Replies

Personally, like a great many other socially conservative Americans, I'm not fanatical about abortion. For the most part, I prefer to cautiously stay out of sight and let the extremists on both sides do the yelling. But the hellish horror of Gosnell's killing chambers inevitably has induced sheer revulsion and shock in legions of formerly blasé Americans who had never thought much about this fundamentally divisive political issue. The two films mentioned desperately needed to be created and distributed. Simple truth is powerful.

Yes, the extremists on the "pro-life" side will continue to hysterically refuse to acknowledge any difference whatsoever between, say, a blobby zygote and what actually is a near-term, "unborn baby," but after decades of arrogant, heartless, creepy propaganda by the "pro-death" side and after the recent spate of truly terrifying laws and proposed laws in New York State, Virginia, and elsewhere, I have utterly nil interest in helping the pro-abortion propagandists. They wanted intolerant extremism, well, they've got intolerant extremism -- on the side of banning nearly all abortions. Ho, ho, ho, how do they like them apples?

Frankly, if Roe v. Wade is ultimately junked by a resurgent conservative bloc on the Supreme Court, I'll break out the popcorn and settle down to watch leftist heads explode like rotten cantaloupes all over the country. It'll be extremely entertaining in a grim way. :/

Sarc, I strongly agree with you that the Gosnell and Unplanned movies need to be shown everywhere, shown over and over again. The first step is seeing the reality.

But think this through with me. You say "the extremists on the "pro-life" side will continue to hysterically refuse to acknowledge any difference whatsoever between, say, a blobby zygote and what actually is a near-term, "unborn baby,"

Is that really true?

Nobody denies the difference in size, weight, tissues, organs and systems, between a new embryo that looks like a brine shrimp and a perinatal baby that's somersaulting, smiling, and could probably use a cell phone.

But the differences between different individuals' rump-to-crown length, bone mass or whatever, are not relevant to the question of intrinsic human dignity. We don't award the right to life by weight, or give big chubbaloobas extra respect for being jumbo size.

In the one fundamental thing --- the right to not be crushed, poisoned or dismembered, the right to simply go on living--- they are the same. The embryo in the uterus, the ethicist in the seminar room, the imbecile liberal comedian on TV, the President in the Oval Office, all have exactly the same status in this one respect, that as long as we live, no one has the right to make us dead.

And why? Because we're the same kind: humankind. WE are not to be slain.

Frankly, if Roe v. Wade is ultimately junked by a resurgent conservative bloc on the Supreme Court

What will be very interesting, is that if the court does strike RvW based on the Alabama law, it's not going to necessarily return as a states' powers issue, AL is based on the fact than any unborn baby is a human being - starting with conception. Therefore, they are entitled to all the protections that a person has. This won't just return the choice to the States, this will (should) end elective abortions in America.