“So I wonder…”

I have continued to struggle with the idea that there are so many people out there remaining silent, remaining indifferent, to the horror taking place at Planned Parenthood.  The Center for Medical Progress videos are laying it out for all to see and yet, outside of certain social media circles, it seems not to be gaining any traction, seems not to be having any real effect on certain segments of the population.

I’m stunned by it. 

I opined elsewhere just a few days ago that it would be difficult to counter the mindset that would call Americans today’s equivalent of the German townspeople surrounding the concentration camps.

Yesterday, I found  this dated but relevant piece written by Jennifer Fulwiler:

For me, this picture [of the staff at Auschwitz relaxing and having a great time] symbolizes all average folks who ever lived during times where particularly dark shades of evil gripped societies. It reminds me that though today we can see through the distance of history the thick pall of darkness that overshadowed the world in which these people lived, many of them could not see it themselves when they were in the midst of it. Like being in a city with air nazi-videopollution, it’s easy to think that the air is clean and fresh when you’re standing in it; it is only when you get some distance and look back that you can see the dark cloud looming over where you were, and know that you were breathing soot all along.
I tend to be an easygoing, optimistic person who focuses more on my little corner of the world than the macro issues of the day. I tend to want to believe the best about people, and guard against buying into hyperbolic rhetoric that makes generalizations about the activities of certain groups of people being particularly heinous — so often, upon reasonable analysis, that type of claim pans out to be nothing more than a lame attempt to vilify people you disagree with.
So I wonder:
If were a 31-year-old woman with three little kids in a busy house in Germany 1941, would I have fully understood the evil that surrounded me? As a woman living in 2008 I can see the horror that was going on there, but at the time there were some awfully sleek lies being told about the situation; it would have been really, really convenient to let myself be persuaded by the lies and just make the nasty little problem go away by telling myself that it wasn’t really a problem at all.
What if I were living in a time and place in India where it was common and accepted for wives to be burned alive on their husband’s funeral pyres? Or living in Rwanda when an entire race of people were murdered by their neighbors? Or a citizen of pagan Rome where newborn girls were frequently “discarded” with hardly a second thought? The people in those times and places had cheery, sunny days, went to birthday parties and get-togethers with friends with lots of yummy food, and had daily lives not terribly different than our own. There are no records in any of these cases that indicate that average people fully comprehended what was going on around them or were as outraged as they should have been at the atrocities in their midst.
It is sobering to realize that the odds are that I would not have been one of the very few people who saw it all for what it was.

Sobering indeed. 

She goes on to describe what she believes would be a tell-tale sign that a society is dabbling in serious darkness:

What litmus test could you offer that would apply to all places and all times as a way for a person to look around themselves with completely clear eyes, piercing through even the thickest fog of self-delusion and widespread cultural acceptance, and see that they are surrounded by grave evil? Is there any simple way for a person to immediately undergo an earth-rocking paradigm shift in which they look up and realize that the world around them is not what they thought it was?
One thing that stands out in all these examples is that the victims of the widespread evil were categorized as something less than human. In fact, though the exact level and degree of evil that took place may vary, one thing that unites all of these practices as worthy of a place in the Human Depravity Hall of Fame is not only that innocent people were killed or enslaved, but that their humanity was taken away by the societies around them. 

Jennifer Fulwiler’s piece is nearly 7 years old and yet speaks completely to the circumstances surrounding the CMP videos.

I ask those of you still reading these words the same question I’m asking myself, what are we doing about what’s taking place around us? What more should we be doing?

Think on it.  

Better yet, pray about it.  

Crossposted at Brutally Honest.

Do Donald Trump and his supporters want the Democratic Party to win the White House in 2016?
Harvard Prof Excuses ISIS Sex Slavery and Terrorism Because USA Had Slavery 150 Years Ago
  • MartinLandauCalrissian

    It is the “Center for Medical Progress” not the center for media progress.

  • Thanks, fixed… brain gas…

  • WHO’S THE BUSTER

    Other than selling for profit, what laws may have been broken?

    • Retired military

      Yes abortion is legal right now. If someone wrote a piece about slavery in the 1850s would you say “other than owning people what laws were broken?”
      After all slavery was legal then
      And hey the germans could legally kill the jews during WW2. I suppose think that was alright because it was legal as well.
      Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. Abortion is the murder of unborn children. Period. You can sugarcoat it all you want. Put a ribbon and chanel number 5 on a pile of shit and you still have a pile of shit.
      So stop with your innocent little “what laws were broken” BS.

      • jim_m

        Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right
        The entirety of the left’s ideology is built on the notion that if you can’t be put in jail for it, if it cannot be proven in a court of law, then nothing immoral or illegal ever happened. It is a sick and twisted amorality that they have today.

    • jim_m

      Selling for profit, altering a medical procedure illegally for the purpose of selling the organs of the aborted baby(yes, that’s a felony), conducting medical procedures without informed consent..
      That’s off the top of my head. I would suspect there are fraud charges in there as well and probably charges related to falsifying medical records.

    • Jwb10001

      Yes other than that…… What the hell that’s not enough? Should tax payer money go to these people? What about the general attitude of these ghouls would you call them professionals? Would we tolerate that sort of crap from any other sector of the healthcare industry? What makes these folks so special?

    • jim_m

      If they were alive it would be illegal. So what you are saying is that you find it perfectly acceptable to murder someone and sell their body parts. We don’t even allow that for organ donation(selling of body parts, that is).

  • Commander_Chico

    Most people are silent about most horrors of the modern world.

  • Ken in Camarillo

    Sobering.

  • JWH

    1) Gallup polling, May 6-10 2015, indicates that 29 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances, 51 percent believe it ought to be legal under certain circumstances, and 19 percent believe that it should be illegal in all circumstances. Given Americans’ largely mixed attitude toward abortion, you should not be surprised that most Americans reject your analogy of abortion to the Holocaust. Moreover, the Nazi argument create a problem. It’s a very extreme argument. And the more often you put that analogy before an unreceptive audience, the less likely that audience is to accept your overall argument … and the less power you lend to the Nazi analogy itself.

    2) The Center for Medical Progress videos run into a couple significant problems. Because they’re highly edited, obtained through fraud, and were clearly assembled by a group with an agenda, they are highly vulnerable to charges of bias and to rebuttal from Planned Parenthood and its allies. And, knowing that allegation of bias, people who do care about abortion issue won’t be shifted by the CMP videos, even if they do watch them. People who don’t care about abortion probably won’t watch them, and probably don’t care about the surrounding hullabaloo.

    This is actually a recurring problem in political communication. People tend to clump in their own little groups, clustered around this issue or that. They craft items — videos, op-eds, banners, and so forth — that they consider to be devastating takedowns of their enemies. They pass the communication piece around, congratulate themselves on a job well-done, and then release it into the world … and then they see it land with a great big thud, and they can’t figure out why. They tend to forget that people outside their little groups don’t think the same way they do, or share their opinions, and this blinds them to the pitfalls of a particular communication piece. In the business world, a similar phenomenon is called “siloing.”

    3) The CMP videos weren’t really created to change people’s minds about abortion. They were created to galvanize antiabortion partisans into pressuring their members of Congress to act against Planned Parenthood. In that regard, the videos are a modest success.

    4) In general, You’re going to have a hard time shifting Americans’ opinions on abortion. If you look at the Gallup tracking polls, you’ll see that the pro-life/pro-choice numbers haven’t shifted all that much in the last 20 years. “Pro-choice” has almost consistently held a slight lead over “pro-life.” Meanwhile, the “always legal/legal in some circumstances/always illegal” numbers have generally been consistent, with the middle position commanding 50 percent or more of the population. Although, notably, “legal in a few circumstances” commands the plurality among all possible positions. With this consensus rather firmly set, you’re going to have a difficult time convincing anybody of the rightness of your position.

    Finally:

    5) From your point of view, the United States is committing a massive atrocity in abortion, and the people are willfully ignorant of the ongoing holocaust. But I don’t think that’s the truth. I suspect that quite a few people have considered the issue carefully, weighing a pregnant woman’s rights against the rights of a fetus, and have reached in their own minds some balancing of the two interests. The current political situation then, does not reflect some massive German-level indifference, but rather a majority that has reached different conclusions on the issue than you have.

    • jim_m

      The unedited videos have long ago been released. The claim that these are “highly edited” and therefore misleading as a bald faced lie.
      The CMP videos are changing people’s minds in that companies are abandoning PP as a source for tissue.
      You’re lying to yourself if you think abortion isn’t a massive atrocity. You are deluding yourself into thinking that the CMP videos are false.
      You cannot for a moment consider that they are actually true because you know that to do so would mean that you are complicit in this atrocity so therefore you believe that it must be false despite the abundant evidence that it is not. The fact remains that your apology (for the practice of murdering babies old enough to survive birth and live a full life for their body parts) makes you complicit in the practice. You are a supporter and a defender of the practice. The more evidence brought forward to show that this is, in fact, the case, the more you will defend it. You cannot afford for this to be true.

      • JWH

        In lieu of presuming I share opinions with your abortion strawman, would you care to address the points I actually raise regarding political communication and the difficulty of shifting political consensus?

        • jim_m

          Most Americans believe that some restrictions should be made on abortion. The overwhelming majority believe that late term abortions should be illegal.

          As for comparisons to the Holocaust, people are unwilling to examine the reality of what is going on and to face the fact of the enormity of the number of late term abortions and the sick profit that is being made upon the sale of body parts. People reject the comparison because they are unwilling to examine the facts. Much as you have shown.

          As for shifting political consensus this is a problem created by Roe v Wade. Without it there was a necessity for rational discussion and the discussion would have been far less polarized. Because the court found a pretext that subverted the national discussion, democratic resolution of the conflict was preempted. Had the courts not intervened the nation would have come to a compromise that allowed some abortions but restricted late term abortions in such a way that the vast majority of the country would agree upon.

          Moving political consensus is difficult when the courts have made it entirely unnecessary for one side to participate in the discussion.

          • JWH

            As for comparisons to the Holocaust, people are unwilling to examine the reality of what is going on and to face the fact of the enormity of the number of late term abortions and the sick profit that is being made upon the sale of body parts. People reject the comparison because they are unwilling to examine the facts. Much as you have shown.

            Or perhaps because people consider the holocaust comparison to a) exaggerate the evils of abortion; b) diminish the evils of the actual Holocaust; and c) speak to the extremism of the partisan, rather than the seriousness of abortion.

            I mean, think about it. Which is more likely to convince you to change your mind on an issue: a) “Hello, we disagree on this issue. Here are some arguments for my side;” b) “Hello, I have experienced tragedy in my life, as have others, because the law currently codifies your view;” or c) “You are a Nazi for holding that view. And if you don’t agree with me, you’re still a Nazi.”

            Ever hear about the virtues of honey vs. vinegar for catching flies?

            Had the courts not intervened the nation would have come to a compromise that allowed some abortions but restricted late term abortions in such a way that the vast majority of the country would agree upon.

            In point of fact, this is precisely what has happened, even with Roe and Casey. There is, in fact, a general consensus against post-viability abortions, except in a few very specific cases. Much of the current controversy centers not on late-term abortions, but on current attempts to drive abortion clinics out of business through creative legislation. But Roe has had a deleterious effect on the politics of abortion, in that the democratic debate would have largely settled down by now, and antiabortion protesters would be deprived of their windmill.

          • jim_m

            I accept the claim that it may be over the top and I don’t generally use it. But the fact remains that most people refuse to actually look at what is occurring and choose to remain ignorant of what is happening. In many ways they are not unlike the German people who refused to admit what was going on in their midst.

        • Retired military

          How about what is right and wrong?

          • JWH

            I’m right and you’re wrong. So there.

            In seriousness — that’s a fruitless discussion. I know it, you know it, and the American people know it. I am not going to bring you to my point of view on abortion, and you’re not going to bring me to yours. So it’s not worth engaging.

          • Ken in Camarillo

            You just illustrated the point of the post, regarding the Germans’ refusal to confront the reality of what was happening.

    • ohio granny

      You lie. The videos were not “highly edited”. Why do you need to lie about the videos if they are wrong or illegal? Since they are neither, i ask you again why do you need to lie?

      • JWH

        I’m not debating this one with you, Granny. I did not speak to the videos’ substance. I merely spoke to their ineffectiveness as vehicles of political communication.

    • Scalia

      Gallup polling, May 6-10 2015, indicates…

      As you later acknowledge, the significant majority favor banning late-term abortions. Since the Planned Parenthood (PP) controversy involves viable babies, your polling data is irrelevant.

      Moreover, the Nazi argument create [sic] a problem. It’s a very extreme argument.

      I can see how people can get offended by that comparison. As an aside, since the Left routinely trots out the Nazi comparison, you can surely provide us with links of your chastizment of them too, right?

      Political dialog in our context is meant to persuade, so Nazi epithets may or may not be effective, depending on the audience. Acording to the CBO, 10,000 late-term abortions occur every year. That would give us about 420,000 human beings murdered since Roe (excluding the some 50 million murdered in earlier stages of pregnancy). Human beings are being legally slaughtered with the approval of the state. When Republicans are called Nazis for wanting to curb the federal budget, that’s an overreach. When prolifers call abortion America’s holocaust, it sounds pretty accurate to me.

      The Center for Medical Progress videos run into a couple significant problems. Because they’re highly edited…

      As Jim pointed out, the unedited versions have been out for some time. Consequently, there aren’t any significant problems. If Germans had taken “illegal” videos of the gas chambers, would you get twisted over that?

      The CMP videos weren’t really created to change people’s minds about abortion. They were created to galvanize antiabortion partisans into pressuring their members of Congress to act against Planned Parenthood.

      And you know this, how? Do you have links from those involved who say that they don’t want to change minds on abortion? If you do, so what? If the charges are true, PP is committing abominable acts. Are YOU upset about it? If not, that sounds a wee bit steeper than what it seems you’re accusing them of doing (playing politcs).

      In general, You’re going to have a hard time shifting Americans’ opinions on abortion. If you look at the Gallup tracking polls…

      Again, this is irrelevant. No shift is necessary with respect to late-term abortions.

      From your point of view, the United States is committing a massive atrocity in abortion, and the people are willfully ignorant of the ongoing holocaust. But I don’t think that’s the truth. I suspect that quite a few people have considered the issue carefully, weighing a pregnant woman’s rights against the rights of a fetus, and have reached in their own minds some balancing of the two interests.

      Again, woefully irrelevant. “Quite a few people” have already concluded that late-term abortions are outrageous enough to prohibit. You apparently don’t think so. It’s okay with you to kill a fully developed baby in the womb, and it’s justified by appealing to a mother’s “choice” and a physician’s consultation? Yes, that’s murder and yes, that’s a “massive atrocity.”

      • JWH

        You really don’t get the point I was making, do you? Rick wondered why moderates and pro-choicers seem unwilling to come to his point of view, so I offered an answer based on principles of political communication. And (as far as I can tell), Rick is concerned with opinion on all abortion, not merely late-term abortions.

        • Scalia

          You made several points. I responded to what I consider the salient one, and the salient point is many Americans’ indifference to PP’s outrageous behavior. To me, a better way to reply is to say, “Perhaps you have a point with respect to PP, but abortion in general is a harder sell.”

          That said, I think you’re completely misreading Rick (and he’ll correct us if he sees fit). He says,

          I have continued to struggle with the idea that there are so many people out there remaining silent, remaining indifferent, to the horror taking place at Planned Parenthood. The Center for Medical Progress videos are laying it out for all to see and yet, outside of certain social media circles, it seems not to be gaining any traction, seems not to be having any real effect on certain segments of the population.

          Everything else that follows flows from that point. I don’t think you get the point he is making.

          • JWH

            Fair enough. I think the biggest source of this indifference is modern political silos. The last decade or so has sen a LOT of political polarization. We’re not just talking about divergent political views. I’m talking about the left wing and the right wing having their own media outlets (MSNBC, Daily Kos et. al. on the one hand, and Fox News, Red State, etc, on the other), constantly feeding them singular worldviews. On top of that, you see people restricting their online social circles (i.e., Facebook) to the point that they interact almost exclusively with people of the same political persuasion.

            So if you’re on the right, here’s the message you got with the CMP videos: “Here is PROOF that Planned Parenthood is evil!!!” If you’re on the left, it was, “Look at the latest bullshit that the right wing is trying to pull.” Before they view the videos, conservatives and liberals are thus primed to see two entirely different stories.

            And that’s for the politically engaged.

            If you’re not politically engaged, then here’s what your likely to think: “Oh, bloody hell, those pro-lifers and pro-choicers are at it again. I’m going to change the channel and watch the baseball game.”

          • Scalia

            I agree with most of what you say here. I will only add that much of the indifference may be attributable to the MSM. Those who are not politically active think they’re being informed when they tune into CBS, ABC, etc. If the MSM doesn’t get behind an issue, Johnny Sixpack doesn’t think it’s worth his time, and sniping from the Left & Right only “validates” his dismissal.

            For example, gays are routinely murdered in predominantly Islamic nations. Although it’s being reported, you don’t hear the incessant drumroll we heard during the Apartheid era. A politician gets a DUI and it’s 24/7. Gays get thrown off buildings and we get blasted with florists and bakers who won’t do gay weddings. With respect to that and abortion, the MSM has blood on its hands.

          • JWH

            Back in the 1990s, I worked at local-level newspapers (no place you ever heard of), and the emphasis was always on the “local give-a-shit factor.” I got a stern talking-to more than once because I used two pages of precious inside-the-paper real estate for world news instead of national news. The assumption (with some justifiability) is that the American public cares about local news and national news, not about what’s happening halfway around the world, and that people who are interested in that kind of thing will go find the news themselves.

            I think ISIS’ anti-gay activities get less attention in American media because editors and producers simply don’t believe there is any interest in those stories.

          • Scalia

            And it’s quite sad when national/world news outlets will focus on what Kate Middleton wore at an event but gay killings get a yawn. Something is askew.

          • JWH

            Pardon my rumination for a moment.

            For work, I’ve had to research some human-rights abuses in the Middle East. That stuff was from before ISIS, but just reading it gave me some damn nightmares. It’s hard enough to read the graphic details on what goes on in a Middle Eastern dictator’s prison. I can’t imagine living through it.

            I’ve tried to keep at least a general knowledge of gay rights, women’s rights, and political dissidents’ rights in the Middle East. It’s a pretty grim picture, and it’s frustrating . Middle Eastern injustices are (for lack of a better word) injustices. But I can’t do a damn thing about them. I can’t fly over to Saudi Arabia and force them to respect women’s rights. I can’t fly to Egypt and magically make them treat Coptic Christians and political dissidents right. I can’t fly to Syria and drag Bashar al-Assad by the ear into the International Criminal Court.
            And I also know that the United States’ hands are tied. Saudi Arabia is a repressive, autocratic regime. But it’s also a major oil supplier and one of America’s main Arab allies in the region. Egypt has regressed to a military dictatorship, but (again) it’s another major ally. Syria is a dictatorship and no friend to America, but the United States can’t simply invade it and make the nation’s leaders (and its people) behave.

            I can do at least minor things about justice here in America, though. So that’s why I’m (for example) interested in ensuring that a couple idiot frat guys can hang up banners at their house near campus, but I don’t say much about Iran holding a WaPo reporter in its prison system (pending kangaroo court trial). I can work for and encourage laws that prohibit employers from discriminating against gay employees here in America, but I can’t do a damn thing about ISIS’s state-mandated executions.

            It’s a pretty crappy world … and I can’t do jack shit about most of it. But maybe I can do a little bit here in America.

          • Scalia

            Well, I think we can do both. What you do and what world news reporters aren’t the same thing. If snipe about Kate Middleton’s pantyhose, they can certainly scream about human rights abuses. Our hands aren’t that tied. No doubt the Allies felt their hands were tied too. That’s why they threw Czechoslovakia under the bus. Look where that got us.

          • JWH

            Also, by the time the “mainstream media” get hold of a story like these videos, the story is no longer “Here’s the horrible thing that Planned Parenthood is doing” (the right-wing story) or “Here’s the horrible thing that an antiabortion group did to Planned Parenthood” (the left-wing story). Rather, it’s “A group did this to Planned Parenthood. Here’s Planned Parenthood’s response. Here’s how that group responds. Here are two analysts with partisan credentials to shout about it for five minutes. Here are the polls to show who has the momentary advantage. And now here’s video of a waterskiing squirrel.”

          • Scalia

            Thanks for the laugh! Good one!

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            The MSN (and almost all media for that matter) responds to viewers or readers.

            Which story you listed gets the most clicks on a website, viewers to a news program or sells magazines due to a cover story?

            The media doesn’t choose the stories, we do.

            If they do not do so, they are soon out of business (Air America anyone?)

          • Scalia

            You still haven’t answered my questions, so you can guess where I’d like you to put your questions.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            Well, all righty then.

  • yetanotherjohn

    I think the reason for the silence is simple. Most people have not seen the videos. Those who have heard something are as likely to have heard the videos were part of a right wing attack on a women’s right to choose (notice the language doesn’t evoke any of the questions you bring up). To really know if the videos really changed people’s mind, you would need to see the sort of saturation coverage reserved for a Republican scandal or an air crash. If the network news and major papers all covered the videos as they came out (i.e across several days) and the cable news had endless loops of the videos playing while talking heads re-hashed them, then you would know if people where truly ignoring the facts or simple did’t know them.

    p.s. For Whose the Buster, what laws do you think the guards at Auschwitz broke? Have you been so indoctrinated in the current education system’s doctrine of relativism that evil is only defined by what laws are or are not broken?

    • WHO’S THE BUSTER

      I don’t see the equivalency, but then I also don’t have the same outrage about abortion.

      JWH took the time and hit a lot of key points about this subject and did so expansively and eloquently.

      There is nothing I could say to sway the opinion of many who are virently opposed to abortion, but then I have no interest in doing so.

      I simply want people to have some options, which are becoming harder to come by due to the efforts of many state governments.

      I am old enough to remember when only illegal abortions were available. They took place behind a barber shop next to my Father’s place of business in Detroit.

      In high school it was widely know that a procedure could be accessed in New York as of 1970, although coming up with that kind of money as a teenager could prove difficult.

      The number of abortions has been dropping for years and Planned Parenthood has a role in that as over ninety percent of its actions are for contraception, mammograms, preventing STDS, etc.

      3,577,348 visits to Planned Parenthood are for contraception. I would think that would prevent a lot of abortions.
      Prosecute anyone that did anything illegal at Planned Parenthood, but for those claiming that this is anything but an attempt to end abortion are being disingenuous. Heck, the harvesting of fetal tissue was passed by a bill in the early nineties with bipartisan support, including a vote from on Mitch McConnell.
      I would imagine that due to some of the obvious vitriol aimed at mere commenters on a web page that many of the people on here would have a hard time even relating to a family member or friend that did not share their views on abortion.
      I know that people that are fervently anti-abortion simply cannot fathom how anyone can have an opposing view, but despite that, much of America does not share that outrage.

      • yetanotherjohn

        “I don’t see the equivalency”

        Your original post was “Other than selling for profit, what laws may have been broken?” That at the least implied the legal issues were the only issues of note. While I understand that many do not consider the unborn fully a person, any more than Nazis considered Slavs and Jews as fully a person, think for a little bit about allowing the state to decide who is and is not a person. If the state passed a law saying it was okay to kill gays, would you find no issue with killing gays. The state (more accurately the Supreme Court) decided that the unborn were not people subject to the protection of the laws. The supreme court had a similar opinion in the Dred Scott case that blacks were not people subject to the protection of the laws. So expand that imagination to the supreme court deciding that gays, blacks, liberals, conservatives or whatever group you wish to name were not people subject to the protection of the laws. Can you imagine there not being any other consideration.

        • Scalia

          Don’t hold your breath waiting for Buster to reply. He retreats at the sound of logic.

        • WHO’S THE BUSTER

          As always, those of us that are pro-choice do not see the equivalency to any of your examples, be it gays, Jews in the Holocaust, etc.

          I know it is a common refrain, heck Bill O’Reilly invoked Joseph Mengele on his show last night when referencing this subject. Unfortunately his two guests did not know who he was, due to either lack of knowledge or simply being too young (you would think Monica Crowley would have got it, she is well-educated and no spring chicken).

          People have a problem with late-term abortions? I get that, and they are limited in 40 states. No problem, if someone wants an abortion I think they should make up their mind.

          Limits to 20 or 22 weeks is fine, but that is not what is happening in many states. There are numerous actions taking place (under the guise of the safety of the mother) that are nothing but transparent attempts to make abortions inaccessible.

          The disconnect? To you, they are murdering babies. Pro-choice people simply do not see it that way and I am well aware that Pro-life advocates simply go mad when they hear that. To them, it is the Holocaust. To us, it is not and it is not because we “lack information”.

          • Jwb10001

            Of course you don’t see the equivalency that was the whole point. I accept that there are going to be abortions in this country. It’s settled, does that mean we should also tolerate all this extracurricular ghoulishness?

          • No, you don’t lack information… you lack a soul.