply it to your ahole DUDE!

  369. why are you such a chickenshit, new? do you think you’re fooling anyone?

  370. > between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose? <

    9 mm between the eyes of the idiot's ?

  371. i know typing “9 mm” made you feel very brave, but that’s not the same as being very brave. which would you choose, new? let’s see that testosterone in action.

  372. >why are you such a chickenshit, new?<

    why are you such an asshole steve the faggot? you be truely gay and proggtarded.

  373. giggle. you think calling someone gay is an insult. giggle.

    which would you choose, new?

  374. >new? let’s see that testosterone in action.<

    you will get war asshole. you will lose.

  375. take cover men. incoming pixels!

    why am i having trouble fearing a man who can’t answer a multiple choice question. peck ones for (A) and twice for (B).

  376. >giggle. you think calling someone gay is an insult.<

    anti darwin/SCIENCE butt fuckers loser

  377. … but don’t call me a homophobe.

    was that the war you promised? i’m failing to be shocked and/or awed.

    embryos or children. pick

  378. “why am i having trouble fearing a man”

    Why are you having trouble dealing with the multi-pronged failure of your stupid and largely irrelevant thought experiment to sway anybody?

  379. >why am i having trouble fearing a man who can’t answer a multiple choice question <

    because clown your ? are: heads i win tails you lose. how much does soros pay you to be an idiot? is weakly or mouthy?

  380. “embryos or children. pick”

    Embryos are children, stupid.

  381. “homophobe”

    A stupid word made to stir up stupid people.

  382. “giggle. you think calling someone gay is an insult”

    So does Alec Baldwin, Ed Schultz, Bob Beckel, Bill Richardson… giggle!

  383. Ok, paleo, would you save the very small and very frozen 1000 children, or the much larger and wiggly 2 children. Pick.

    This isn’t a heads i win tails you lose question. Most of the world would have no problem quickly answering it. If you think it’s heads i win tails you lose, maybe your worldview lacks logical consistency.

    and paleo, you truly are a wreck of pus. You flinch at the word homophobe, but apparently high-five over “why are you such an asshole steve the faggot? you be truely gay and proggtarded.” Please quit breathing valuable air. You contribute nothing of value to society. And deep down, you know it.

  384. “why are you such a chickenshit, new? do you think you’re fooling anyone? ”

    Says the idiot who changed his name to get past a site ban.

  385. hey steve who stole “gay” clown?

  386. steve are faggots gay? do homosexuals reproduce? just axing?

  387. the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting

  388. new, lets just hope you don’t reproduce. i can’t imaging a shittier father. was your dad as fucked up as you? is that how you got this way?

    the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting

  389. >You flinch at the word homophobe<

    oh no it was proggtarded? seriously!!11!!

  390. “Ok, paleo, would you save the very small and very frozen 1000 children, or the much larger and wiggly 2 children. Pick.”

    Your thought experiment is dumb worthless shit. Fuck you, fuck it, fuck your silly claims of foo-foo victory, fuck your asinine assertions, your stupid drama, your idiotic cries of cowardice, your perpetual ignorance, your childish repetitious vainglorious sens of glee at making an utter fool of yourself, and your amazing lack of self awareness.

    I’ve already torn the little chicken head off your stupid thought experiment and shit down it’s neck. You can’t hide behind it any more. It has nothing to do with Wendy Davis, Abortion laws in Texas, or anything else. It has no value. It’s just making me laugh to watch you virtually pulling on the chord trying to restart it like it was a lawn mower that was out of gas.

    Fuck off, you vapid shameless little troll.

    :)

  391. “lets just hope you don’t reproduce.”

    No, it’s your side that is down on reproduction. Remember ?

  392. @paleomerus: He’s so lonely, so lonely and sadly alooooone.

    Though it’s cute how it thinks it’s amateur philosophy “thought experiment” is significant. Life isn’t a video game affected by programming limits.

  393. that’s a lot of swear words to not answer a question.

    the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting

  394. >the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting<

    do you eat popcorn while you drown kittens steve? how about puppies? killing is big stuff in proggtardia. ax pol pot?

  395. Look at chester trying to play smart. How cute.

    the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting

  396. “the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting’

    Still fucking irrelevant too! Bummer. But that’s how the dim lib mind functions. Bravado is victory. LOL.

  397. >new, lets just hope you don’t reproduce<

    why do you care about me?

  398. new, i’m sad that the rush you got from typing 9 mm wore off. try some other words and you’ll feel all virile again

    the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting

  399. >the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting<

    why play the faggot's game?

  400. “Look at chester trying to play smart. How cute. the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting”

    Wait more. Go on. It’s precious watching you try to age your bullshit into an persuasive argument as if it were a fine wine. And noboy is buying it! LOL! :)

  401. new, i care that you would be in a position to teach young impressionable minds anything, thereby propagating your ignorance for another generation. it’s not your genes that I don’t want to live on, it’s your stupid

  402. 22 will do for a loser like you

  403. “that’s a lot of swear words to not answer a question.”

    The answer to your question is pointing how stupid it is and how worthless your clinging to it is. You have been answered. You just don’t like the answer so you babble on to yourself about how cute it is when people notice that you can’t handle the answer.

  404. “new, i care that you would be in a position to teach young impressionable minds anything, ”

    And who gives a toss?

  405. Oh dear, the troll is getting a bit testy at my mocking of him and throws back a lame insult in response.

  406. how do you plan on delivering it? you going to shoot your webcam?

  407. The feeling’s mutual, DickHead.

  408. chester, the lame thing is your fear of a simple question.

  409. >i care that you would be in a position to teach young impressionable minds anything, thereby propagating your ignorance for another generation <

    mr proggtarded i knows that is your clowndisaster™ intention. we be tea we be taking your sh@t down. hi 9

  410. Abortion (the fire that only one “thing” can be rescued from) is okay after cell division gives you an 8 cell complex after IVF and then his frozen and stored?

    Great point idiot. heh!

  411. “chester, the lame thing is your fear of a simple question. ”

    Said the lame thing, under a fake name, still trying to peddle its stupid question as a meaningful rhetorical point.

  412. If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose?

  413. hey steve you ever think that peeps know your ip and other stuff? just saying “fellow american”?

  414. “Oh dear, the troll is getting a bit testy at my mocking of him and throws back a lame insult in response. ”

    Well of course the insults are lame. Were you expecting it to exhibit any wit and creativity? It’s all cliches and cartoons all the way down. And lots of tinsel to dress them up as le points.

  415. Though it’s a bit pathetic that he’s trying this “choose who to save” either/or fallacy to justify actively destroying something when there is no fire or disaster.

    …and he has been answered, just not in the way he likes so he whinges more and pretends they don’t exist.

    Standard progressive troll. With the usual ego-driven need to keep coming back when he’s banned.

  416. “If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose?”

    If you had a chance to put out the fire, reduce the fire, or declare it a choice and a form of liberty to let it burn things, which would you choose?

  417. >If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose? <

    i would choose to say to the idiot posing the ? : bullshit like this is fading quickly.

  418. Just watch, as soon as someone chooses saving the children before the embryos he’ll claim it “justifies” abortion.

    The whole point is to get people to decide someone is not worthy of life, so they can justify killing whomever they want. Amateur philosophers love this sort of sophistry so they can pretend they are enlightened.

  419. “Standard progressive troll. With the usual ego-driven need to keep coming back when he’s banned. ”

    He thinks popping the frill over and over again is intimidating and that he has an invisible audience cheering him on in his victory. The reality is that he is narcissistic yet anonymous troll who can’t take “get out, your shit is of no value” for his answer.

  420. >If you had to choose between: printing money or printing money and pocketing it, what would you choose?<

  421. >If you had to choose between : a choom gang loser from hawaii and a mormon from michigan.

  422. “Amateur philosophers love this sort of sophistry so they can pretend they are enlightened. ”

    Plus you can tweet it to set the trained seals to arping their supposed approval.

  423. hey steve you ever think that peeps know your ip and other stuff? just saying “fellow american”? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comment-1052395

    Hahahahaha

  424. That’s what the obamacare death panels are all about anyway deciding which grandmas and kids get rescued and which get toasted. And the only alternative is people fighting over lungs in the street.

  425. dodge, parry, spin, thrust.

    If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose?

  426. “dodge, parry, spin, thrust.”

    Which is all your stupid question is in the first place. Why? Because you don’t want to talk about Wendy’s past, the safety of abortion clinics, 20 weeks, ultrasounds, the value of unborn human life, or the rest of it.

  427. Nor has he answered the question about his assertion that an embryo might have a chance at becoming something other than a human being. Genetically unique, and all.

  428. @paleo:
    Yep. Projection. Another habit of progressives.

  429. If you had to choose between discussing the actual issue, the past of a candidate for Texas governor and its bearing on her character, or trying to reduce abortion down to a rather stupid thought experiment that has already been chewed to pieces, which would you choose?

  430. “an embryo might have a chance at becoming something other than a human being”

    Or even a different human being than the specific person it will develop into, ot at least towards whether viable to birth or not.

    Did you know that abortion is necessary because it kind of like saves 3 year olds from weird staged trap fires or some shit? For serious.

  431. “Did you know that abortion is necessary because it kind of like saves 3 year olds from weird staged trap fires or some shit? For serious. ”

    If we just repeat this bit of fluff enough it will magically crystallize into a global thought paradigm from which only people who can still think might escape.

  432. …followup question: At what point will the troll meltdown when people refuse to play it’s games according to the rules/premises it demands?

  433. There is like a fire and it forces you to declare an 8 cell frozen embryo a non human. Really. Take that you homophobic Jesus-botherer country mouse shitheads. Now hand me my wobbly weenie crown so my reign of cyber-truthocity can commence its begininization.

    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/155/1241/1600/5534.jpg

  434. “At what point will the troll meltdown when people refuse to play it’s games according to the rules/premises it demands?”

    Depends on how far its head is up its butt. The black knight lost all four limbs and tried knee biting. Then he wanted to call that a draw.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

    steve: Answer my question!
    Me: But you question just blew up!
    steve: No it didn’t!
    Me: What’s that then?
    steve: ‘Tis but a scratch!
    —-much fighting later—
    steve: I’m the black knight! I cannot be defeated!
    Me: You’re a loony! Now you’ve no arms or legs you stupid bastard! Come, let us go.
    steve: Oh that’s it then! Run you yellow cowards! Come back here you bastards! I’ll bit your knee caps off!

  435. So far, I think Squid is the only one to give an answer.

    Well, fucknose, I’m not Squid and I answered.

  436. shorter steve: Shut up, shut up! I said you can’t walk on the carpet, the carpet is lava, those are the rules and you can’t break them! You have to walk on the tile or you lose and I win! Waaaaaaah! Stop cheating! It’s not fair!

  437. For every 1000 frozen 8 cell IVF embryos you consider a human being, a 3 year old child must be destroyed by fire. SCIENCE!(tm) See ‘Laffer curve’ ‘better outcomes at lower costs’ and ‘game theory’.

  438. THAT’S A VICTORY BITCHES! In your face! How mah kool-aid taste?

  439. Because mass starvation in the depression in New York City!

  440. So far, I think Squid is the only one to give an answer.

    I’ll answer, after you answer my question about whether you’ve ever had your eletrical service interrupted for nonpayment.

    Because it’s important. And I asked first.

  441. mileycyrussays says January 20, 2014 at 10:31 pm
    the embryos or the 3 year olds… still waiting
    – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52493#comments

    You need to answer all my unanswered questions first.

    That’s how this works, Steven.

  442. Wow. Did dogvomit really keep up with the distraction all night? Color me impressed!

    If only he had that sort of ability in other venues, he might have a much better personal understanding of abortion issues.

  443. If you had to choose between grabbing two children, or 1000 frozen embryos, and fleeing a burning building, which would you choose?

    Of course the two children. No one of right mind would do otherwise.

    Are you equating the two children needing saving with a woman who may or may not choose to abort her unfrozen, nearly-viable fetus because, if she doesn’t abort her child, her life might end during a live birth?

    How many times does that mother’s death actually occur? Given that women can have c-sections almost at will; many choose c-sections over live births as a matter of course. Chances of a mother dying during the birth of her child are much lower today than they’ve ever been, and getting better every year.

    That’s a weak argument, “Abortion is for saving a woman’s life”, and getting weaker every year.

    And frozen embryos? SCIENCE! has given them protection. Your weak ass couldn’t shift a thousand of these given a week and a forklift.

  444. Of course the two children. No one of right mind would do otherwise.

    I’d have to consider locking Slappy in a closet first.

  445. I’ve got a question: If Wendy Davis had to choose between putting out the fire on the house of the two children she abandoned, or a that at a woman’s center performing abortions past 20 weeks what color sneakers would she wear as she decided?

  446. That’s a great question Carin. I admit, I’m stumped.

  447. Only dogvomit can answer that one.

  448. AAaaaaand Steven ducks and runs.

  449. Sad. I really wanted to know the answer to that one.

  450. So, Wendy Davis – A Texas Story?

    Sure, all the best Texas stories have their first 11 years take place in West Warwick, RI.

    How about her rat bastard father who abandoned her and her siblings leaving her poor single mother struggling so desperately that she and her brother had to get jobs just to make ends meet? And then the son of a bitch had the nerve to give her said job working in his restaurant! #WarOnDaddy

  451. So far, I think Squid is the only one to give an answer.

    And since I answered before you said that, you are proven a liar once again.

    Be gone now, twatwaffle.

  452. Meanwhile, speaking of those “fudging” personal histories:

    KATU learned Cover Oregon and the Oregon Health Authority collectively spent just shy of $200 million on its Cover Oregon website, which has been plagued with problems for months and still hasn’t enrolled a single Oregonian for health insurance since the site launched Oct. 1, 2013.

  453. I only answered him because I thought it might prompt him to get to the friggin’ point already. I should have guessed that he had no actual point to make, but was really just trying to wear us out by asking the same meaningless question over and over again until everyone in the world gave him an answer.

    Had I known, I’d never have given him the compliment of a response. My apologies to the community; I honestly thought I was doing the right thing.

  454. Gee, the horror of young Wendi’s life, Pablo.

    Shockingly, I too got a job at the age of fourteen, selling cut flowers. This was following a couple of years baby-sitting for $2.00 and hour.

    I feel her pain.

  455. was really just trying to wear us out by asking the same meaningless question over and over again until everyone in the world gave him an answer.

    He tried the same phony stratagem with “Do you have health insurance?”

    The thermos one was not significantly different in intent.

  456. It was no more clever (which is not at all) than his other gambits.

  457. It’s a stupid question, especially given that I’m rather sure if you grabbed those embryos to save them, they would rather quickly die w/o the proper environment.

    Stupid question. I don’t waste my time with such nonsense.

  458. I would baldly assert that those who believe it’s a human life with rights at the moment of conception have never used a microscope. I’ve proven it here, many times, with a simple thought experiment. –

    Since at the moment of division the fertilized egg has all the DNA it’s ever going to get. Of course it’s human.
    What else would it be?

  459. I just wish dogvomit were around to explain to my sister-in-law that her miscarriage was no big deal. “Relax, sugar — it was just a clump of cells! Nothing to get all weepy over!”

    The scene’s conclusion is left to the reader’s imagination.

  460. Squid, I back handed my SIL when she said as much to me when I miscarried.

  461. “Sure, all the best Texas stories have their first 11 years ”

    In my experience, anyone who starts off a phrase with New York is trying to sell you a mediocre slice of pizza or a dry pretzel. Anyone who starts off a phrase with Texas is trying to sell you a big pair of sunglasses or a plate of greasier than usual enchiladas. Or a share in an oil lease. Or lately, they might be trying to get their overdeveloped multi-cul-de-sac retirement neighborhood annexed by the nearest city to get a sewer and sidewalks put in, and then try to go to court to form a neighborhood M.U.D. so they don’t have to pay to use them.

Leave a Reply