Boston Globe is too extreme for me to retire
Folks, you can read the whole, ridiculous editorial at boston.com but the key sentence of the completely-lost-it Left's position on abortion is contained in the following sentence, "It is hard to see how forcing a frightened 15-year-old to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term will improve the life of the teen or her child (Pregnant and Frightened, Boston Globe, July 29, A12)."
For those that missed it, earlier in the week, the U.S. Senate passed a bill making it a crime to transport a minor across state lines to have an abortion without notifying the parents. This, of course, puts the unhinged Left on tilt; the Left stops thinking and it writes stupid lead editorials. Quick aside: the Editorial Board of the Boston Globe is six white men, a white woman and a Hispanic woman (it looks much more like the U.S. Supreme Court it is always railing about than it looks like "America"; but, as we have come to learn, do as liberal extremists say and not as liberal extremists do).
I'm going to skip over the words in this sentence that were clearly included for propaganda purposes and have nothing to do with the issue at hand; these words are "forcing", "frightened", "15-year-old" and "unwanted". Nothing but propaganda.
But, I cannot overlook the idiocy contained in the last half of the sentence, "improve the life of . . . her child". Wow, the Boston Globe used the word "child". Obviously the Boston Globe was not referring to the fetus; it obviously assumes birth to use this word. But, killing the unborn "child" improves the unborn child's life? Are they stark raving mad? The elite Left thinks starting a life as a possibly unwanted (she's 15 and frightened, after all; who knows if she's thinking clearly enough to definitively say she doesn't want the baby) baby justifies killing the baby before birth! They really do think this. My goodness, I wish I were so intelligent that I could begin to understand the clearly enlightened philosophical brillance of this thinking. The depths of their collective depravity cannot be measured. Yes, they are stark raving mad.
Folks, you can read the whole, ridiculous editorial at boston.com but the key sentence of the completely-lost-it Left's position on abortion is contained in the following sentence, "It is hard to see how forcing a frightened 15-year-old to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term will improve the life of the teen or her child (Pregnant and Frightened, Boston Globe, July 29, A12)."
For those that missed it, earlier in the week, the U.S. Senate passed a bill making it a crime to transport a minor across state lines to have an abortion without notifying the parents. This, of course, puts the unhinged Left on tilt; the Left stops thinking and it writes stupid lead editorials. Quick aside: the Editorial Board of the Boston Globe is six white men, a white woman and a Hispanic woman (it looks much more like the U.S. Supreme Court it is always railing about than it looks like "America"; but, as we have come to learn, do as liberal extremists say and not as liberal extremists do).
I'm going to skip over the words in this sentence that were clearly included for propaganda purposes and have nothing to do with the issue at hand; these words are "forcing", "frightened", "15-year-old" and "unwanted". Nothing but propaganda.
But, I cannot overlook the idiocy contained in the last half of the sentence, "improve the life of . . . her child". Wow, the Boston Globe used the word "child". Obviously the Boston Globe was not referring to the fetus; it obviously assumes birth to use this word. But, killing the unborn "child" improves the unborn child's life? Are they stark raving mad? The elite Left thinks starting a life as a possibly unwanted (she's 15 and frightened, after all; who knows if she's thinking clearly enough to definitively say she doesn't want the baby) baby justifies killing the baby before birth! They really do think this. My goodness, I wish I were so intelligent that I could begin to understand the clearly enlightened philosophical brillance of this thinking. The depths of their collective depravity cannot be measured. Yes, they are stark raving mad.
posted by Zack at 6:43 AM
3 Comments:
thanks for continuing
Anyone who has read my comments before knows that I agree with your position. It is totally absurd to say that a child would rather be killed than be brought into the world by an unwed teenager who has a variety of options -- including, keeping the child herself; having the child raised by a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or other family member; and putting the child up for adoption to one of the many hundreds (likely tens of thousands) of adoptive parents who would dearly love to adopt the child. All of these options would definitely improve the life of the child over stopping that life.
That said, I still think those on our side need to present the case a little more calmly, and less sarcastically (I understand that leftists make it difficult with statements like the one you cite) so as not to lose the power of our arguments. Of course, to the extent your piece is meant to vent, rather than persuade, I join you in your outrage.
Conscience, you almost get my tone. The Left prints suff like I quoted in the original post and millions of people think that it is NOT extreme. I repeat, with gusto, the depths of their collective depravity cannot be measured. It cannot be overstated. I want innocent human life to be protected and I'm the extremist? I want parents to be notified and I'm the extremist? I want partial-birth abortions banned and I'm the extremist. My goodness, the Infants Born-Alive Protection Act says if a fetus survives an abortion attempts must be made to save the fetus's life! We codified that the only way you can save it is if you FAIL to kill it! They are stark raving mad.
Post a Comment
<< Home