Angry father confronts pro-lifers

I watched/read this on BuzzFeed a moment ago. I can’t write it up any better than they already have, so I’m gonna go right ahead and copy their words:

“He and his 16-weeks-pregnant wife went to a women’s clinic in Brookline, Mass. for an abortion after discovering that their baby had a congenital deformity with no chance for survival. On their way in, they were confronted by images of dismembered fetuses and two women yelling, “You’re killing your unborn baby!” Enraged, Gouveia decided to confront the protesters while his wife was in surgery, and he caught the whole interaction on his cellphone.”

YouTube Preview Image
  • dutchhobbit

    I’ve seen this before. Don’t remember where. But I think it is a shame that people are so dogmatically holding their beliefs that they can’t even allow a woman to get an abortion who would give birth to a dead baby otherwise. I think that man was brave to confront that protester. He and his wife are going through a rough time and I hope that everything is ok with them.

    • LRA

      Well, don’t you know… these people are taking away God’s right to kill the baby himself. Yes, only God has the right to kill innocent babies!!!! And terminally ill people who are suffering agony. And severely traumatized people who find the world a morally repugnant place. And any other human who would die with dignity. Yup. It’s God’s right to force us to live so he can torment us before sending us to eternal damnation. Cuz God is a God of love.

  • Francesco Orsenigo

    Isn’t there in the Bible a procedure to cause an abortion to your wife if you just suspect the child may not be yours?
    What is the argument Christians use to ignore it?

    • http://argama.deviantart.com/ Sunny Ng

      Which part was that?

      • Elemenope

        Numbers 5:14-24

    • FO

      Found. ^^

      http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2008/10/bibles-guide-to-abortion.html

      Myself being largely unchurched, I would like a comment from you ex-bible-thumpers.
      How do Christian reconcile this with the holiness of life the talk about?

      • Yoav

        The same way they deal with anything else in the buybull that doesn’t fit with whatever political agenda the try to push at the moment, pretend it’s not there.

        • Rev

          And scream “Out of Context!!”

      • Len

        You’re asking us “ex-bible-thumpers” how Christians reconcile this. Why do you think many of us are EX-bible-thumpers?

        • Francesco Orsenigo

          Many, dunno.
          Some, definitely.
          Daniel himself, as far as I understood, was pretty brazen in his belief.
          I’m using the term with all the respect I have for people that overcame a situation I am not sure I would be able to overcome myself.

  • Mark the Pilgrim

    I commend that man. I think people who go and protest outside abortion clinics are more interested in maintaining a feeling of superiority by insulting and bullying the mothers going to them, than actually trying to change their minds. Otherwise they would, as that man said, be going to the root cause and helping those at risk of getting an abortion by providing contraception, supporting poverty alleviation policies and measures aiming to increase the quality of the health system so that in the case where the child would be born deformed, the child might have a chance at living a decent life.

    On a separate note, I’ve noticed that quite a few anti-abortion activists support measures stopping abortion (as they would) but then conversely don’t support teaching safe sex and distributing contraceptives to teens, which would lower the overall number of abortions in general. Funny.

    • Nic B

      Kinda how Sarah Palin supports abstinence-only education while her own, un-married teenage daughter gets pregnant? And STILL sticks to that belief after all that? Yeah, exactly.

      I also want to point out, while this is not meant to be an discussion about health care, that countries with universal healthcare have significantly lower rates of abortion. Probably because they have access to all the things used to prevent pregnancy. Just going along with what you said about all the measures that can be done to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

    • Sunny Day

      “conversely don’t support teaching safe sex and distributing contraceptives to teens, which would lower the overall number of abortions in general. Funny”

      I think you misspelled that word. It’s spelled S A D.

      • Kodie

        What’s really sad is that, as has been asserted by some posters on this topic in the past, the fault is with the books and tv shows these children are exposed to, in some effort for parents to futilely prevent teenage pregnancies by keeping their kids from being exposed to satanic temptations.

        In strict denial of biology, creationism is rather harmless (but stupid) compared to the superstitious belief that hormones are god-given miracle feelings of love made specifically for the heterosexual marriage and subsequent acts of procreation, but are devil-given if teenagers succumb to them. This also entails forgetting that we’re no longer in an economical society where it’s practical for a teenager to be married because that’s when their hormones kick in and their bodies are ready to procreate, where they are apprenticed in a job by the age of 15, and who your mate is doesn’t really matter as long as they’re Christian too and the opposite sex. These might be the same people who think children should be innocent for as long as possible, who shield their children, complain about quasi-adult drawings in Where’s Waldo? books, and stunt their children’s growth in general. The prolonging of childhood (in our society in general and certain religions particularly) does nothing but ignore biology and a long past when getting married really young was more or less when you were ready to work and have a family.

        But no, the modern problem isn’t that children have to wait all chaste well into legal adulthood, and through college until they are trained for a viable career (if only the man should work, in many cases, he better have a degree in something useful and lucrative, or a lucrative trade), and can’t have sex until they get married, can’t really support marriage until you are financially able, it’s too much the fault of the tv and movies and books tempting them to experiment with their bodies and be curious. How life on earth began seems rather trivial compared to this. There are lots of jobs anyone can get still believing a snake talked and that Jesus rode a dinosaur, where that belief doesn’t interfere, but not if they propose chastity until the age of 21, give or take, because that’s how long it takes to get out of childhood and make a start of a career for yourself and find a good enough Christian mate before you die of blue balls you’ve had for most of the previous decade, so you marry her not knowing anything other than “I need to have sex NOW, with her? Okay!“. Any young man or woman who is not recently blind is also a good pick, because they obviously are holy enough not to masturbate. You will also be very surprised how expensive it is to have babies when you don’t have any idea how to control it, or you do that “family planning” that no one knows about, just like you pretend you were a virgin when you got married, in which case, you are more choosy, take your time, and your parents think you must be gay if you haven’t succumbed to your hormones via getting married or at least courting seriously by a dumb young age. You can’t win! It’s the tv, movies, and the gay agenda perpetrating premarital sex!

        • Siberia

          This, pretty much. I wish I could ‘like’ comments.

          I was ranting today to a friend on MSN about how people always blame the media, TV, books, whatever for when the sh*t hits the fan. Someone killed someone? Those awful violent films! Someone had sex and got pregnant? Those damned TV shows! It’s never the lack of education, never the lack of actually talking to the kids, never, you know, basic human nature, oh no. It’s the damn books and films and things like that turning everyone to whores and drug addicts and pregnant unmarried women and on and on and on…

  • http://www.mysistersfarmhouse.com Rechelle

    Good for him. I wish the best for him and his wife.

  • http://www.mysistersfarmhouse.com Rechelle

    Good for him for speaking up. I wish the best for him and his wife.

  • Meanie

    I guess they don’t care who they hurt as long as they have the warm feeling of moral superiority

  • Oranges

    The worst part is that they advocate for “adoption adoption!” but do they do ANYTHING to help the children they try to save AFTER they’re born? Very little, I think.

    Some people *are not fit* to be parents, cannot afford to responsibly raise a child or some other unfortunate circumstance like this poor man had to suffer through, let them get the abortion. You don’t like abortions, then don’t have one!

    If only they’d teach sex education instead of denying that penises and vaginas even exist. Then we’d actually do something to lessen this problem.

    • Kodie

      One of the women protesting, it seems (unless I misheard) adopted at least one child if not more, and the guy more or less said, “good for you” but that does not apply here. Here, even a married couple with a sick fetus were harassed. Nobody here had an oopsie, it wasn’t a case of poor finances, the protesters made ugly remarks to a couple who was actually looking forward to adding another child to their family and were already devastated enough that day without them adding to the pain.

      I don’t really agree with any judgments that abortion protesters could make against anyone’s particular reasons for choosing to abort, but in this case, it seems particularly insensitive to intentionally hurt people who had wanted their baby, but weren’t willing to listen or open their minds to justify an abortion under any trying circumstances. It’s all murder, they go on thinking what they want to think. They go on treating everyone who has an abortion as an irresponsible slut (which is still wrong) and don’t take into account people who don’t want to have an abortion but have to. It’s just easier for them to keep up the act to generalize them.

  • UrsaMinor

    That guy is my hero!

    The protesters he confronted really horrified me with their unwillingness (or inability) to stop and reflect on what they were doing. Godbots at their finest.

    • Yoav

      Someone posted this link to stories from abortion providers about anti-choice protesters who came to have an abortion in the comments for PZs post about the same story. The level of hypocrisy is astounding, in all but the last story the women held to their position that abortion is murder and should be illegal but their case is really unique and as such should be an exception.

      • Kodie

        I had that in my bookmarks and was going to post it. Everyone should read this article.

      • Custador

        “18% of women having abortions are born-again or Evangelical Christians. Many of these women are likely anti-choice. The survey also showed that Catholic women have an abortion rate 29% higher than Protestant women. A Planned Parenthood handbook on abortion notes that nearly half of all abortions are for women who describe themselves as born-again Christian, Evangelical Christian, or Catholic.”

        Totally. Not. Shocked.

      • James G

        As Bender Bending Rodriguez once said, “this is the worst kind of discrimination! The kind against me!”

  • DDM

    I wonder if these anti-choice women getting abortions realize that, in a court of law, you will still be charged with murder if you planned it and had someone else carry it out?

    • Elemenope

      In most jurisdictions, it is actually much worse. Contract murder, as it is called, tends to bump it up to a capital offense if it isn’t already.

      • Revyloution

        I’ve been tinkering with the idea of trying to get a voter initiative on the next ballot outlawing abortion.

        I was thinking of language like ‘Any person obtaining or performing an abortion, while subscribing to a religion or philosophy that considers such acts as murder, shall be tried for murder.’

  • Patrik

    Kudos to him, he did absolutely the right thing.The last thing women going for an abortion need is the stress induced by idiots like this.

  • Sean

    This is the type of thing many religious always do. Instead of trying to help an actual problem, they invent one of their own. I believe it comes from the mentality of being told their entire lives to turn everything over to Jesus/God/etc. Poor people dieing? I better pray for them instead of do something to actually help them. Women having unwanted pregnancies, I better protest their freedom to do as they like instead of educate them before they are pregnant or provide useful support when they do become pregnant. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of religious people who do meaningful things and help. There are just plenty of others who could do a better job of being compassionate and caring instead of brainwashed and bigoted.

    I’m impressed this man was able to control himself like he did. I don’t even have a wife and I would have likely lost it on these women. He is a better person than myself and I hope he and his wife are able to have a healthy child.

  • Michael Weir

    Good for him, and a shame that he and his wife had to run the gauntlet at all. Though it’s fortunate that there were only two protesters this time around, a whole bunch of fanatics might have been more dangerous. Bullies are always braver in a mob.

    • Kodie

      There are laws regarding how far away from the entrance an abortion protester may stand, but it is still within their rights to say it. They can’t block the entrance or, I think obviously, physically prevent people from entering a clinic. I live locally to this incident (Brookline is a suburb adjacent to Boston), but the street doesn’t look familiar, it wasn’t the Planned Parenthood (which is in the neighborhood of Allston).

      I’m amazed at his restraint to confront them. When I had my abortion, there were protesters, I just told them to stay out of my uterus, I yelled back at them, but kept on walking, and I don’t remember them still being there when I left (but I was on heavy painkillers). As I recall, they weren’t this close though. I feel like they were on the other side of the parking lot yelling at me. Of course it was so long ago, this was before cell phones and cameras in cell phones, but I wonder how many others have a little chat or shouting match with the protesters before or after their appointment. It doesn’t strike me that confrontations are exceedingly rare, and sadly, it doesn’t seem effective (that’s probably what they think too).

      At least what I’ve seen in Boston by the Planned Parenthood, there aren’t more than a couple people protesting at a time and early in the day (when I believe they schedule abortions), but that may be a time management thing where everyone on the pro-life church committee takes turns. It seems to me, shouting and holding up a few pertinent posters only needs 2-3 people every day. This man and his wife only needed 2 people to shout horrible things to them to be offended, they can see and hear just fine. Boston’s kind of a liberal place, so I wonder how it is in other areas. If they know they are more likely to lose control in larger numbers and break over the threshold or block the entrance, that may be another reason to keep the number of protesters low, and so, more able to keep a constant and loud enough presence.

  • http://billym.macabreink.com Billy

    Those women are gaping fucking cunts out to make the world a worse place, I feel so bad for that man and his wife.

  • cornbread_r2

    Just a bit of Catholic triv:

    The portrait the woman is holding is a rendition of a vision reported by Saint Faustina Kowalska. It demonstrates Jesus’s divine mercy flowing from his heart like the water and blood reported in John’s Gospel. During her lifetime Faustina was considered a lunatic and her diary of revelations was even placed on the Vatican’s List of Prohibited Books. The late Pope John Paul George and Ringo, a fellow Pole, rehabilitated her image and elevated her to sainthood. Today, Catholics all over the world pray “The Divine Chaplet”, a mind-numbing litany inspired by her begging an all-merciful, all-loving god to…you know…not fry them like bacon for all of eternity.

  • timmy the dying boy

    I like him. His wife is a lucky woman.

  • Chris A

    My wife had to have an abortion because the fetus had died inside her. I thought it sensible to have an alive wife in the future.

    A friend was raped by her father – are they arguing that somebody who is 12 or 13 should have the baby when it is likely that either the kid will die in the process of childbirth or have the rest of her life ruined?

    These people aren’t living in the real world.

  • nazani14

    I used to take a bus route through the south side of Chicago, past an abortion clinic- and never once saw anybody protesting or trying to dissuade the women who went in. My conclusion was that there’s a big dose of White supremacy and breeding for the state sentiment in the anti-abortion movement.

  • Jack

    It all comes down to one simple question: What is the unborn? If the unborn is not a human person, no justification for abortion is necessary. However, if the unborn is a human person, no justification for abortion is adequate.

    • Nox

      But “unborn” could cover the entire period during which a fetus becomes a human person. A fully developed infant five minutes before birth about to be born is arguably more of a human person than a small collection of cells in early development with nothing that could reasonably be called a brain. Both of these are “unborn”. But there is a reason why abortion usually becomes both less medically advisable and less legal as the pregnancy progresses.

      • Jack

        You are correct – “unborn” does, indeed, cover the entire period before birth. Once the egg and sperm combine, the fetus is a genetically unique human person in development. Remember – development doesn’t stop once the child is born. Development continues throughout the human life-cycle. The lack of a defined brain in the earliest stages of development no more takes away human “personness” than does the lack of functional reproductive organs in the prepubescence stage of development.

        • Kodie

          Having a brain is pretty important to personness.

          • Jack

            Indeed! We should deny anyone of the right to develop one.

            • Jack

              Ok ok ok… it shoud read “We shouldn’t deny anyone of the right to develop one.”

            • Kodie

              What would you say about a developing fetus who is developing a brain and also a congenital defect that it will die anyway? You set up a binary situation: If the unborn is not a human person, no justification for abortion is necessary. However, if the unborn is a human person, no justification for abortion is adequate. That is, a person is not allowed to grieve for a miscarriage or imminent fetal death if they agree with legalized abortions, that one must have one attitude (considering any undeveloped zygote as a full human person with rights) or you would call these people hypocrite for aborting a wanted child who would have been born dead anyway in a matter of time. If they wanted it, they should pray that god heals the fetus magically, and wait for that to not happen anyway.

              You say “no justification is necessary” like you think people have abortions without any emotions about it, and aren’t entitled to have emotions about it.

            • Sunny Day

              Except the pregnant woman already has a brain and rights. Why take them away in favor of something that does not have either?

            • Francesc

              That’s why I think christian schools shouldn’t be legal

            • Elemenope

              K: Having a brain is pretty important to personness.

              J: Indeed! We shouldn’t deny anyone of the right to develop one.

              Er, if you concede that having a brain is a crucial component of personness…if they don’t have a brain, they aren’t a person, hence they can’t make rights claims about a possible future in which they will have a brain.

              And this is borne out in practice. Fully half of the “genetically unique human persons” (leaving aside monozygotic twins) ever conceived are spontaneously aborted by natural hormonal cycles. I’ve never seen anyone cry a river for them, nor decry the immense loss of human life they would represent if folks of that position actually were consistent about assigning human personhood to every conception.

            • Jack

              You’re missing the point. A missing crucial “component”, especially one in development, does not invalidate personness.

              You say you’ve “never seen anyone cry a river” for miscarriages. People cry all the time over this.

              Now… back to the question. Let’s all try to stay on topic.

            • Elemenope

              A missing crucial “component”, especially one in development, does not invalidate personness.

              Says you. I’m arguing that there is nothing to invalidate (which would imply that the presumption, unearned, is that the fetus is a person); the feature of personness is a null-set *until* there is a mind. it all depends on the presumptions.

              You say you’ve “never seen anyone cry a river” for miscarriages. People cry all the time over this.

              Individually. Never in the aggregate. Big difference, and one that is apropos to discussions about people’s attitudes and behaviors towards abortion. My point, if I may sharpen it, is that nobody rails against the heavens that there are millions upon millions of miscarriages in the world. The only pain that is expressed about this feature of the natural world is the one that has personal impact.

    • LRA

      “However, if the unborn is a human person, no justification for abortion is adequate.”

      Wow. What a load of false dichotomy tripe!

      You are not taking into account that my womb is part of MY body and NOBODY gets to live there unless I say so. You are not taking into account the fact that however low the risk may be (and I admit in first world nations, that risk is very, very low), I could DIE in childbirth and should not be FORCED to risk my life or my health with out MY consent. You are not taking into account the fact that pregnancies are not perfect processes and that many, many things can and DO go wrong, and it is medically necessary to have a procedure in place to care for women who require that medical service.

      WORST of all YOU, A MAN, are not taking into account the HORRIFYING REALITY that is the sexual ABUSE of women that occurs every day on this planet, in which women have no control over their bodies and what happens to them. IT IS PEOPLE LIKE YOU who condone a woman being FORCED to carry the child of her rapist, her molester, or her incestuous family member when you make statements about no justification for abortion being adequate.

      In short, you are INHUMANE. Shame on you!

      • Siberia

        Oh, LRA, we know it’s all about the babies. It doesn’t matter that the woman has rights too, the dirty slut should suffer, right? That’s what we’re here for, to be incubators to all the what-ifs we’re (un)fortunate enough to carry, no matter what. Women don’t need rights, right?

        /sarcasm.

        • LRA

          I’d like to force pregnancy on anti-choice men and see how long they retain their stance. Of course, I’d never stoop to that kind of violation because I’m not in inhumane a##hole like Jack.

          • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty

            It would sure be fun to watch them throw a bitch fit, though.

          • Jack

            “I’m not in inhumane a##hole like Jack”

            Come on, now… is that really necessary?

            • Kodie

              To bypass, the moderation filters in a timely fashion? Yes. Do you have any other questions or comments or excuses?

            • LRA

              ““I’m not in inhumane a##hole like Jack”

              Come on, now… is that really necessary?”

              As long as anti-choice idiots spout overly-simplified, false-dichotomy bullsh*t that violates women’s rights and bodies in horrific ways, yes. Yes, it is necessary. You fight dirty to oppress me by calling me a murderer and saying that my reasons for controlling my life and my body are unjustified, and I will fight dirty by pointing out what an inhumane monster of an a##hole you are.

            • JK

              … or prick etc.? ;-)

            • JK

              Soz, my former reply was meant for Paul :-)

            • Paul

              “‘I’m not in inhumane a##hole like Jack’

              Come on, now… is that really necessary?”

              No it’s not– what derogatory comment would you prefer, I’m sure we kind find worse phrases to employ. Perhaps a male analogue of a certain C-word (our society could use one IMO)?

            • JK

              How about “dick”? Seems to be the male counterpart of the bad c-word. Maybe not that strong but still… ;-)

      • Jack

        “IT IS PEOPLE LIKE YOU who condone a woman being FORCED to carry the child of her rapist, her molester, or her incestuous family member”. I condone no such thing. Please re-read my question and the two possible answers, the first one being “If the unborn is not a human person, no justification for abortion is necessary”.

        My question is simply whether or not the unborn is a human person. By calling the unborn a child, your statement appears to indicate that you affirm the unborn carries this inherent value. Do you honestly believe this?

        • LRA

          That’s just the problem… there are way more than TWO possible answers. It isn’t an either/or. It’s complex, like other life problems. You were trying to be tricky there… it didn’t work. As I’ve already stated, your black and white response indicates your thought on this topic. You are clearly in the camp of the latter of your two choices.

          • Jack

            I understand your caution, but please know that I’m not trying to be tricky, under-handed, or anything but sincere. The correct answer to the question of whether or not the unborn is a human person is, indeed, yes or no. It cannot be both, and it cannot be neither.

            • James G

              Is an unborn foetus a human person?

              No.

            • Sunny Day

              Ok so you claim to have the correct answer, show your work or STFU.

            • Jack

              Where have I made such a claim? I’m simply asking a question.

            • Elemenope

              The correct answer to the question of whether or not the unborn is a human person is, indeed, yes or no. It cannot be both, and it cannot be neither.

              Disagree. For any given criterion or complex of criteria one would care to posit in order to define the character of what being a human person is, it would either exclude entities we would normally agree are human or include entities we would normally agree aren’t.

              There is also something to be said about there being a discrete and yet not complete difference in identity between radically different forms or stages of the same putative entity, such that it would be improper to treat them as the same for the purposes of practical or moral categories, and yet would also be improper to declare them as different in some intrinsic sense.

              In short, what one might think ought to have a simple yes or no doesn’t in reality necessarily possess that comforting dichotomy.

            • LRA

              (I think you scared Jack off with your big brain. LOL!)

            • Sunny Day

              Yep, if his new name is anything to judge by, Jack was scared right into Transsexualism.

            • Elemenope

              ROFL!

      • Deb

        If you were once the unborn child your mother carried, then you have to accept an undeniable truth:  killing that child through abortion would have killed you.  Not a potential you.  Not a possible you.  Not a future you.  Abortion would have killed you. 

        This is why abortion is tragic.  It kills more than a human body.  It kills a valuable human being. 

        Note from Custador

        The interesting thing about being the OP on a post like this is that I get an email whenever anybody comments. That email includes the commenter’s IP address. Whenever somebody pops up suddenly to support a minority view, I can and do compare IP addresses with whichever fundie is winding everybody up at the time. So, I’ll say this once and once only:

        Sock-puppetry is not allowed, Jack. If you post under a different name again, I’ll mark every comment you make as spam. I hope that’s clear enough for you. Enjoy lying your way to the moral high-ground by all means, but don’t do it here.

        Regards,

        Custador

        • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty

          And had I been aborted, I wouldn’t be around to care about whether or not I existed. What’s your point?

        • Kodie

          Don’t overestimate yourself. If you had been aborted, nobody would have missed you because you’d have been unwanted in the first place. Can’t handle it? As in the above case, that fetus was dying. Do you really want to give a dying fetus a fighting chance to die in a few weeks or months, what if you were its parents? What is your problem? Tragic???? Think of the chiiiiiiiiillllldren!

        • LRA

          So, Deb, you think that little girls who have been raped by their fathers should be forced to carry a child, even if their hips are too small and they can’t possibly carry the baby to term, risking their lives???

          If you think so, then you are seriously disturbed and utterly inhumane to the suffering of another person.

        • Custador

          Custador says: “Sock Puppets will be get spanked in future”.

          • LRA

            Aw, SNAP!!!! Someone got caught lyin’ for Jeebus!!!!!!

            • Custador

              For the record, I read every comment on every article I post, and I do check for sock-puppetry. As I hope I have demonstrated. I also occasionally check for it on other people’s posts if I think there’s a suspicion of it. Yes, I am that sad and lonely.

        • Jack

          So, no one in my home is allowed to post but me??

          • Jabster

            Jack stop being such a fecking prat … you’ve being dishonest in the way you’ve argued, dishonest in creating a sock puppet and now you’re being dishonest about being dishonest. Must be difficult taking the high ground when you’re an out and out liar?

            • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty

              Apparently it’s easier to just tunnel on through, even if you do get covered in mud…

          • LRA

            If someone else in your home… this supposed DEB… is posting, then that person perhaps should make a note that she is your wife, daughter, girlfriend, etc. Otherwise, the moderators will look at the IP address and figure it out.

            We’ve had too many Liars for Jeebus(TM) come along and pretend to be something they are not. Too many have pretended to be supporters of their own side, and too many have pretended to be a side they are not in order to discredit that side. (See “Pastor Gets Caught Lying for Jeebus” entry on this blog… a PASTOR pretended to be an atheist to make atheists look bad… and it turned out badly for him!)

            Fair warning.

            • Kodie

              Too many have also pretended to be a woman after being told that men aren’t entitled to an opinion about this (unless they take the woman’s side, i.e. defer to the woman’s choice entirely). I would also note that Jack pretends to have an agenda of a fair discussion from both sides, while Deb is outright horrified that anyone ever considers abortion as anything but a tragedy. I’m not convinced they are the same person as sock puppets usually don’t know well enough to change the (hidden) email address so the little gravatar is different until we catch them changing names but not emails. Perhaps this one is savvy, and we don’t know how similar “Jack” and “Deb”‘s email addresses are. Even with the tell of an identical gravatar, it’s not completely uncommon for a wife to not be allowed to have her own email address or know how to get one or to even think she should assert her own identity, particularly in uptight hierarchical biblical Christian marriages. In any case, if Deb is Jack’s wife, or if Deb is Jack, it’s not surprising they have the same opinion.

              Jack, I’m surprised you let Deb have her own email and that you even told her about this blog post so that she could enter the discussion with her own name and voice her opinion, especially when you have made such a low opinion you have of women public knowledge. It’s surprising if you didn’t tell her what to think, or write the posts for her, if she even exists. Sock puppets are technically not another person, but could alternately be a case of someone passing along a story and encouraging another person to post only because you already know what they’re going to say. We have no real reason to suspect Deb found this article by herself, if she even exists, and decided to post her own opinion in her own words without someone prodding her to do so, if she even exists.

          • Custador

            Jack, do you really want me to prove it? Fine, I will:

            This morning I looked up the domain which “Deb” claimed as her email, which happens to belong to an Australian company which has an office in Denver. Now, given that corporate email addresses are NEVER [first name]@domain.com, I was suspicious of her email address being deb@[Australian corporate domain].com – so I emailed it. Lo and behold, guess what the hotmail mail server said when I got back today? Message undeliverable, unknown address on host. Combined with the breathtaking speed with which “Deb” has failed to come and defend her identity and/or your honour, I think that’s pretty conclusive. Even if “Deb” was a real person (and by “real person” I don’t mean the transsexual alter-ego you use on weekends), to post in support of you without first pointing out the relationship would have been massively dishonest.

            You, Jack, are a lying piece of shit for Jesus – so why don’t you fuck off and whinge about how hostile we all are when we catch you lying to us and pretend like it’s not your fault? Which, for the record: It IS your fault.

            • Custador

              I feel I should point out that I don’t think there’s anything wrong with transsexualism and I apologise for associating them with Jack. Not to Jack, to transsexual people.

        • Yoav

          Deb/Jack.
          That’s a load of woohee, as other have pointed if I was aborted (artificially or by the most prolific abortionist of all, your god) I would never have existed and while the concept of what if/ other trouser of time can, when use by a talented writer, make a nice story it’s completely irrelevant for the real world. When fundies do the what if thing (generally without the aforementioned talent) it’s always Mozart or Einstein who get aborted, somehow they never come up with a scenario in which Hitler/Stalin/ Berny Madof is the one aborted resulting in a glorious alternative reality.

    • coffeejedi

      Dude, judging by your name, like me, you’re a dude.

      Guess what? As dudes, it’s not our frakking decision! We have absolutely no say in this matter what-so-ever.

      Now, IF there is a couple out there facing this decision (and when I say couple, I mean an actual equal relationship between two consenting legal adults), the guy gets some input. Advice really; he gets to weigh in with his opinion and be part of the process with his female partner, but the final yes-or-no vote resides solely with her. If she wants to raise the kid, well Mr. Man is just going to have to buck up and be a father. If she decides to abort, then he either accepts it, or leaves the relationship for someone who thinks more like him. But that’s IT. And don’t think for a minute you get to tell someone who ISN’T your partner what she can do with her womb. The ONLY choice concerning abortion that you get as a man is whether to stand by the mother’s decision, or leave.

      In my opinion, every male lawmaker should shut his trap on the issue as well.

      • Jack

        I’m not talking about laws, rights, or parental roles. I’m simply asking a question about the unborn.

        • Elemenope

          No offense, Jack, but adopting the rhetorical term “unborn” makes me (and I’m sure, others) doubt you’re posing these questions and points in good faith, if for no other reason than that the term is loaded so as to imply a teleological normativity to a fetus to be born as opposed to the many other common fates (natural or artificially-induced) of such fetuses.

          • Jack

            No offense taken! Finally, a reasonable response not filled with name-calling and foul language.

            I am sincere, though. Just posing the question.

            • LRA

              No you’re not! You’re looking for a gotcha moment with your false dichotomy. There are many many criterion for whether or not a person is a person with moral rights and responsibilities. Being born may or may not actually be one of the criterion.

              But since you’ve admitted that you clearly think it’s an either/or question, you are either extremely anti-choice, or shockingly pro-abortion at any stage. Neither is a good position. Both are fraught with serious moral flaws.

              And you wonder why we’re suspicious of you???

            • LRA

              ps. Your concern with “foul” language gives you away.

              pps. You’re no Socrates.

            • LRA

              ppps. You’ve already stated:

              “We shouldn’t deny anyone of the right to develop [a brain].”

              and:

              “However, if the unborn is a human person, no justification for abortion is adequate.”

              You’ve made your position clear, and it is a shocking and horrible one. By your logic, all the “unborn” no matter the circumstances of conception, stage of development, or presence of a severe disability should be given the chance to “develop” (read: forced pregnancy on the mother).

              You’re not just asking a question, you’re looking for a Socratic dialog in which you “logically” develop an argument against a woman’s right to choose.

              Whatever. How stupid do you think we are?

            • Sunny Day

              Its not how stupid he thinks we are, its how stupid he is.

            • Jack

              *sigh*

              Such a hostile place… Serves me right for thinking I could find some civil dialog.

              Peace.

            • Kodie

              When you have such a hostile opinion of people and their choices, you’re going to get met. You might think your words were civil, but your attitude came in loud and clear.

            • Jabster

              @LRA

              Having read a few of Jack’s posts I’ve got to agree with you (and a few others) that he is not being honest in his position and is instead waiting for the “gotcha moment” so he can claim what he believes is a win – although he probably now be claiming a win as we’re all nasty people who unlike him can’t have civil dialog (hint to Jack: dialog is a two way process not you trying to pry information out of others to prove have right you are).

              To me the big give away is how guarded he is/was with his opinion yet always trying to get others to foward there opinion. This always you the most scope to prove the other wrong with no maximum flexabilty for not having to justify your own position. So if you’re going to act in a seemingly dishonest way and use loaded terms then you have to expect at least some people to be hostile.

            • LRA

              “Serves me right for thinking I could find some civil dialog. ”

              But you AREN’T being civil! You’re acting like you are smarter and morally superior to the pro-choice people here. It is smug and maddening. But I suppose you anti-choice people can feel secure in your persecution complex.

              Whatever.

            • LRA

              BTW, why don’t you have a “civil” dialog with an African-American about the virtues of slavery and see how far you get. Or with a Native American about the virtues of individual land ownership over tribal life. Or with a poor person about the virtues of a poll tax.

              People get pissed of for a reason when you try to trample on their personal rights. Especially when you are part of the group perceived as the oppressor.

            • Len

              @LRA: You rock.

            • LRA

              :D Thank you!!!!

      • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty

        You. Rock.

        • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty

          That was in response to coffeejedi, above.

          • CoffeeJedi

            Thanks!

      • Custador

        I was going to chip in to this, but Coffeejedi said exactly what I wanted to say already.

        • Elemenope

          The only part I disagree with is the very last part. Male lawmakers (just like female ones) by dint of the way the positions work, end up representing many men and women in their district. Since the issue, like it or not, is of political import, it is entirely appropriate for male as well as female lawmakers to hold and act upon their positions on the issue. One would hope that the male lawmakers would take seriously the opinions especially of women in their district on an issue that disproportionately affects women.

          Also, as a practical note, in the US this election cycle the Republican party has been far more effective at fielding female candidates than the (even more pathetic than usual) Democrat showing. The upshot of making it a rule that only women politicians should have an opinion on this issue, if actually followed, would rapidly lead to abortion being outlawed in the US; not, I think, your intent, amirite?

          • CoffeeJedi

            You know, that’s a very very good point. That last bit was just something that popped into my head as I was writing, thinking of all the campaign ads talking about abortion. Probably shouldn’t have tacked it on like that.

          • Francesc

            Strange how pretty often opressed population can fight against their own rights.

            • Sunny Day

              The rights of the possible trump the rights of the actual?

            • Francesc

              Course not.
              I wonder why so often poor/black/hispan people vote republicans or women votes against abortion or contraception.

              On another hand, every possible human being wich born means an awful lot of possible human beings that are never to be born. Think about them too :p

  • Darwin

    How the hell did we get that weird trackback?

    • CoffeeJedi

      Spam bot, they just crawl blogs and do trackbacks to posts with high comment counts.

  • Pingback: The Pinoy Connection - My dialogue with an Anti-RH apologist: A blow-by-blow account


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X