It was a sweltering July day in the city of Philadelphia in 1776. The delegates to the convention slowly make their way into what ultimately would be dubbed “Independence Hall” but on this day it was still commonly known as “Moe’s Place.” Representatives from the 13 American colonies were there to discuss whether or not to break away from Mother England and set up their own nation. A committee had been formed to draft a statement of principles that would publicly explain to King George and the rest of the world why the colonies felt it was necessary to declare its independence and, in effect, start a war.
The debate over the proposed resolution was intense and went on for days. Should we actually call the King a “tyrant?” How do we address the issue of slavery? Should we be quoting Thomas Paine or Voltaire? Should we refer to God?
Then, suddenly, after days of laborious discussion, a delegate raised his hand and is recognized: “Mr. President, why is there no language that protects fetuses from being aborted?”
There are puzzled looks on the faces of those in the room then Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the document, calmly assures the delegate that his concern has been met and refers him to the section which says that all men shall be endowed with the right to “life” in this new nation so, he explains, since every baby has the possibility of coming out as a male, you cannot have any abortions!
Somehow I just don’t think that’s how it all played out.
Those who advocate making abortion a crime in this country love to cite the Declaration of Independence and, in particular, the line that says (cue the trumpets!): “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Or is it “inalienable?” I always get that part confused.
Anyway, so somewhere along the line the anti-abortion folks started to interpret that passage to mean that everyone has a “right to life.” See! See! The Founding Fathers, those wise old men, were saying that everyone, including those little fetuses, have the right to life! See! What did I tell ya? You gonna argue with the likes of Jefferson, Franklin, Berkowitz and Adams?
Okay, now let’s everybody calm down and think this through a little.
First of all, the fact is that those sage, all-knowing Founding Fathers never said a word about abortion during that long summer in Philadelphia. The word is never found in any of the historical accounts of the process. I mean, just think about about it. It wasn’t even an issue in those days and they had much bigger things on their mind, like creating a new country. Didn’t they have other things to do that were a little more important than abortion?
Second, remember that in those days, when they said “all men” are blah, blah, they really meant all MEN. We know that they weren’t talking about women – God forbid – and they weren’t talking about the slaves either. They were talking about all of those old white people who had the power. So, please do not tell me that, although they didn’t give a rat’s ass about women or slaves, they did care about protecting those little, defenseless fetuses.
This is one of those arguments that is really stretching it a bit, don’t you think?


July 3, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Pat can you please go to my blog and contact me privately via email. I need to discuss a private matter with you. thanks.
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 5:54 pm
Let me ask you guys a question, Pat, Kate, Dwanna and I,( maybe a few others) were having a legitimate civil conversation (BY INVITATION) and then you late comers jump in calling the pro-lifers names, insulting them, and basically just being juvenile sounding brats for no other reason than that we are pro-life.Then you have MaryAnn popping up with her religious bantering, which is basically the same thing. It astounds me how you can think that this behavior is appropriate. Dr. Miller (I would hope to God that no true doctor is as juvenile as you.) You systematically went down the page and said a bunch of nothing in response to legitimate discussions. Several others did the same thing. So, do you guys want to have legitimate discussions or not? As I said earlier I was invited here to give a pro-life perspective, which I have done, but my perspective has been met with nothing but junk for the most part, other than from a few actual adults on here. Frankly I am getting bored with the whole atmosphere of immaturity. When I was invited here the person who invited me said that these discussions generally digress into a bunch of name calling with no one saying anything really (paraphrase) and they were hoping that I could lend some genuine discussion to the blog. I can see now what they meant when they said that. It seems to me that for the most part other than a few, the author of this blog is the only one that is interested in genuine conversation. Am I right about that? The rest of you appear to be interested in nothing more than junior high bantering and name calling with nothing more than that to add. I would really like to know if this is the way it is going to be because I honestly have no interest in junior high playground arguments.
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 6:05 pm
You just sound like another ranting Pro Lifer,
trying to take away women’s rights.
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 6:24 pm
So I guess you are only interested in junior high games then?
Ok. lets hear from the rest of you….legit conversation or bantering?
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 6:58 pm
Legit conversation gets my vote, in spite of me.
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Well John, unfortunately no one else is interested in a conversation. All that they are interested in is slinging poo at me because I am pro-life. The reason I was invited here was to converse. Pat, Kate and a few more were interested but frankly I am tired of wading through all of the junk to dig out the conversations so I’m done.
Pat, thanks for the invite, I tried but as you can see from this articles posts and the last as well that they are simply not interested in a conversation.
Perhaps you should consider what some of the other blogs do when they have this problem. If people cannot stop the name calling and bashing they cannot comment. If you decide to implement this let me know and I will come converse. Otherwise, I don’t see the point of dodging poo after every comment that I write.
I don’t know if you saw it or not but I asked you to contact me privately via my email address on my blog. I have something private to discuss with you.
Kate, thanks for attempting to have a civil discussion with me. I know you got angry a time or two but you did try and I appreciate that. also thanks to the others who attempted.
If anyone else wants to have a legitimate conversation or has a question please feel free to contact me via my blog.
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 10:40 am
DeAnna,
I have been reading this blog for a long time.
What I typically see is a Pro Lifer, when subjected to the scrutiny of real questions – Important questions – just disappear, as you are proclaiming to do.
It has been a consistent behavior.
ProLifers will never answer the real questions, then they say “I’m leaving . . . ”
You seem to be in that group from what you wrote.
It saddens me, as a Pro Life person, as you do write like an intelligent person that you will be yet another. It harms our cause. I am so tired of pro lifers harming the pro life cause.
Please adress the important questions that you get as you will serve the ProLife movement well.
If you quit, then you appear to be just like all the others I have watched – and that is sad, and will destroy our cause.
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 1:24 pm
I began to laugh softly after Irv’s second paragraph, and my wife heard me after the seventh: “If you quit, then you appear to be just like all the others I have watched – and that is sad, and will destroy our cause.”
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Irv,
I appreciate what you have said and do understand your point. The problem is, as you can clearly see, I DO answer the questions. I have as Kate said, spent hours per day answering questions and trying to have real conversations. Every time I answer a question the response is accusations, insults, attacks, and worst of all a refusal to acknowledge my answer. If you can show one question that I didn’t answer other than asinine accusations (other than perhaps some I haven’t seen since I made my exit) then I will be glad to answer them. But I feel like I am wasting my time because there are almost no responses that indicate a desire to have a conversation.
Before I left I asked a point blank question, Do you guys want to have a civil discussion or banter. No one answered except John. In response that threw more insults. So, basically for the most part I am talking to myself.
The insults don’t bother me as far as insults go, it’s just a waste of time if we really aren’t conversing.
I don’t mind trying, really I don’t, and I’m usually as stubborn as they come and can take on just about anybody saying anything. I am not intimidated in the least. But someone else is also going to have to make an effort to be civil. I feel like I am talking to a bunch of drunken cowboys who want nothing but a bar brawl. I am not interested in that. I am looking for intelligent, adult conversation. I don’t even mind anger. Kate has gotten angry before and that can be a good part of communication. It doesn’t bother me in the least. But poo throwing to say you did is not worth my time.
I have a feeling that many of the people doing this are not as interested in the issue as they are in puffing themselves up in feeling good about the fact they have spoken down to a pro-lifer and “put her in her place”.
Again, a waste of energy.
So, I am willing to try again but as I said, someone else is going to have to be civil or speak up and ask the others to be civil. I have a hard time digging through all of the poo in order to even see the legitimate questions in order to answer them,
It’s a grownup issue people, Can we act like adults?
LikeLike
July 3, 2011 at 8:13 pm
This blog will suffer with the No. 1 voice of sanity leaving. But I’ve saved some of what she offered us. I’ll keep at it, though, hoping to attract another clear thinker.
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 5:56 am
So it looks as if now I’m left with my friends from the AWC, Bill Bekenhuis, Ellen Bell, Sharon Davis, Matt, Pat, Anna, and others. On this blog they go by the names of Monica, Henly, Garett, Latisha, dock tore me la, Amy – well, just about all except for Chuckles, Pat, Kate, and Rog.
I like it just fine that way. I would never insult them there; I like ’em too much. But here, since I’m not sure (I’m pretty good at recognizing style, but not perfect), I can fire away. Fun!
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 7:39 pm
You like it just fine…what way?
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 9:22 pm
This way: not being sure whom I’m talking to because, then, I can underline their stupidities and not worry about hurting their feelings.
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 8:48 am
Just catching up with everything. sorry to see you go, Deanna. I also get very bored with folks who just call others names, but I guess that is the nature of the beast and I”m not gonna spend my time trying to censor folks.
I used to work on Capitol Hill and my boss always said “politics is a contact sport.” That’s the case here. Hope you’ll reconsider your decision but, if you don’t, best of luck to you….
And then there was a Dunkle!
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 9:15 am
Pat, have you ever considered addressing the use of grotesque images within the anti abortion industry?
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 10:02 am
Kate gets upset when we show what she’s done after she’s helped do it.
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 7:32 pm
What’s this “WE” stuff, white man?
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 9:24 pm
We loser cruisers. (I’m black.)
LikeLike
July 4, 2011 at 10:46 pm
Can you translate your reply?
I just cannot understand what you write most the time.
Tx
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 12:21 am
Irv,
Ok I went back as you suggested and looked at each question, insult and comment. I answered one or two that I saw that had not been answered. I responded to every comment where I was accused of lying, providing biased sources, ignorant, stupid, and the like. I answered each of these as well. I asked for opposing documentation to prove that what I said was a lie, or biased, or that I didn’t know what i was talking about or that I was ignorant of the facts. I have asked for these thing several times before with a 100 % lack of response. I suspect it will be the same this time as well. I did this to make a point. When I or another pro-lifer posts a comment they they do not like the response is to question the source. When the source cannot be legitimately questioned (the Gallup poll comment line is a perfect example of this) they resort to insults. The other response it to say we are ignorant or lying. We ask for documented proof to show that we are ignorant or lying and they either completely ignore the request (again 100 % of the time this has been the case) indicating that they do so because there is no legitimate proof, or they resort to insults.
Stay around and watch it play out and you will then understand why pro-lifers leave. It’s very frustrating not to mention time consuming with no real purpose unless one likes bantering.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 8:06 am
Just so everyone is clear..I for some reason cannot “reply” to a comment so I have to watch the flow and comment with this seperate post. When I try, it says “leave a comment”, I write it but then there is no “post comment” opportunity.
So…Deanna, you can obviously do what you want but I’m sure yyou know that there are folks out there who just dont make ssense, who will repeat the same thing over and over again. They’re on both sides of the issue. Personally, I just prefer to ignore them. Second, I hope you can tell by now that I want a civil dialogue and that I am a slightly different pro-choicer. Indeed, that’s why I get into trouble with my colleagues on occasion.
And speaking of….Kate I think it is a good idea to write about the “grotesque” images that the anti-abortion movement uuses. I’ll work on it, but you might not like what I ssay….But I guess if you dont like it, you can call me a “toad” again 🙂
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 8:43 am
Pat, I do know that there are people out there who just do not make sense. And yes, I know that they will most likely repeat it. It just gets annoying to be conversing and a bunch of juvenile delinquents who were never taught basic manners interrupt to spew nonsense. And yes, I know they are on both sides. Believe me I have seen the posts of the random fly by pro-lifer who stops by long enough to call you guys names as if that fulfills their pro-life duty. I never have understood exactly what they think that accomplishes and it annoys me just as much or in a way even more so. Maybe that is the whole point. They don’t think.
I do appreciate your being willing to talk through the issues in a civil way. Everyone on both sides needs to grow up and understand that the only way any progress will be made on this issue is for us to actually hear what the other is saying, not just looking to see if it is the opposite side speaking so they can answer with some smart mouth response.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 10:40 am
Ouch
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 2:52 pm
but deanna….
you are calling people names even in the post i am replying to….
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 3:54 pm
Yes I did Rogelio but the difference is that I was describing what has happened on this blog, not just spewing out names and insults at people because they have opposing views to mine. That behavior is juvenile. I assure you that in the context of a conversation about the issues I will never attack a person just because I am pro-life and they are not. We should disagree with opinions and ideas, not insult a person for no reason.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 7:50 pm
Rog has his own problems, d, don’t get him excited.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 12:53 am
rationalize it how you wish.
i have done the same thing before, but in the end, i had to admit at least to myself that two wrongs don’t make a right.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 8:35 am
And you would be right about that one. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 10:43 am
WOW 306 comments… Pat you got to come with arguments like this more often…
Deanna, You are a great person for what i see on your comments in here. Congrats. If just more people could have your knowledge, things for sure could start to change.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 11:12 am
Thanks Sonia. I appreciate the support.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Thanks, Sonia. I will try to come up with more creative stuff. Hey, Deanna, if you would like me to comment on some topic via a blog post, lemme know. Here’s your opportunity to stick it to me 🙂
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 10:57 pm
Ok, I put some thought into it. I agree with Kate. Write about the abortion pics. I would also like to hear your take on post viable abortions. You mentioned it a bit. But I would like to hear your whole scoop on that, specifically your personal thoughts.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 3:55 pm
I have a better idea Pat, why don’t you let me write it 🙂
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 5:20 pm
The first time I read “Guilty Pleasures,” I found it deliciously msetyrious with a gratifying but surprising plot. “Guilty Pleasures” stood out because of its awesome storytelling, atypical plot, and atypical characters.Although, I love the character development in “Micah,” lately it’s been really about Anita’s harem and Anita’s superpowers. I’m ready to go back to the story telling days of “Guilty Pleasures” and “Obsidian Butterfly” where it was fun reading about Anita solving mysteries.I’m anticipating “Afflictions “and can’t to read it. I expect LKH to write on par or even better than “Guilty Pleasures,” “Micah,” and “Obsidian Butterfly.”
LikeLike
March 10, 2014 at 3:06 am
That’s more than sensible! That’s a great post!
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Don’t you write your stuff on your own blog??
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Yeah, but you have to admit the response would be interesting. You would probably get thrown off the who’s who of abortion list.
LikeLike
July 5, 2011 at 7:51 pm
Hey! I like where this is going!
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 9:30 am
The more I think about this…..as you know, this blog page has given Dunkle and Chuckles the ability to post on their own page, correct? So, now I’m wondering why we dont give Deanna that opportunity and – to even it out – give Kate the same opportunity to opine on their own page. See at the top of our home page for Dunkle’s and Chuckles’ pages. I dont know if it would be worth it to Deanna and Kate. Let me mull this one over but I’d be interested in your collective responses…
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 10:58 am
anything to get you thrown off the who’s who of abortion list
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 12:27 pm
that is a STELLAR idea!
i think deanna has some very constructive input, even if i think some of the wording can be hurtful.
and i always loved loved LOVED kate’s blog.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Where is kate’s blog?
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 2:16 pm
I don’t think it’s around any more. It was called bullywatch009. Google it and see what happens. It was fun for a while, till Kate could no longer take it and stopped posting my replies. I told her bully would die of boredom if I left, and I guess it did.
LikeLike
February 9, 2014 at 4:27 pm
almost the same thing. I haven’t started even wrtinig short stories yet, unless they are non-fiction things. Someday I will branch out, and am practicing with weekly micro fictions that are fun and make me want to keep on expanding some of them. Still, there is something inside me that is growing daily to sit down and get to work on my wrtinig.I post when I feel like it, which is often. My blog is so eclectic that it draws in all sorts of people, and I am grateful when they come back and when they leave me comments. I post a lot of pictures; they are so easy and don’t require much commentary. I try to stay on schedule with my Sepia Saturday and Book Blurb Friday posts, though sometimes I skip them if I have time constraints. Each little story is a building block for the future.I’ll go and visit your friend and wish her a Happy Birthday. Hope you have a wonderful week.Kathy M.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 3:09 pm
kate is a very busy lady and had to make the choice to stop the blog because it took up too much of her time.
it was definitely a choicer blog, but she delved into other topics than abortion.
her entries, even if i didn’t agree with them were always thought provoking, and we had some awesome conversations there.
she is very openminded by nature and was open to opposing views as long as they were respectful to the other readers.
it was also very user friendly and it was easy to follow the threads.
if she ever decides to blog again, i will be a regular.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 3:15 pm
I found it. I see she posts quotes from Rebecca Turner. I would love to get that woman in a room for a heart to heart discussion. I think I would actually mortgage my house and pay for the opportunity.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 3:28 pm
i was referring to thenotsodailyherald.
she just recently shut it down due to time restraints.
i am subscribed to bullywatch009 on youtube.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 3:51 pm
the blog i was referring to was thenotsodailyherald.
i am, however, subscribed to the bullywatch009 channel on youtube.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 4:10 pm
I would consider doing that. Would like to hear details though. FYI. I don’t see any posts under Dunkle’s and couldn’t figure out which one belonged to chuckles.
LikeLike
July 6, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Rog’s right. It was thenotsodailyherald that died from boredom. Bullywatch009 (I’m the bully) has me confused now. I would tell you where to go to read Chuckles if I were really mean. To read mine go to skyp1.blogspot.com, or, I think, Abortion is Murder.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 6:03 am
Pat, a couple of technical things here– normally abortiion.com notifies me when a comment’s been posted, but on this thread it’s not happening, although it continues to do so on dunkle.com and cg.com. Second, the “post comment” problem that you experienced and wrote about is still happening with me, so every post I want to make has to be a new one. I’d appreciate it if you would have your tech support person check into that. Why it would only affect one or two people is puzzling.
As for Deanna having her own subblog, why not? Either she’s got a terrrific amount of spare time or she’s a collaboratrive. In either event, the flow is astounding, even if of questionable validity.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:40 am
Me a collaborative? Now that would be nice. People do do my laundry, sweeping and dusting while I argue with you guys.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 6:07 am
So, hypothetical question for the so-called “pro-life” contingent here: You are protesting at the clinic on the day women come for abortions, and Casey Anthony arrives for her appointment. What do you do to protect her next child?
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:34 am
I would try to persuade her to let the child live — diabolical law that discourages me from forcing her rather than persuading her. (I love it, Chuck, now that you’re beginning to talk rationally — next child rather than next humanoid. Should I pat myself on the back?)
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:52 am
Ditto john:
I would do the only thing that the law allows right now which is to try to persuade her to let it live (both before and after birth) and then place it for adoption. I certainly wouldn’t encourage her to kill it because that would mean that she has snuffed out two of her kids instead of one. If she allowed it I would then take her to counseling sessions to help her understand how to NOT be psycho. And then try to help with whatever practical needs she may have.
Here’s the thing. Hat happened to Caylee was horrible and tragic and heartbreaking but also are the millions of others killed by abortion. It’s just that you could see Caylee’s little face and with abortion you can’t. If there was a window on the front of the womb abortion would be practically non-existent. I mean who could watch that baby get a shot of digoxin into it’s heart or watch it get sliced up and it’s head crushed other than the deranged doctors who do it for a living? Think about it.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:43 am
Chuck: I will try to find out why the “reply” issue is happening to you and I but I’m gonna have to go through the WordPress people, which can be a chore.
Meanwhile, still mulling over giving Deanna her own forum like John and Chuck (CG.com). Would like to consider doing the same for Kate, but she has not responded lately.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 4:03 pm
So, Deanna and Dunkle, the “butchered little baby bits” still grabs you harder than what happens to real children? That’s quite a focus you have on abortion. Real human life counts for less, hmmmmm……
And it’s interesting that neither of you are aware of the options of aggressively advocating for the child by communicating with her doctor, the police, the child protective services, and going to court to establish guardianship. But that’s a lot harder than fighting for the unborn. I tend to forget that, don’t I?
I’ve dealt with parents who have lost their baby to protective services at birth; I’m surprised that you know so little– but not at all surprised you do so little– about what actually can be done to protect the next Caylee. As long as you are fixated on fetuses, you cannot help but let children suffer.
But, thanks for buttressing the nature of aborticentrism with a couple of real-life testimonies!
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Aborti,
I actually thought about all of the options you listed above but they wouldn’t work. Here’s why: She was found innocent so Child protective services would not interfere because they have no legal just cause.
Her doctor would not communicate because of the patient privacy act. (it’s illegal)
The going to court to establish guardianship I would do in a second however just like CPS, there is no legal just cause until and if she shows that she is a danger to this child. She was found innocent. The only thing she was found guilt of was lying and they don’t take peoples kids for lying.
People do loose babies at birth to CPS but ONLY if it is established before hand that they did not properly care for previous children and they had lost custody of them or if the new baby is born addicted etc. They will not take a child from a parent if the parent has not been found guilty of abuse or neglect. Now the neglect part may fly with her since she didn’t report Caylee missing but not necessarily. It depends upon what her reasoning was for it.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 5:37 pm
Also, the cases where they take a baby at birth are when there is extreme neglect of previous children and or drug addiction. The general rule is (at least in my county and experience) that they must show neglect to this particular child first.
One of my family members adopted 3 children. The biological mother had lost 3 previous to these to CPS. Then these three got adopted. She got pregnant again and the state refused to take this one until she proved that she was unfit to parent IT. It sucks but it’s the way it is.
Also had a family member who owned some rental property. The people who rented it had a newborn. He went in to inspect the property and it looked and smelled (I saw it) like a herd of hogs lived there. You would not have believed the filth. It was worse than an episode of the filthiest hoarding show you have seen. There were paper bags of poo sitting all over and cats had went potty in the kitchen drawers etc. Trash was knee deep throughout the house (no kidding) Really bad.The sheriff and CPS were called and all said they couldn’t do anything because the baby did not look neglected. All they made them do was move to another house. So, my point is that they have to have just cause and it isn’t that easy to get that. Although I personally believe that Casey was guilty and neglectful she was found innocent so CPS’s hands would be tied most likely.
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:08 pm
“than what happens to real children” — just when you think that maybe Chuckles has taken a step forward, he self-consciously jumps back. Read Poe’s “The Imp of the Impossible.”
LikeLike
July 7, 2011 at 8:19 pm
nope — “The Imp of the Perverse”
LikeLike