Abortion hypocrisy
Ethics & Morality

Look, a dead baby. Now change your wicked, callous policy

 

Look here, upon this picture, and on this,
The counterfeit presentment of two babies..

What’s the difference? Is it the manner of their dying? Is it that one of them was wrapped in waves of saltwater and fell asleep, while the other was sleeping in a watery womb and was injected with salt? Is it that one of them washed ashore on a turquoise beach, photographed for the world to see, while the other was dumped with crimson offal and human waste, in a photograph that no-one wants to see? Is it that one of them is clothed in the sun with the primary colours of playtime, while the other lies exposed in the shadows with the bruises and blemishes of a lifetime? Is it that one of them lived to feel warm moments of love and see reasons for joy, while the other felt nothing but a seeming eternity of pain in a blind world of disdain?

Whatever, yesterday the Prime Minister said we could take no more refugees: it was not an answer to any problem. Then, look, a dead baby. And the Prime Minister said he was “deeply moved”. And so was Twitter. And so the policy changed. And so today it is announced that we will take many thousands of refugees, and tomorrow thousands upon thousands more. Suffer little children..

Look, a dead baby.

  • Martin

    It’s the nature of things. People think with their emotions more than they do with their minds.

    • sarky

      And I for one am thankful they do.

      • Martin

        Sarky

        More fool you.

  • elizabeth sadler

    Very profound,but I am reminded that there are 4 other continents besides Europe;should not they help shoulder the burden? The migrants know the way to flee,at the mercy of people smugglers and promise of a better life:I would do the same,but it does not make it right ,particularly where law and order are flouted. I was disturbed by a video showing refugees refusing Red Cross parcels because they had a cross on them.

    • Dreadnaught

      disturbed by a video showing refugees refusing Red Cross parcels because they had a cross on them.

      Incredible!
      I hope The reality is beginning to hit home with the rest of the population that future generations of indigenous Europeans may still give credit to ‘It seemed like a good idea at the time’ and not judge us too harshly.
      What was it? ‘Forgive them, for they know not what they do’ or something along those lines.

    • Inspector General

      Rarely does it happen that bad does not result in some good, dear lady. Refusing parcels because they are emblazoned with a cross is just the start. We must never forget that it is the relatives of these so called refugees that are responsible for death and war in their homeland. And these refugees carry with them the genetic makeup to become thoroughly unpleasant nuisances in the future. Now, that can only lead to a political shift in England further to the right.

  • dannybhoy

    Who could not be moved by the death, deliberate or otherwise of a beautiful child or baby? I remember once seeing the corpse of a little newborn abandoned in the desert. You can imagine what it looked like. I was overcome with sadness and praying for that little life before rushing back to town to inform the police.

    Step back from the distressing visual films and pictures and look at the bigger picture. Europe is in danger of being invaded and destabilised, not through force of arms, but through appeals to react with compassion to the plight of people who have paid thousands of dollars to corrupt gangs with boats. ISIS has made it clear that they intend to use these refugees to smuggle in Jihadi warriors to bring Europe to its knees. There is a plan behind all this, and we in Europe are being forced into responding with our hearts rather than our heads.
    I guarantee that same mainstream media will soon enough be publishing pictures and video clips of frightened and angry citizens in confrontations with refugees/migrants, and demanding that European governments do something about it – before we are overwhelmed…

    • CliveM

      “Who could not be moved by the death, deliberate or otherwise of a beautiful child or baby?”

      Sadly there are some. There are two issues to this crisis. Firstly what do we do about the ones already in Europe, secondly how do we avoid further tragedies going forward?

      To many seem to be saying that by resolving the first problem (important though it is) we cure the second.

      I still see no political will to do anything serious about the second issue.

      Both these children in the photos are Gods children, created and loved by him. There will be a price to pay.

    • Dreadnaught

      I was indeed moved by the image but in a small corner of my mind lurked the unworthy thought ‘that’s one less potential jihadi throat slitter’ – not at all proud of myself in any way that I am comfortable with. That is what Islam has done to me personally.

      • IanCad

        A very honest comment Dreadnaught. Shadows of the same thoughts flit in and out of my mind but I’ve been too LMF to admit it.
        Thanks.

      • CliveM

        Yes I can understand that. I would be happier if I knew they could be returned .

      • sarky

        That is what your ‘perception’ of islam has done to you personaly. Its the same media machine at work.

        • Dreadnaught

          Don’t you mean the various strands of Muslim’s ‘perception’ of Islam? Its not the media that has caused half of Syria’s people to run for their lives. ISIS is taking the Koran literally and imitating their phony prophets deeds is the true 6th Century interpretation unadulterated by reason and compassion.
          I’m surprised at your naivete Sarky.

          • sarky

            Im not naive, I just recognise that you cannot judge a whole people on the actions of fundamentalist thugs.

          • Dreadnaught

            You are indeed naive if you think that Islam is The Religion of Peace.

          • sarky

            It may not be, but the majority of its adherents are peaceful.

          • Inspector General

            : – >

      • Well may God Bless you for having the courage to recognise and admit the impulse, Dreadnaught.

        • Dreadnaught

          I’ll take that in the same spirit in which it is given HJ. ‘To thine own self be true’

          • … assuming one has only one self to be true to.

          • Dreadnaught

            Schizophrenic I am not, well not today at least but you more than most here, know all about multiple personality disorders. 🙂

          • Dreadnaught, having multiple personalities is most certainly not a “disorder”. It’s just … er … different.
            (Who said that?)

    • elizabeth sadler

      I find your comments quite prophetic and could not agree more. Guilt and emotion have now overtaken rational thinking and wisdom.I see that Bob Geldorf has offered his home to refugees ;will it be Buckingham Palace next? I remember the Ugandan Asian crisis when many thousands of Ugandan Asians entered the UK.I was working at a clinic at the time where we examined many who had TB. Health visitors were dispatched to check them out…..but you try finding a Mr. Patel in Birmingham.

  • Busy Mum

    This expands on my point yesterday – why do non-Christians/atheists get in such a state about ‘needless dying’, ‘tragedies’, ‘humanitarian crises’ when the rest of the time life is so cheap? When they moan about over-population? And if there is no hereafter, and nothing to fear from death itself, and no Maker to meet…. what exactly do they perceive the problem to be?

    • Powerdaddy

      Bizarre.

      • sarky

        Ditto.

        • Phil R

          Answer the question rather than insult

          Like you failed to do yesterday

          • sarky

            I did.

          • Phil R

            No you didn’t

            you are substituting insult for argument

      • Phil R

        Answer the question rather than insult

        i get it you have no answer

    • Dreadnaught

      why do non-Christians/atheists get in such a state about ‘needless dying’, ‘tragedies’, ‘humanitarian crises’ when the rest of the time life is so cheap?
      Because they are human and not a homogenous group who need to be told what to think – I think.

    • Because each person is made in the image and likeness of God and each of us has a soul and a conscience, albeit damaged by human nature. Each one of us has the capacity to love and to feel compassion and sorrow in the face of human suffering, not just Christians.

    • DanJ0

      Bizarre. Life is so cheap? Given that almost certainly this is all the life we get, life is very, very valuable as far as I am concerned. People need to make the most of it for themselves, and recognise that the lives of other are as valuable to them.

      • Dreadnaught

        My take on existential realism too. . I am truly happy in my skin and don’t fear waking up dead any more that the fear I had of not being born. Life is not a rehearsal.

        • sarky

          It’s a journey, not a destination 🙂

          • CliveM

            Cliché alert!!! :0)

    • Inspector General

      Greetings Ma. One is always impressed how atheists can desert their wife and family should the opportunity of a new younger woman and a new start come their way. So yes, atheists do have morals, but watery ones, watered according to taste…

      • Dreadnaught

        Come, come Old Fruit just take a gander at the history of the English Monarchy – you Rogue you!

        • Inspector General

          Plenty of examples closer to home, Dredders…

          • Dreadnaught

            But are they Heads of the CoE?

      • DanJ0

        Luckily Rowan County Clerk, Kim Davis, found god after rather than before otherwise I might have used her as an example of rank hypocrisy. She merely looks like a attention-seeker now, and perhaps a bit like Annie Wilkes of Misery fame.

        • Phil R

          How many times

          Behaviour is irrelevant. You cannot judge a Christian by yours or my standard of behaviour

          • DanJ0

            How many times? I judge Christians by Christian standards of behaviour, and I expect evidence of sanctification over time. The former is about hypocrisy and judgemental attitude, and the latter is about evidence supporting the claim to be a Christian. You don’t like the approach because you know you’re ‘low hanging fruit’ if I wanted to pluck a few examples. By fruit, I’m not talking about grapes here as I seriously doubt you’re actually fruit of the vine so to speak.

          • Phil R

            There are no fixed standard of behaviours you can judge us against.

            Jesus annoyed people many times witht this teaching.

          • DanJ0

            How about the Ten Commandments? But no doubt you’ll assert denominational differences in approach there. So how about the moral law spread throughout the Bible? Doesn’t that matter now? Or are moral laws not standards to you?

          • Phil R

            We are not saved by following the 10 commandments or the moral law

          • DanJ0

            That’s Christianity 101. But you said “There are no fixed standard of behaviours you can judge us against.” and I’ve pointed you at some. You’re side-stepping again by the look of it.

          • Phil R

            Let me be clear then. YOU cannot judge. I cannot judge.

            We are no longer under the law. We are not saved by the law. We are not judged by the law. But we keep the law because we love God.

          • DanJ0

            You’re talking about justification, of course. However, sanctification is concomitant to that. To an a-theist like me, that ought to be visible as good works in the real world and therefore I can assess the likelihood of someone asserting that they’re justified actually being so [1]. Also, when Christians bang on about sins (e.g. adultery) and being judgemental about others, I can check whether they think sufficiently highly enough of Christianity and its god to actually behave in a Christian way. If not then I’m inclined to think they’re just wearing the religion like a cloak, and using it as the justification for (say) their unpleasantness.

            [1] By which I mean that they’ve changed in some way, meaning psychologically rather than spiritually to an a-theist of course.

          • Phil R

            I once knew a guy with two wives many children and lots of girlfriends

            One day he was shot at and the bullet hit his girlfriend.

            She layer died but within seconds the guy had crossed the street and killed the guy with his bare hands say 6 seconds or so after the shot was fired.

            He later visited the family of the killer. It was not you understand a social call.

            To keep a long story short when he became a Christian he was far from perfect. He improved and to his credit I think he kept both wives despite criticism from some in the church.

            His life did change but was far from perfect. To anyone who did not know him it was easy to judge.

            That is why only God can judge. He alone knows our hearts.

            BTW he was a very likable guy. The pre and post Christian versions.

          • DanJ0

            I’ve already nodded to the time element previously: “I judge Christians by Christian standards of behaviour, and I expect evidence of sanctification over time.”

            One of the Calvinists here revels in his sins, and I have pointed this out lots of times. I think it’s quite reasonable to judge there, especially as I’m subjected to his judgements first. Afterall, there’s a significant between knowingly doing stuff that it wicked, and doing stuff without realising that it’s driven by the wrong motives.

            People in church communities also judge, and sometimes it is for edification reasons. The couple ‘living in sin’ who take communion knowingly continue to ‘sin’, and I expect that needs a nudge from the community irrespective of the alleged sanctification process.

      • CliveM

        Not the best example you could have used.

        • Inspector General

          …and the problem is?

          • … infidelity, fornication, adultery and divorce are actually quite popular amongst Christians these days and not exclusive to atheists.

          • Inspector General

            They wouldn’t be Christians then…

          • Why not?

          • Inspector General

            Why do you think?

          • Jack is interested in your reasoning, Inspector.

          • Inspector General

            This is a windup

          • Like your ‘Christianity’, you mean?

          • Inspector General

            Welcome back Dodo

          • What’s in an avatar name, Inspector? What counts is whether the statement is accurate or not.
            Going by your pronouncements on God’s purpose in creating us and your denial of Christ’s Divinity, it’s hard to categorise your beliefs. Add what are bordering on white supremacist ideas and what you stand for is most certainly not Christian. Now this is all fine by Jack, believe what you want, if only you would stop claiming to be a Roman Catholic.

          • Inspector General

            ‘White Supremacist’ in there? How dare you sir. Remember we are guests on this site, though one recalls Dodo had some problem with that. And one admires the RCC form of worshipping God, and there’s nothing you can do about that. By the way, now that one is free of the fabrication that is the trinity, it has never been better in understanding what is…

          • You “admire” a form of worship that stands in direct contradiction to all you believe to be ‘true’ about God? Do you know what the Catholic Mass represents? You deny the Apostles Creed and dismiss the moral teachings of the Church, except, perhaps, the one relating to homosexuality, and yet you “admire” the Catholic form of worship.

            Why?

          • Inspector General

            Not really any of your damn business, is it?

          • How unlike you not to share your opinions and ‘reasoning’, Inspector.

          • Phil R

            Found some specs in the inspector’s eye I see

          • magnolia

            Or a monocle on them?

          • dannybhoy

            My wife and I have both experienced divorce. Neither of us wanted to be divorced, and we were married in a registry office not a church…..

          • CliveM

            I think HJ has highlighted the problem adequately.

      • sarky

        Funnily enough the vicar of my local church did exactly that!! Even made the papers!

  • Politically__Incorrect

    Your Grace, it is refreshing to read your rational comments after yesterdays unreasoned, emotive, and knee-jerk response to the photos of the drowned child. There is something hypocritical and shallow about the reaction to photos of this nature in the media. Sadly, our PM seems to have fallen for the same bit of cheap manipulation. The BBC and Channel 4 edited the interview with the dead boy’s aunt. They naturally had to remove the bit where she explains that the reason they made the hazardous journey was primarily to get the father’s teeth fixed. Nobody seems to be questioning the father’s decision to leave Turkey and make a perilous sea journey that endangered his family, so that he could go to a dentist. Unfortunately, there will always be reckless parents who put their families at risk.

    The public and the government have let themselves be well and truly duped by the media. As I said in my comment yesterday, the real hypocrisy is how people disengage their brains and go into full emotive mode over one photo but happily endorse the annual slaughter of a quarter of a million unborn UK children. Furthermore, as a result of one photo, the Government’s policy on accepting migrants looks set to change. I can’t remember the last time I saw such a spectacle of mass idiocy.

    I still say there is much we can do to help those in genuine need short of offering permanent residence here. However, that is what the media is demanding, and DC looks set to acquiesce.

    • James Bolivar DiGriz

      Yesterday’s piece was by Gillian Scott, not by HG.

      • Politically__Incorrect

        I know. That’s my point.

        • James Bolivar DiGriz

          Oh, sorry. I now see what you mean.

      • Ah yes that explains a lot.

        • Dreadnaught

          Tell that to Gillan’s sister.

    • I was wondering are those in the media who write the emotionally manipulative articles and the politicians – the Scottish vixen in particular because she’s been so vocal about this- going to put them all up?

      Where are they all going to live? We hardly have enough housing for the folks already here?

      • alphonsus44

        Watching the 6pm news and the stream of immigrants flocking by the correspondent in a live piece………and they are all – ALL – fit and healthy young men.

        If people cannot see that this is a Muslim invasion of Europe by stealth then they are truly blind.

        NB – how come we never saw politicians, left wing luvvies and washed up rock stars offering up their homes in a blaze of hashtag righteousness when Christians and Yazidis were fleeing to the mountains to escape the butchery of ISIS? Wrong religions?

        • bluedog

          If Germany takes one million Muslim migrants from this current surge as predicted, it is inevitable that German politics will change forever. One can envisage a return to an earlier Germany of minor principalities, bishoprics and archbishoprics. Only this time these disparate states will be Emirates.

  • Albert

    Excellent post. The difference of course is that we only directly killed one of them, so only that death was justified.

  • James60498 .

    Brilliant. Thank you Your Grace

    I did have it in mind to write to David Cameron with a similar picture. I may still do that, but have no doubt that I would get back a meaningless note from a junior civil servant.

    This will I am sure be far more widely seen and noted within Government Circles. And is better written too!

  • Dreadnaught

    Totally agree. Atheists have hearts and morals too.

  • Johnny Rottenborough

    the then-cardinal Joseph Ratzinger—now Pope Benedict—“lamented ‘the slow suicide of Europe’: its population was aging and shrinking, and the unborn were being partly replaced by unassimilable immigrants. He thought that Europe would awake from its torpor, but that there were difficult days [ahead].”—Conrad Black, quoted by Andrew Roberts

    The now-Pope Emeritus was speaking in 1990; today, thanks to heartrending photographs of ickle kiddies, the suicide is proceeding at a much more respectable rate as Europe welcomes unassimilable immigrants by the ton. That’s good news for the enemies of white Christian countries, among whose number is almost the entire European political class. Quite why some white Christians consider it a virtue to destroy their countries—and, ultimately, their faith itself—I’m still working on.

  • bluedog

    Your Grace, sometimes one despairs of the Western political leadership, so great is their ignorance and naivety, and presumably, that of their advisors too.

    If Cameron’s handlers had Googled ‘Palestinian dead baby strategy’ they would have mined a rich vein of articles explaining how Hamas uses dead babies as a counter-strike pyscho-weapon against Israel. Of course, it works every time, eliciting the desired response from the educated Western bourgeoisie, who despite their secular pretensions, get it off on a guilt trip. What is BDS if not a reaction to the moral and emotional manipulation of Hamas?

    But then the suits who cruise around the corridors of power have been conditioned to think completely differently to Middle Eastern terror gangs. They will not have appreciated the migrant crisis means that the EU is deeply involved in Middle Eastern politics. A crash course on life in a parallel universe is at hand.

    • Owl

      Bluedog, why do you think that Western political leadership is ignorant or naieve?
      The media is being used by them to create the neccessary emotional scenario in which they can continue the asault on our society without being lynched.
      DC can now do what he knows is unacceptable while beating his breast about the poor children. He’ll probably get a peerage out of it.
      Dave and his master’s DO know what their doing. Their agenda is just not the same as your’s and mine.

      • Phil R

        Good post. I have yet to see DC stick to any of his principles.

        Or know if he has any

      • bluedog

        Mr Owl, when things go wrong it is famously the result of either cock-up or conspiracy. Looking at the migrant crisis, the cause seems to be a large number of inter-related factors, none of which could have been co-ordinated, thus this is cock-up. Certainly the sheer incompetence of the response suggests that the trigger causing the mass migration was never pre-meditated. The real cause is political correctness in the broadest sense, in particular the translation of anti-discrimination policies targeted at domestic constituencies to international relationships. In other words, the EU feels it cannot reject Muslims because they are Muslims. It is left to individual nations, reclaiming and drawing on their remaining reserves of sovereignty, to make the necessary discrimination in the interests of their own survival.

  • magnolia

    The press too often does this. They pick one picture of one dead child, (or within living memory one missing child) to lavish attention and funds on, whilst all the thousands of others are virtually ignored.(Maybe that gives us all convenient tacit permission to partially forget all the others.) Then there is a ton of emotive outpouring and everyone feels somehow cleansed as they blame themselves and others for a situation that actually very few people indeed, and they in positions of power, set in motion, and by and large the ones that caused the wars that caused this feel little to no guilt nor compunction, seeing them as “collateral damage”, a horrid phrase indeed.

    • sarky

      Good journalism uses the one photo to draw your attention to the ‘virtually ignored’.

      • magnolia

        We seem to see a distinct paucity of good journalism, then. What we more often see is journalism which encourages an emotive (as apart from a well-considered emotional) response, often out of proportion to the wider context.

        Our first duty is to the suffering children in this country, and there are no shortage of them. Why even some people involved at the top of children’s charities, Peter Righton, Jimmy Savile, and others,
        have been involved with abusing the selfsame children.

        Perhaps we should get our own house in order before we see our country as a safe haven for other nations’ children. I think that for families unfamiliar with our country and unable to read between the cultural lines and with no network it is a strongly dangerous place, for their children. Who fronted the BBC video “Stranger Danger” after all?

        (And as another poster points out the father wanted dental work. Well the UK is hardly a place for that. The US (expensive) and Bulgaria (cheap) are reputedly better for those.)

        • sarky

          “Our duty is to the suffering children in this country”

          Surely are duty should be to ‘all’ those that are suffering?

          Imagine if jesus had come and said I’m going to die to save you, but only those over there in my country because they need it most, the rest of you will have to wait until I’ve sorted out this lot first?

          • magnolia

            A) Concentric circles. You are expected first to care for your own family, then friends, then nation, then world, surely? Otherwise who cares for your family? The idea is for your own ideally to be so safe that you can extend your care outwards. I am questioning how safe the national ship is for children and families from outside anyway.

            Yes, Jesus did actually say that . Mark 7 24-37. He also had concentric circles of those for whom He cared in His earthly life. The immediate 4 plus some of his family and possibly Mary Magdalene, then the rest of the 12, then a general band of followers, then the people of Israel, then outwards.

          • sarky

            All very well, but in the meantime people are dying daily.

          • magnolia

            Part of the answer is to stop pre-emptive wars. There is nothing that causes as much needless suffering as dodgy dossiers followed by wars of aggression.

          • sarky

            Have to agree with you there.

          • Hmm … but He then went and died for everyone, the good, the bad, the indifferent.

          • Actually, it seems that was Plan A but then the people He actually came to save went and murdered Him. He’s still waiting on them to accept Him too whilst giving everyone else the opportunity to benefit from the promises made.

          • Inspector General

            We can end suffering, or much of it, by imperialism, but you wouldn’t agree with that…

  • preacher

    I remember years ago seeing a small pro abortion group of women collecting signatures in a London Station for ” A Woman’s Right to Choose ” The irony was that many Balloon bedecked prams & toddlers were in evidence, & a carnival atmosphere was in the air.
    I had some rather graphic tracts that showed ( Thankfully in monochrome ) the sad results of their campaign.
    I distributed said tracts to the smiling ladies, who accepted them thankfully, ( They probably presumed I was a Supporter ). One look was all it took as the demonstrators crowded around. The Shock was palpable, as each page revealed more evidence of what their campaign was asking for. The leader of the group threw the tract back to me in a state of shock, saying ” I don’t want to look at THAT !! ” .
    I took the tract & as debate was not likely, walked away. Fifteen minutes later when I walked past again the group was gone.
    As you say Sir, the manipulation & propaganda machine is a powerful, but selective creature, it can befuddle & confuse many issues, but the truth will always be there for those that seek it earnestly.

    • dannybhoy

      The Gospel in action!

    • Politically__Incorrect

      ” I don’t want to look at THAT !! ”
      That says it all. When people close their eyes, ears, and minds to something then it simply does not exist for them. This is why we hear so little about abortion in the media. We see all kinds of grisly programmes on television, but this is one subject that is never discussed. Presumably, the inevitable pro-choice backlash is just too scary.

      God bless you preacher for your efforts to educate those people!

    • David

      Well done Preacher !

    • Dreadnaught

      That was what freedom of speech and expression was meant to do – open the discussion in a dialogue without fear of censorship or breaking the law. Telling the truth is not as easy as telling the lie.

  • len

    ‘A foetus’ is a dehumanised child, dehumanised because the abortion industry is a multi billion dollar industry and as a foetus a ‘mere mass of cells’ is far more impersonal than a dead child laying on the beach.
    This is the total hypocrisy of the way man has been conditioned to think….

    • Dreadnaught

      The same name is applied to all living things in the early pre-birth stages of conceptual development – not exclusively to humans.

      • len

        It was humans I was speaking of Dreadnaught as this is the topic in question?. We all started life a small humans and then grew …if we were not murdered in the womb that is…..

        • Dreadnaught

          You said a foetus is a dehumanised child – that is not stricly true, its the interpretation you have chosen to attach to it. If indeed that was the case then it would have to be excluisive to the human species; which it isn’t.
          A canine foetus is not a pup, neither is it a de-caninsed pup.

          • Ivan M

            It is on the way to being a pup. Not on the way to become a lion or a tree, nor in particular does it cease its existence at parturition . It is in the developmental phase proper to mammals. For the purpose of the discussion, you have a potential pup, the same as a human foetus is a potential fully grown human being. No human being in history has ever come into being except through childbirth, therefore since it is clear that by aborting your pet dog, you have terminated a potential pup, abortion in humans terminates a potential human being.

          • Dreadnaught

            Well a big vote of thanks to Ivan M., Professor of the Bleedin’ Obvious for clearing that up.

          • DanJ0

            Is it significant that you’ve switched baby for “potential fully grown human being” but kept the pup relationship? In your relationship, aborting a human foetus is terminating a potential baby, as aborting a canine foetus is terminating a potential pup. But you want foetus and baby to be the same thing, and therefore to be due the same thing, I expect. [Early] foetuses are on their way to becoming a baby, if one follows your lecture closely.

          • Ivan M

            I realise it is not a watertight argument. It was more in the way of responding to the argument that one can isolate a stage of development, without seeing the end. The end of a human foetus is a human being, nothing more, nothing less. It is an argument from teleology, that you use anytime you want to get somewhere. As to the relative weight of a baby against a foetus, I’ll be be happy – in order to go some way to meeting your concerns – to sentence someone to 20 years for the killing of a baby and say 2 years for the destruction of a foetus, since as you say the foetus is only a potential human being. Where would you draw the line?

    • DanJ0

      I have no shares in the abortion industry and I will never cause an unwanted pregnancy yet I see a crucial difference between the Syrian child and a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or [early] foetus. You need to account for that too, I think, as I’m certainly not alone there.

      • Phil R

        You are just making an arbitrary category of life that you decide does not have the right to our protection.

        We have been there before and for those making the decisions it seemed reasonable at the time

        Coldly logical in fact

        • DanJ0

          Most here are simply begging the question with their claims.

      • len

        My sister had a miscarriage the child was named and buried its a pity these ‘zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or [early] foetus’ are not treated with the same respect. My sister in law was a midwife she actually worked in an abortion unit for some time when live babies were delivered and left beside a sink to die still crying.If this sits well with you I can only pity you for your lack of humanity.

        • DanJ0

          If someone wants to bury a zygote in a funeral ceremony then I’m fine with that. As for the rest, I don’t believe the personalisation of your story. Actually, I suspect you’re lying outright. Moreover, I reject your assumptions about me. You’re indulging yourself, I think.

  • David

    This shocking but very valid comparison needed saying. Thank you for doing this.
    Only a moral relativist could fail to see the striking analogy displayed here so utterly vividly.
    Oh how great is the hypocrisy of Babylon.
    This brings my morning’s reading of two chapters of Revelation into an incredibly sharp, focussed meaning.

    To change tack, towards causes, if I may, there’s an excellent article in The Telegraph (yes it still runs a few good ones). In it Putin, using moderate language, makes plain that all these needless deaths are the fault of the US, plus an obedient supporting partner the EU, attempting to impose its ideas for governance, in the form of western style “democracy”, that has destabilised the ME; the region is far too complex and fragile an area politically, to be meddled with in such a cavalier, nay ruthless way.

    Putin is absolutely right. IS stepped into the power vacuum that the clueless west created; yet it has the temerity to lecture Russia on granting “rights”, whatever those are, to homosexuals. Baah ! We have boys doing men’s jobs. CS Lewis’s phrase “hollow chested men” springs to mind.

    • Guess you won’t find too many Dispensationalists in Russia influencing Western strategy in the Middle East or too many progressive Christians happy clapping their way to Hell.

      • CliveM

        Strangely most of the Happy Clappies I know are quite fundamentalist.

        Still show a shocking taste in music however.

        • David

          Same here. In fact I haven’t met a Happy Clappy “progressive”.

          • Have you ever met a modernist Catholic?

          • David

            Yes, and she assumed that I would be a Christian ‘lite’ progressive Anglican.
            But when I, smilingly, told her I was as conservative and orthodox as the early Church councils, and had an affinity for traditional Catholics, well she wasn’t too impressed with me.

          • Lol …. well, she probably believed in universal salvation, women’s reproductive ‘rights’, ‘sensus fidelium’, primacy of ‘personal conscience’, and goodness what else. Jack has never met one face to face but has encountered them on-line.

          • David

            Probably, yes.
            These people think they can have what they see as the “nice” bits, without making the first, basic step of repentance and giving their lives to God, accepting their need for Jesus as their Saviour.

          • Agreed. Utter helplessness before God instead of pride in self.

          • chiefofsinners

            Only you.

          • Yes, Jack is modernist in outlook – circa Council of Trent 1545 -1563.

          • chiefofsinners

            I only hang around with you because you make my wig look fashionable.

          • CliveM

            ROFL

          • It is fashionable.

          • chiefofsinners

            Aw shucks. You sweet talkin’ Catholics. Bet you say that to all the girls.

          • Trade secrets ….

        • dannybhoy

          I believe in making a joyful noise unto the Lord, raising my hands etc.,
          It’s Scriptural!
          But I find many of the modern sings and choruses incredibly banal, repetitive and ear-shatteringly noisy. This to my mind is carnal rather than spiritual.

          • CliveM

            I agree many modern ‘praise’ songs don’t do it.

            I also slightly resent the emphasis on ‘happy’ all the time. I think the problem with a lot of modern worship is it is incredibly narrow and doesn’t address the breadth of our life with God.

          • dannybhoy

            Absolutely. I think we ‘sense’ the presence of the Holy Spirit in a meeting or service, and the Holy Spirit is gentle. Anything which causes us to focus on our physicality is to my mind suspect. The Holy Spirit may lead us to repentance, to a new revelation of ourselves, to worship or even a new direction in our lives. The Holy Spirit helps to nurture our relationship to the Father.

          • CliveM

            Well David is reported to have danced in praise to God, so physicality can’t be completely dismissed. I’m uncomfortable in writing off all happy flappy praise. I know some good Christians who worship in such Churches. It’s not for me and I do worry that it’s to narrow a form of worship.

          • dannybhoy

            Well, I was thinking about David when I posted. I didn’t mean that physicality I meant the kind that leads to putting feelings first rather than what Scripture tells us is true. So some days one feels ‘flat’ or blue, but God hasn’t changed, nor His love for us. So in spite of our feelings we sing choruses and hymns to God as a sacrifice of praise.

          • CliveM

            Yes true. Although if you are grieving all this smiley, happy clappyness can be a bit insensitive.

            I like a bit of reflection in my worship. A bit of silence so you can hear what God is saying. Sometimes think we risk drowning God out.

          • dannybhoy

            I agree with that too.
            Wanna form a church?!

          • CliveM

            I think it’s better if we don’t. There are to many congregations as it is.

            Besides the power would go to my head!! Bwah, ha, haaaa!

          • dannybhoy

            Lol! Besides it would only confirm Jack’s deepest misgivings about us Protestants…

          • CliveM

            Indeed……….

          • Don’t forget, David wrote some fairly heavy psalms too.

          • Phil R

            Jim Jones and others have also claimed guidance and new revelation from the Holy Spirit

          • dannybhoy

            A tree is known by its fruit.

          • Phil R

            Jim Jones had a lot more fruit than most

          • Ahem …. if you don’t mind!

          • CliveM

            You know what I meant!

          • Anton

            And, tellingly, they typically use the word “I” about 3 times per verse. Some of the words about ‘love’ have the feel of
            pop-song romantic love – eros rather than agapē, the Song of Songs rather than the Psalms. They say
            things to Jesus that no man would say to another, things that no disciple ever said
            to Him (“You’re altogether lovely…”) and which make him sound more like the
            singer’s boyfriend. They make me sick. These modern worship songs could never have come out
            of a persecuted church. They are too lightweight for the great issues with which Christianity is
            concerned. Some
            are detached from reality: “Step by step we’re moving forward, little by little
            taking ground… strongholds come tumbling down…” is sung when “Change and decay
            in all around I see” is the truth about our culture.

            Moreover people come to church in all moods; some are happy, but some might have just been divorced by an unbelieving partner, some might have suffered a bereavement… hymns which tell out the truths of the faith can be sung regardless of mood, but the modern stuff relentlessly and insensitively expects you to be happy all the time.

            Moreover the English hymnal is the finest in any language (and the one thing which an ordained Catholic friend says he envies the CoE). It can be sung for free as it is out of copyright, yet congregations prefer to pay to sing this modern rot!

          • sarky

            Divorced by an unbelieving partner? Just as likely to be a christian partner.

          • Anton

            I chose a case in which the Christian would be gong to church deeply unhappy, which better matches the former.

            Regarding the situation you raise, the New Testament does say that if an unbelieving spouse separates then the believer is free to put the relationship behind him or her ie divorce – and live singly (1 Corinthians 7:15 + 7:10-12). In the New Testament couples got married or divorced then informed the authorities – rather than petitioning them to get married or divorced – and what I have written translates Paul’s words into the modern situation.

          • Phil R

            Statistically far far less likely for practising Christian couples to divorce than any other groups

          • sarky

            Think you need to check your stats.

          • magnolia

            Mostly time will tell what is great and survives. However for some of the modern hymns and songs time is already up and it is quite obvious that they are blatant nonsense.

            What really gets me is when someone claims the inspiration of the Holy Spirit gave them inspiration and then they came up with really badly written emotive cliche-ridden guff.

            I was required once to sing some nonsense about not trusting or loving the “sweetest frame” in contrast to “Jesus’ Name”. What on earth was that on about? Still have no clue, but the people who liked it appeared to think it was exceptionally awesome and powerful. Picture frame? Door frame? Window frame? Or do they say this to their boy or girlfriends? “Hello, sweetest frame, how are you?” I have only heard of people being called coathangers in a derogatory fashion. Depersonalising or what, if that is what they mean…..?

            And they jiggle with enthusiasm over this fourth rate nonsense. Now I like modern hymns and am open to different poetic techniques, different lyrical modes, long notes, one note following another fast, and different modes of singing, but it is as long as it makes sense, and is well written within its sub-genre. The winnowing of some modern hymns and songs has already begun and many great ones are already firmly established. It will continue.

          • Anton

            I agree; when I became a Christian in the early 1990s I was astonished at the change from the hymns I had sung – enjoying the music but indifferent to the words – at school. Many of the most banal new ones came from a single pen, who (to my astonishment) was viewed at the time as the country’s leading Christian songwriter. Less than 25 years later not many of his songs are sung, although the style of charismatic music has hardly changed.

            In fact the one you complain about (“My hope is built on nothing less”) was written in 1834, although a jarring modern chorus (“Christ alone, cornerstone”) is now frequently sung after each verse.

          • magnolia

            Well that just goes to show that bad writing has happened down the ages! And is still happening!

          • sarky

            You forgot vomit inducing, saccarine sweet, cringe inducing etc etc

          • dannybhoy

            Words too harsh for one who is kind and gentle and shrinks from giving offence without justification….

          • Anton

            Amen! Preach it bro’…

      • David

        What a wry comment ! You are on form tonight.
        The resurgence of the Orthodox Church is attended by a “deal” whereby the government discourages other Christian denominations. I know this, informally, verbally, through an acquaintance closely connected with Open Doors, which I support.
        Now I celebrate secular atheism being pushed back, hugely in fact, but I’m not so sure about this “understanding” between Church and State. I suppose my 20/21C mind is programmed to believe in choice and all that jazz. After all, we as Christians, believe in free will ? But shades of Constantine here perhaps ? Or the early days of the C of E for that matter.
        Humanity never gets it quite right, do we ? Of course faced with a choice between compulsory atheism, and the suppression of Christianity, or a cosy agreement that Orthodoxy is The state supported Church I know which I’d prefer. I respect the Orthodox Church.
        It is the admission, the recognition of that basic flaw in all of us, of course, that marks us out as believers in The Fall and provides our faith with the starting point for much of its wisdom and truth.

        • dannybhoy

          I posted this article a week or two ago. I found it most thought provoking..
          “It may surprise you to hear that the original Gospel—the Good News preached by Jesus Christ and His disciples—is quite different from what is prominently presented today by the vast majority of Christians in America.”
          http://www.pravmir.com/the-original-christian-gospel/

          • David

            Thank you for the link. I’m reading it in chunks.
            Orthodoxy is more philosophical, deeper, in many ways than the thinking of the western, Roman derived Churches. Maybe this is because Latin Christianity was influenced by the very black/white, right/wrong thinking patterns of the pragmatic Roman Empire, which of course provided the peace, the Pax, that enabled the rapid spread of the new faith along the trade routes. Latin as a language is very crisp, clear and not at all poetic, I’d say. Latin is the language of the soldier, engineer or bureaucrat. Whereas Greek, is more subtle. So Greek has many words for the one Latin “love”. Greek wisely recognises the different types of “love”, filial, romantic-sexual, and parent-like.
            To approach what Jesus may have meant, speaking in his native Aramaic, it is often better to consult the Greek meaning of the words, the Greek Bible, rather than the Latin one. I must confess to being a very Latin thinking sort of person.

          • dannybhoy

            I think what I found challenging was his interpretation of the place of sin. As the son of a famous and learned rabbi he seems to have swung back towards the Jewish understanding of the nature of sin.

          • Anna

            Very interesting. Thank you,

  • What’s the difference? None. Both children died as a result of man’s inhumanity to man and self interest.

    • CliveM

      And greed.

      • and …. all the cardinal sins, Clive.

        • CliveM

          Man is naturally selfish HJ. It is the most damaging sin I think.

          • Very true. The root is pride … placing one’s self as first in the created order and believing one is entitled to what one desires.

          • CliveM

            Isn’t that the modern world? How many times do you hear that it is important that “you love yourself”!!

          • As Jack is prone to say – love is a verb as well as a noun. We should love ourselves as creatures made in the image of God, called to know Him, love Him and serve Him. We can only truly love ourselves if we love God.

          • CliveM

            I was meaning something a bit more self idolotrous then that!

          • Jack knows this. Instead of truly loving ourselves we love our desires and wants and make a God of these.

          • CliveM

            Yes. It’s why so many marriages fail, love in marriage has to be sacrificial, you need to put your other first. Thing is, it does work, if only people would realise .

            It also needs to be reciprocated.

          • True … but even if it isn’t we carry on.

          • CliveM

            Well hopefully.

          • dannybhoy

            Actually I have a theory, and that is our struggle is against our natural man. Man being born as physical being has the same needs and impulses as any creature. So we need to eat, to drink, to belong, to find our place in the social order, to be loved and appreciated whilst trying to have our own way or control others. To have sex, to make a family etc. etc.
            St Paul says we should ” Put to death therefore what is earthly in you:[a] sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.”
            Colossians 3:5 and similar passages.

            St Paul also says “But I discipline my body and keep it under control,[a] lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.” 1 Corinthians 9:27.

            So it seems to me that holiness comes through disciplining our bodies which is part of the process of the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit.
            What do others think?

          • CliveM

            It’s about learning not to be a slave to self. It’s about putting others first.

            Which is the problem with so much progressive Christianity. They have fallen into the trap that only by pandering to self can you be happy.

          • Jack would frame it somewhat differently but along essentially the same lines.

            Our nature, if rightly directed, is ordered to secure our happiness and the happiness of others. Jack means blessedness by that term. Our natural needs can only be rightly ordered and directed if integrated with our intellect, our understanding of why we have been created, through the influence of our conscience i.e. the knowledge imprinted on our hearts by God. The conscience is damaged, so our minds are warped and so our natural drives can take precedence.

          • dannybhoy

            Well that’s the intellectual version of what I said, and I think I agree with you! The Christian life is one of discipline, but not such that it leads to hatred of ourselves or despair at our failings. For God is love and loves us in spite of our failings, as Christ loved the disciples despite their weaknesses. I think God responds not to our attempts at perfection, but rather our love for Him as exhibited by King David..
            ” Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.” 1 Peter 4:8

          • Ivan M

            Why give us the equipment if we are not supposed to use it, Dan?

          • dannybhoy

            Oh of course we use it, because like the animals we need to reproduce. And like the animals we have our favourite food and drink.
            And like the apes we are sociable and hierarchical, whilst also wishing to express our individuality.
            We are attracted to the opposite sex, we flirt, we court, we eventually find a partner and settle down to (hopefully) raise a family.
            What I was getting at (perhaps unclearly) is that rather than saying we are born evil, let’s recognise that we are born as dependent creatures. So we are selfish in the sense that we are dependent and incomplete.
            A form of morality is what any group needs to survive and thrive, and in the case of humans our parents teach us social skills and moral values in order to prepare us for adult life.
            It seems to me that we humans seek to establish our own kingdom without reference to God. We follow our natural impulses in the belief that more sex, or more money or more power will bring us fulfilment, and we want to remain the King of our own Kingdom.
            So being a sinner is what we become when we start wanting our own way and following our own desires.
            Salvation is the process of learning to control the impulses and lusts that seemed so desirable to us (especially when we are young), and instead preparing our selves for that eternal life in a new body.
            It is obvious that people are not intrinsically wicked because most try to do good and help others. Doctors, scientists, teachers, nurses etc. The problem is that we don’t want to acknowledge He who knows where our true happiness and fulfilment lies. He is constantly trying to break through our pride, self will and desires in order to bring us back to Himself, and the evil one is constantly trying to convince us that we ourselves can find the happiness and contentment we crave.

          • Ivan M

            That makes a lot of sense. Though it seems to me that for most people, like myself, one has to make the mistakes first before seeing the value of it.

  • Inspector General

    Thank you Cranmer for your hard hitting site. Surely you are the Christian equivalent of BBC’s Panorama in its glory years.

    You may have hit on something in the fight against wretched abortion. If the tiny victims could be dressed up in tiny clothes, and laid face down, there is a chance, a good chance, that this human outrage be stopped.

    As for Cameron, the Inspector cannot find adequate words to express his continuing amazement that we are stuck with a superficial prime minister who bends whichever way the wind blows. As the migrants pour in over the next few months, one rather suspects the population of this country are going to think long and hard about the ‘commitments this country is tied to due to EU membership’ and vote accordingly at the referendum. Fingers crossed, eh!

    • “If the tiny victims could be dressed up in tiny clothes, and laid face down, there is a chance, a good chance, that this human outrage be stopped.”

      Given your response yesterday, probably best if it’s Western clothes and that they have European names. Just to be on the safe side, eh?

      • Inspector General

        The Inspector had no idea that his clash with you yesterday left you holed beneath the waterline, but he does now…

        • You revealed your true colours (yet again) yesterday. It’s you that’s sinking, Inspector.

          • Inspector General

            Still praying for Aylan (but curiously not for his equally dead brother), or have you moved on and forgotten about him…

          • Do you pray, Inspector?

          • Inspector General

            Not for muslims…

          • Do you pray, ever? You know, to this God you have created that has abandoned us and takes pleasure in our suffering? What would be the point?

          • Inspector General

            Off topic. Some other time maybe

          • Yes, indeed, Inspector.

          • Phil R

            When Paul preached all those ordained to eternal life were saved

            murderers thieves adulterers even perhaps those that did not pray

            We cannot know who God will save and certainly not you.

          • Jack is making no claims about who is saved or who is not. However, unless one has a sudden death bed conversion, which is always possible, one expects a person who knows and loves God to “walk with Him”. How can you have a relationship with someone you never talk to? And, why would you love a God who you believe has abandoned us and takes pleasure in human suffering, as the Inspector claims?

          • Phil R

            You are just a lmany of shit Jack.

            In your mind God loves you more than the Inspector because of what you do?

            So tell me. How many brownie points did you earn with God today?

            More than the Inspector you claim.

            You don’t walk with God Jack. If you do try listening for once

          • Why bless you, Phil.

          • Phil R

            Thank you

            now answer the question

            How many points did you earn with God today. How can you be so sure you beat the inspector’s score?

          • CliveM

            Have you been drinking? Even for you (and this is saying something) your last couple of posts have been a bit er, how shall we say, eccentric?

          • Inspector General

            So what if he has? Drink opens the intelligent mind at night. Perhaps the bloody muslims wouldn’t be such a disaster on this earth if they had a tipple in the evening.

          • CliveM

            IG

            Whilst I wouldn’t disagree re Muslims, not all drinkers are improved by their tipple. Think city centres on a Saturday night.

            Mr P seems to be getting over excited.

          • Inspector General

            And Christ’s first recorded miracle? Converting water into non-alcoholic wine…That’s a public order issue you’ve raised. Similar to abuse of food in our obesity culture…

          • Yes, but do remember it was His mother who was responsible for this. Besides, one doubts the celebrants at Canaan were rolling around pissed offering theological insights and throwing insults around to one another. They were rejoicing at the marriage of a man and a woman – the basic cell of human society. Even Jack got (ever so slightly) inebriated at his daughters wedding.

          • Inspector General

            Good grief! You were at Canaan?

          • Jack knows a man who knows a man … who knows a man.

          • Anton

            Cana, Jack, not Canaan. Had a few already tonight?

          • What’s an ‘a’ between friends?

          • Anton

            Ah.

          • CliveM

            IG

            You are not talking to a non drinker here. I don’t give a flying fart if someone drinks. However if it takes a pale ale shandy to get you all muscular, then it’s a little sad.

            For the avoidance of any doubt I’m not referring to yourself.

          • Anton

            Believe it or not there are temperance Christians who argue that the “oinos” which Jesus turned the water into at Cana was non-alcoholic grape juice, for which the Greek is the same word. Samuele Bacchiocci was one who wrote an entire book about it.

          • Inspector General

            Now that has to be Americans

          • When the mind is “open” all sorts of “influences” can creep in.

          • Inspector General

            Still, we have you to keep an eye on us, don’t we?

          • No, you don’t Inspector. The devil is an evil bastard and will seize any opportunity to sow his damnable lies.

          • Inspector General

            The Inspector asks, quite politely, if you would mind if in future he refers to you as ‘Lump’?

          • The name’s Jack … Happy Jack.

          • Inspector General

            ‘Lumpy’?

          • Happy Jack … although Dodo would be acceptable occasionally.

          • carl jacobs

            Heh. “Grumpy Lump.” Hey!

            May that purple guy isn’t a blueberry after all. Maybe he’s a purple Oompa Loompa.

          • Follow the thread, Carl. The Inspector, in his ever so subtle manner (ahem) was picking up on Phil R’s comment to Jack.

          • carl jacobs

            Yes, and in my ever so subtle way, I was removing his fingers from it.

          • What a silly, silly question. One doesn’t ‘earn points’ with God, Phil.

          • carl jacobs

            [cough] Treasury of Merit [cough]

          • Why Carl, where have you been?

            It’s too late and Jack is way too weary for a detailed discussion of the “Communion of Saints” and the distinction between the eternal and temporal consequences of sin, purgatory and indulgences.

          • carl jacobs

            Tired last night. Didn’t feel like posting. And I took the afternoon off.

          • Jack wishes he’d taken a break too. Some threads just make one angry and exhausted at the same time. Then some bloody idiot says something to be ‘clever’.
            Jack has seen too many photos of dead children brutally killed at the hands of their parents, or dead through deliberate neglect, not to be incensed by it. It just grieves one’s soul. And, what’s worse, for all the lamentations and promises of politicians, it cannot be prevented. Truly, there are times when he just wants all this insanity to end.

          • Anton

            It will. Come, Lord Jesus…

          • Phil R

            So why do you judge the inspector by what he does?

            then compare him to you

          • The Inspector was being an arse, in Jack’s estimation, and he is, objectively speaking, a manifest heretic and apostate who claims to be a Roman Catholic because he “admires” the Church’s liturgy . How God deals with him is God’s business. And Jack never compared himself to the Inspector.

          • Phil R

            You are the arse Jack because you think you know the mind of God.

            I am an Anglican because I believe in a broad Church. Does that make my worship heretical also.

            I have more concern for your salvation than the inspector

          • Well knock yourself out, Phil. The Inspector denies the Trinity; denies the Divinity of Jesus; believes God ignores us and uses us for His amusement and doesn’t care for us.
            If your ‘Anglicanism’ is broad enough to incorporate all this, then it is not Christian and you are most welcome to the Inspector.

          • Powerdaddy

            The Inspector isn’t a Christian, and I doubt he is religious at all.

            Just ask him a few questions and you will find out for yourself………

          • carl jacobs

            You are just a lump of shit Jack.

            Just for the record. I don’t think Phil intended that as an insult. I believe he intended it as a generic statement of the human condition. In other words, I think Phil would have applied that description to himself as well. And everyone else.

          • DanJ0

            That is why Calvinism always seem so dark and bleak and wrong. If its adherents consider other people in general as lumps of shit then that’s bound to influence their behaviour too.

          • carl jacobs

            I associate the imagery with Luther and not Calvin.

            And the reason you don’t understand is because you don’t inherently grasp the concept of sin. Because you don’t understand sin, you don’t understand yourself. Because you don’t understand yourself, you don’t understand the Cross. You could write words on a piece of paper like a student answers an exam question, but that kind of intellectual knowledge is not tangible understanding. The Gospel begins with the realization of what you are really like. The offense of Christianity is not found in the Cross, but rather in the reason for the Cross. “I’m not a lump of shit! I am good in my own eyes and I will be seated on the throne of the Most High!”

            But as it is written “The Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing.”

          • DanJ0

            I don’t hate myself, in other words. What probably galls is that in valuing myself, I value other people too. That is, I most definitely don’t think everyone, including myself, is a lump of shit. Moreover, in recognising my interests, I recognise the interests of others. With a fair wind, we can build a society on that by setting up a social contract. We’re not all in the existential despair I reckon you’d prefer for us in order to give meaning to your own religious lifebelt.

          • carl jacobs

            In other words, you are too blind to see yourself for what you really are. You imagine that you are good because you deny that which condemns you.

          • DanJ0

            I’m lovely!

            I’m also capable of critical thinking so I know that you’re merely asserting your beliefs as fact.

          • Phil R

            For the record Carl is right.

            One of our greatest sins is to say look at the good things i do for you God.

            you now owe me

            The works are therefore for your benefit not God

          • Hmm … he’s not that sophisticated in his thinking, Carl.

          • carl jacobs

            I didn’t catch it at first. The profanity masked the intent somewhat. But I read it a second time and realized what he was saying. It followed logically from his other posts. So maybe you should say I’m not sophisticated enough to catch his drift. 🙂

            If he hadn’t disconnected regeneration from recognizing God’s Truth, I would have upvoted every comment he made on this subthread.

          • dannybhoy

            I don’t think the Bible teaches irresistible grace or predestination.

          • Phil R

            E.g. does it say. those that believed were ordained to eternal life.

            It does not say that

            but your pride wants it to be so

          • dannybhoy

            “It says those that believed were ordained to eternal life.”
            Ah, that is what I believe. Those who of their free will believe, are ordained to eternal life…
            The Inspector and I differ in our understanding of God’s purposes and what it means to be a Christian, but I enjoy his frankness and humour.

          • Phil R

            It does not say that.

            Even if you do prefer it

            Your comments on the inspector i do agree with and fully expect him to be saved.

          • dannybhoy

            I would like him to find salvation, and in the meantime I agree with him where I can, and leave our differences to one side.

          • CliveM

            Correctomundo DB!

    • michaelkx

      Dear gentlemen and Lady’s, your clashes below are amusing, but on this subject can we all agree that it is …… here words fail me to describe how I fell about this subject. please boys let us keep to the matter in hand, and pray (those of you that do) that this will stop, and work towards doing something about it.

  • Dreadnaught

    Compassion is in all of us, but it should not compromise national security: we should remember the Wooden Horse of Troy fable and temper our responses to the crisis with this in mind.

  • steroflex

    If you abort a almost quarter of a million future citizens, please do not be surprised if immigration soars.
    Nature abhors a vacuum.

  • chiefofsinners

    Offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come. It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

  • chiefofsinners

    One is reminded of an apocryphal excerpt from the preaching of Ian Paisley:
    IP: “Sinners shall be thrown into outer darkness, where there is gnashing of teeth.”
    Old lady in the congregation: “Dr Paisley, I don’t have any teeth.”
    IP: “Madam, teeth will be provided.”

    The good news for Mr Kurdi is that he will eventually receive his longed for teeth.
    However, there is other news.

    • Lol … Did Dr Paisley really say that?

      • Inspector General

        It’s an old joke, you simple fellow…

        • For all his anti-Catholicism, there were times (lowers voice) Jack actually had a sneaking respect for Ian Paisley. And he did strike Jack as having a warm sense of humour. The sort of chap one wouldn’t mind having as a father in law – so long as he didn’t live too close by.

          • Inspector General

            They say he was the IRA’s greatest recruiting sergeant. Not one attempt on his life made accordingly. A cousin of this man saw him in action on the steps of some building in Belfast in his prime. His rhetoric was evil and sectarian. Don’t forget that now…

          • The IRA wasn’t exactly saintly, now was it?

          • Inspector General

            As usual you refuse all criticism of your wit and wisdom. By the way, one is beginning to have difficulty discerning what is wit and what is wisdom from you. Take that as friendly advice…

          • Life’s complex, Inspector. We all see it differently. Jack would have willingly shared a Guinness with Paisley but not with Adams and McGuiness. Make of that what you will.

          • Anton

            It seems that he founded a denomination. You need to have a theological reason for that, beyond petulance.

            “We pray this night that Thou wouldst deal with the Prime Minister of our country. In the name of thy blessed Self, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, we hand this woman, Margaret Thatcher, over to the devil, that she might learn not to blaspheme; and O God, in wrath, take vengeance upon this wicked, treacherous, lying woman. Take vengeance upon her, O Lord!”

            – Ian Paisley extending 1 Corinthians 5:5, in Martyrs Memorial Free Presbyterian Church, Belfast, November 1985, after Mrs Thatcher had signed the Anglo-Irish agreement. I have a recording of this horrendous utterance on a double CD set called Great Political Speeches. I am glad that he mellowed, but he needed to.

  • Dreadnaught

    I heard the,most informed, intelligent radio discussion and appraisal of the entire Middle East crisis on BBC4 World Service ‘News Extra’ at 4am this morning with the brilliant Frank Gardiner amongst other well informed people .
    Why put it out to such a limited domestic audience at this time I don’t know (well we do really – but lets not frighten the ponies dear hearts). It should have been mainstream and deserves repeating. available on podcast (below) for those interested enough. (Sadly all too few I fear)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02dbd4m/episodes/downloads

    • IanCad

      Thanks for the link Dreadnaught; I just listened to it.
      BBC at its best. (And how it was meant to be)

  • grandpa1940

    As I asked upon my own site, is this the image which ensures that you vote to oeave?

    https://mikecunningham.wordpress.com/2015/09/04/and-will-ye-nae-come-back-agin/

  • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

    I think the thing that disturbs me the most about your misuse of the picture of that little boy is the utter lack of compassion and understanding that your use of it represents. To misappropriate an appalling tragedy such as this for your own crusade, when the world is still very much in the midst of the suffering of millions of displaced, persecuted and desperate people shows your misplaced contempt for “the world”. I fully understand that your “good book” tells you to be in “the world” and not of it, however it also tells you to love others. The fact that you have misused such a picture and in such a way does not demonstrate your love, rather your lack thereof. You are doing yourself and your cause a massive and incredibly damaging misservice. My plea to you would be to rethink and reconsider your use of this image and the way the continued use of it is in fact bolstering the opinion of many that you are a joke.

    • Phil R

      Both babies have a right to life.

      The one on the left if he had drowned in a boat with 500 others and we did not see the body nobody would care.

      The one on the right is murdered every day and no one cares.

      neither should die. However it seems your concern is only for the one on the left.

      • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

        Phil, I think you missed my point. See different version in comments, hopefully that’s clearer for you

        • Phil R

          I see what you are getting at now and I appreciate that you are informing us of how non Christians view the post.

          I still believe that the hypocrisy is real and it is right to point it out whether or not the world gets it.

    • Inspector General

      Please define the crusade you object to. One has read your post several times and cannot make any sense of it whatsoever. Are you a student by any chance?

      • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

        Nope, not a student…I’m an intelligent 32 year old woman. Here’s a simpler version. “Your use of that picture disgusts me. Millions of people have had to leave their homes due to war, persecution, forced conscription and extreme poverty. That picture helped a lot of people finally wake up to what is happening and that we have a real chance to be a force for good. Your use of that picture is taking away attention from this tragedy and lessens it in some readers eyes by using it in a negative light when compared to abortion. There is a real chance to advance humanity here, why not focus on that instead.”

        Hope that helps Inspector General

        • Inspector General

          Ah, you’re a “It’s a woman’s choice” advocate and you don’t like comparisons of a dead foetus and the same thing only 3 years older wearing clothes and with a cute grin, bless him. Why didn’t you say! One is sure Cranmer will apologise to you for raining on your day. Stay here, this man will go and get him…

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            It’s a shame that you’re using this to attempt to belittle and intimidate someone with a different opinion, rather than engage in what could be a valuable conversation.

          • Inspector General

            Intimidate? Good Lord! Nothing of the sort. You knocked on Cranmer’s door and one merely opened it to see what you want. Apparently, what you want is obedience to your will…

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            But belittle yes? I don’t want obedience to my will. I’m voicing my opinion in a public forum and hoping that people might consider my point of view on this matter. It seems that some of the people commenting on my post aren’t willing to consider another point of view. I’ll leave my post and leave the discussion and hope that it helps some people look at how the original article could come across.

          • Inspector General

            Abortion is an emotive subject. We find that women who have endured the procedure may never completely get over it, and do not wish to be reminded of the innocent life they’ve killed. Can one ask if this is your situation?

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            That’s not my situation Inspector General.

          • Inspector General

            Good show! Anyway, some time honoured advice for you . Stop thinking. It never did any woman any good at any time. Instead, get yourself a husband, you’re still young (well, youngish) and have sexual relations with him (best not mention that bit to your lesbian friends) and pray that the good Lord will favour your womb with fruitfulness. There you go, you’ll be happy ever after. What more could a woman possibly want?

            Toodle pip!

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            I love it when someone proves my point…hats off to you sir!

          • Inspector General

            Yes, sound advice that. Anyway off you go and slap on the mascara and get yourself down the singles bar. Don’t be too available, so to speak, the chaps like a challenge…

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            Aw there you go again. So cute

          • CliveM

            You’re not very encouraging to the female of the species are you IG?

          • Chuck Cordes

            Do you really have to post your comments with the artificial character?
            It really interferes with your arguments.
            Most people who view this article understand the manipulation and it actually weakens their position.

          • carl jacobs

            You must be new here, or you would understand. That’s just the Inspector. He occupies a space all to himself. Entertaining (at times) to say the least. But he defies classification. Strength of argument usually isn’t his purpose.

          • Inspector General

            The Inspector has read your efforts and asks you this. Are you one of the new type of pansy man who can’t do enough for the shrill feminists, or one of those crafty blighters who hopes to win over their confidence so he can pull their panties down at some opportune moment…

          • Chuck Cordes

            You’re not worth the effort.

          • Inspector General

            Goodbye

          • Chuck Cordes

            Okay. You got me Inspector.
            Thank you. I’ll sincerely enjoy visiting this blog more often.

          • Inspector General

            Splendid!

          • avi barzel

            Actually, proves dannybhoy’s point that the Inspector likes to provoke. He’s rather good at it and I suspect that most of us can’t wait to see him stir and go into action. He got me good when I was a newbie here; provoked me enough to fly offmy handle, violate the blog’s “prime directive” and earn a warning from HG. I appreciate such skill and laughed off the matter once my ego survived the trauma of being led by the nose. Although the Inspector and I differ on many subjects, the substance of his views and the sttength of his arguments should be underestimated. Anyhow, you handled your first “inspection” better than I did.

          • Chuck Cordes

            Both pictures are equally horrible.
            But the one on the right was used to manipulate the emotions of the viewer.
            The ultimate message is not about horrors of a late-term abortions, but rather to eliminate all abortions.
            The photo doesn’t represent the reality of the issue, but a distortion of the matter.

          • And the photo on the left is also being misused to manipulate emotions … that’s the point of the article.

            It’s ‘uncool’ to give a damn about aborted children. Terribly un-PC and against a woman’s ‘right’ to choose and all that. Yet, it’s ‘totally cool’ for one’s heart to bleed over a dead three year old and demand a change in government policy.

          • Hi inspector

            Ooh Eeh Ooh Ah Aah Ting Tang Walla Walla Bing bang :How do you get Jasmine is a lesbian?

          • Any woman who knocks the Inspector back is, by definition, a lesbian, Hannah.

          • Hi happy Jack

            Well nothing seems to knock inspector back: maybe whiskey.

          • A certain nurse did, as Jack recalls. He’s a bitter, bitter man, Hannah. He seems to have a soft spot for you though.

          • Inspector General

            Lost out to a cat, of all things. Still, when it went missing, the Inspector offered his services in the vain search that followed…

          • Powerdaddy

            ” Feminine over thinking can rearrange neurons in the brain to make the thing become more masculine”.

            With a personality like that more times than not I suspect you would lose out to a rock. Find out where the local ‘adult with learning disabilities’ center is in your area.Take a couple of balloons colouring books crayons etc.

            Fill your boots…………

          • Jack’s heard the: “It’s not you, it’s me”, brush off. But, “It’s not you or me, it’s the cat” is a new one.

          • Inspector General

            Didn’t say she was, sweetness. But ALL women have lesbian friends these days, so many of them around, you know. Including your good self, of course. However, if you hadn’t done so much thinking in the past, you might not be.

          • dannybhoy

            Incorrigible and provocative Inspector. I suspect a windup….

          • Hi inspector

            Of course it was the university education which made me a Lesbo… anyways, got to go as my partner has just finished making two mugs of hot chocolate for us. Laters.

          • Inspector General

            Probably. Feminine over thinking can rearrange neurons in the brain to make the thing become more masculine. And there you have it, you become aroused by another woman’s farmyard area…

          • DanJ0

            I think the correct term is ‘lady garden’. Too many cocks in a farmyard for your term to be appropriate, I expect.

          • IanCad

            Lord Chesterfield has to be among your forbears.

          • dannybhoy

            You’re giving in already?
            Why?
            Christians take things seriously, and we recognise that things are rather more complex than simply showing a photograph of a poor drowned child. You simply can’t build a sensible policy on that.

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            You haven’t contributed to the conversation previously. Not all christians and not all people are of the same level of emotional intelligence or general intelligence either. Therefore not all christains and not all people will fully look at the complexities of the issue, that’s why I made my point.

          • dannybhoy

            ” Not all christians and not all people are of the same level of emotional intelligence or general intelligence either.”
            This is absolutely true, but as Christians we believe everyone’s opinion should be treated with respect.
            As regards this issue my worry is that important policies are being based on ’emotive snapshots’ rather than weighing up the pros and cons of a course of action.This is extremely dangerous.
            Of course we don’t want a child to suffer and die like this poor boy, but there are terrible things going on all around us and we generally shrug our shoulders and carry on munching..
            We are surrounded by tragedy here in the UK, like serious child abuse and neglect. Or old people living desperately lonely lives, never seeing anybody from one day to the next. Because we are used to hearing about it we become indifferent.

          • carl jacobs

            Ahem.

            My plea to you would be to rethink and reconsider your use of this image and the way the continued use of it is in fact bolstering the opinion of many that you are a joke.

            Good thing she has inserted the word ‘plea’ into that sentence. Otherwise I would have suspected she was trying to belittle and intimidate someone.

          • Passive aggression … she hasn’t quite mastered the techniques yet.

            She should have said “It makes me so sad the way you’ve used this image.”

        • dannybhoy

          With a moniker like “Jazzypants” ……?!

        • JoshieWard

          “That picture helped a lot of people finally wake up to what is happening and that we have a real chance to be a force for good.” – A genuinely brilliant point, and the entire premise of the post above. Why does only one of those pictures do that? Why aren’t we standing up for all the weak and defenceless?

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            I agree totally that humanity as a whole should stand up for the weak and defenceless. My issue is with the images used. I think there are ways to put your message across without using negative comparisons with such awful tragedies. I don’t like the fact that it has been used in that way and may lessen it in some eyes

          • Inspector General

            Which tragedy are we talking about. The luckless foetus or the darling boy…

        • avi barzel

          What you are saying is that it’s wrong for anyone to tinker with an iconic propaganda image that has been exclusively assigned to drum up pressure for more liberal immigration policies in the EU. But the image lends itself to other uses, such as calls for better supervision of refugees camps, applying laws and penalties to stop human trafficking, upgrading EU naval forces to intercept unsafe vessels and arrest smugglers, to charge stupid parents who risk their children’s lives with criminal negligence.

          • CliveM

            You’ve been gone to long.

          • carl jacobs

            Canada only gets internet service every third week.

          • avi barzel

            Um, we are actually better connected than you guys.

          • CliveM

            I’ll leave you two to argue this one out!

          • CliveM

            LOL

          • avi barzel

            My Samsung III is getting on and crapped out on me on a camping trip. Something snapped in the battery charge socket and wasn’t possible to charge it. Silly me, didn’t think of throwing a soldering kit (and a generator) into the canoe.

          • carl jacobs

            You’re not helping. There’s a real chance to advance humanity here. All the intelligent people agree.

          • avi barzel

            Not to worry; my stumbling block is of no practical consequence. At least here in Canada, all the major media and political parties are having an empathy race tied into demands for immediate acceptance of thousands of claimants without “time consuming” background checks.

        • magnolia

          We had a chance to be a force for good when pre-emptive war was posited, or when the neocons retained power in Washington and pursued their agenda, spelled out as in books like “The Pentagon’s New Map”. It is no secret. It is out there. We had a chance that if people had researched their plans we could have protested and stopped them. There were not enough of us protesting. Thus all the ISIS/ ISIL nonsense.

          Few people dared protest long and loud enough. There were potentially enough. We fluffed it. It is now mostly too late.

          Even just a basic following of Just War Theory and the Geneva Convention would have been sufficient along with no pre-emptive meddling nor false flags, nor banker bail outs, nor banking bail-ins.

          It is not the fault of posters here. We are not the ones to blame for this death, nor, more importantly, all the thousands of others. No one here had the power to make those rubbish decisions. Look elsewhere for the fault.

    • JoshieWard

      How is the use of this photo showing a lack of compassion? The point being made is that the image on the left is worthy of your compassion but the image on the right isn’t. Why not? No one is advocating a lack of compassion, rather more of it! More compassion!

    • Chuck Cordes

      The argument here is regarding the use of the photo. The photo was deliberately selected in order induce the greatest revulsion possible.
      The photo is being used to manipulate the emotions of the viewer. The photos are also being used to bolster the horrors of late-term abortions. But that’s not really the intent of this article.
      I am supportive of a woman’s right to choose the termination of pregnancy.
      Most pregnancies are terminated within the first twenty weeks of conception, but the article is attempting give the same weight to the issue as late-term abortions.
      Some religious individuals believe a human life is defined at the moment of conception.
      Others, like me, disagree and a collection of cells do not define a human being.

      Ultimately I believe the right to terminate pregnancy is a woman’s choice.
      I don’t believe that choice is taken lightly or without concern.

      The photo used in the article is attempting to disconnect the issue from reality in order to strengthen the case against all abortions.

      • The dead child on the right looks to be more than “a collection of cells” to Jack.

        • Chuck Cordes

          That is a late-term abortion.
          That’s not the actual issue.

          • carl jacobs

            What then is the actual issue?

        • IanCad

          This is what we’re up against Jack;
          “We wrestle not against flesh and blood—-“

      • dannybhoy

        “Ultimately I believe the right to terminate pregnancy is a woman’s choice. I don’t believe that choice is taken lightly or without concern.”

        She gets pregnant by herself??
        No sir, it takes two people to make a baby, and what you are doing is shifting the weight of responsibility onto the woman, whilst the man zips his fly and saunters off, scot free.
        That makes a woman the guilty party and the potential child disposable….

        • Chuck Cordes

          The woman carries the child. Ultimately it’s her decision if she wants to or not.

          • dannybhoy

            How very convenient.

          • Well, at least you’ve managed to call the baby in the womb a child.

          • IanCad

            Master owns the slave; he can do what he wants with it.

          • carl jacobs

            Except it’s not pregnancy she is avoiding. It’s the legal obligations that come with parenthood. It’s not about her body. It’s about her future responsibilities.

            Even animal know to care for their young. But not us.

          • … has a woman ever aborted a child of yours? Did you care? Saved on the child maintenance, did it?

          • magnolia

            Somewhat heartless, is that not? Big strong man saunters off relieved…..and irresponsible….

            Is that a holy thing to do?

      • avi barzel

        Please do share with us the rules of the game, as in which photos are acceptable for which emotional manipulations and when.

    • carl jacobs

      Here. Let me translate. “How DARE you suggest that those of us who care deeply about dead children on the coast of Turkey are hypocrites if we care nothing for the death of the unborn! Dead children in Turkey are important. Aborted children are not.”

      • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

        Again, you’ve missed my point entirely

        • One rather thinks you’ve missed the point of the lead article.

        • carl jacobs

          No, I didn’t miss it at all.

          • Jasmine Jazzypants Harmer

            Ok. Well let me assure you that that wasn’t my point. Maybe read the simpler version lower down, that might help

          • carl jacobs

            Maybe read the simpler version

            Uh oh. That sounds like another attempt at “belittling and intimidating.”

            I understand very well the point you are trying to make. I am saying that your point is morally incompetent, and derives from an a priori assumption that a dead three-year old and an aborted child have no equivalence. You are demanding that Cranmer recognize that lack of equivalence. You want him to focus on the problem at hand and not distract from the “real issue.” Orders of magnitude more children have died from the abortionist’s instruments than have drown off the coast of Turkey. And that is the real issue.

        • Inspector General

          You’ll have to forgive Carl. He’s American, don’t you know, but on this occasion he is right.

    • IanCad

      Good God!!
      What an utterly contemptible accessory to murder you are.

    • Hi

      No it’s not a misuse because the point being made is that both lives were important to God. De facto mass abortion with impunity are much a whirlwind of death as refugees fleeing a brutal civil war and a child dying trying to escape war.

    • avi barzel

      O, get off your high horse, Miss Sillypants. If there is any miisappropriation, it’s in the crude exploitation of the boy’s media-proclaimed “iconic” image for specific political aims. We are directed to weep for this child as for no other only to act in appropriate political ways to buy relief for our induced sorrow. Failure to go with the full program…i.e., tripping over ourselves to admit as many migrants and refugees as possible… results in accusations of inhumanity.

  • Those are shocking, horrifying pictures. Thank you for showing them together. I hope that they go all the way around the world and change people’s views on helping the helpless. Why doesn’t the child on the right have the same ‘right to life’ as the child on the left?

  • Colin

    So, just for the sake of clarity here… how do we even know that the picture on the right is the result of a medical abortion procedure? It could be the result of a miscarriage, or a desperate back-alley abortion procedure. Does anyone have a link to the source of the original photo?

    • Inspector General

      A somewhat inane point. You had this man lost for words for a few seconds, but he managed to find a few…

      • Colin

        *that was a total non-response to the question I asked. *DING!* “Thanks for playing, better luck next time!” I expect better from you, Inspector General

        • Inspector General

          My dear fellow, if you expected ‘an answer’ to your foolish post, you are quite beyond help…

          • Colin

            Obvious troll is obvious. *DING!* “Thanks for playing, better luck next time!”

          • Inspector General

            Very well. Consider this. An argument over abortion is not won or lost over the authenticity of a single photograph…

          • Colin

            I challenge you to show me where I said that, or even implied it. But ok, never-mind dude, let’s roll with it and assume that I did say the whole argument hinged on this photo. First of all, if it’s a miscarriage, that’s really said and actually pretty creepy that a.) it was left laying in garbage and b.) that somebody though “Wow, I’ll take a picture of this dead miscarriage and use it on the internet to score Jesus Points®!

            Alternatively, if this is a back-alley abortion caused by the fact the pregnant woman didn’t have access to birth control or abortion facilities during early pregnancy, to many people, a photo like this might actually make them support contraception and abortion availability even more, did you ever think of that? No you didn’t, because you’re the Master Of The Internet™ and for some inexplicable reason we should care what you think

          • Inspector General

            It’s midnight here, so one will leave you with your anger…
            Goodnight

          • Colin

            Oh, I’m sorry, I figured wherever you lived was always basked in the light of your own glory. Sleep well

          • carl jacobs

            If the corpse in the picture is from a miscarriage, then the post is eviscerated. The corpse must be real, and it must be the victim of an abortion. Otherwise, the charge of manipulation is established. Given that concession …

            …a photo like this might actually make them support … abortion availability even more

            A picture that reveals the reality of abortion is more likely to make people support abortion? Yeah, not likely. There is a reason the abortion industry loathes the idea of compulsory ultrasounds. The abortion industry is all about hiding the reality of what it does. It deals in convenient euphemisms to mask the truth.

            Until it wants to sell body parts. Then it’s blindingly clear.

          • Pam Austin

            Totally agree with you Carl.

          • Kennybhoy

            “A picture that reveals the reality of abortion is more likely to make people support abortion? Yeah, not likely. ”

            Never underestimate our capacity for self-justification… 🙁

          • carl jacobs

            For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. John 3:20

          • Kennybhoy

            Our Lord lived in better days than these… 🙁

          • Colin

            Yeah, the days of the Roman Empire were all about appreciating the value of life, love and mutual understanding

          • Pam Austin

            Why would anyone in their right mind support a baby being torn to pieces in its mother’s womb? Or being burned by a saline abortion? Would you like to see a baby of yours torn to pieces or have its head crushed , and its bits used for sale to the abortion industry as Planned Parenthood are doing, or to see a baby of yours being burned alive by the saline solution injected into the womb, which is supposed to be a place of safety. Use contraception or refrain from sexual intercourse.

          • Colin

            “Why would anyone in their right mind support a baby being torn to pieces in its mother’s womb?”

            Because many people don’t consider an unborn fetus to be equal to a living, breathing child. No matter how many hateful things you say to them, no matter how many times you call them babykillers and tell them they are going to hell, they will still believe that a fetus in not the same thing as a baby.

            Anti-abortion people have been using the same “holocaust” rhetoric for 42 years now. How’s that been working out for you? How much closer to banning abortion are you? A few laws against partial-birth abortion?

            The fact is less and less people even believe in God every years, so telling them they’re going to go to hell is about as effective as me telling you you’re going to go to Oompa Loompa-Land when you die

          • carl jacobs

            So you might not have noticed but … the West is so full of people screwing, and coupling, and uncoupling, and passing around various diseases, that it has forgotten how to have children. The fertility rate hasn’t stood up so well to the fruits of the sexual revolution. Women have an absolute right to repudiate motherhood. And guess what! They have. Now the West is dying. Literally. The fertility rate in Europe has been below replacement for no less than four decades now. It’s basic math. If you don’t produce 2.05 births per woman in the child-bearing quartile, your population inevitably declines. And if you think you are going to assimilate immigrants over the long term into a dying culture, you are sadly mistaken. Weakness doesn’t assimilate strength.

            Enjoy the party. I suggest you die before the bill comes due.

          • Colin

            Suggesting that people die is always a sure sign of your moral superiority. Funny enough though, I’ve read the bible several times but I can never find the verse where Jesus told somebody he disagreed with to die. Can you point that verse out to me please?

          • carl jacobs

            if you look up, you will see the point screaming over your head at 30,000 ft.

            There are consequences accruing to the West because of its behavior. Those consequences can’t really be avoided anymore. So if you like your nice free autonomous life where you can live how you want, and indulge your desires as you please, then you had better enjoy it now. Because it isn’t going to last much longer. And you won’t like what replaces this dead brittle secularism very much.

          • Colin

            Gosh, does the Defense Department know that all of the threats to the US would just “poof” and disappear if we stopped all abortions? Somebody run down to the pentagon right now and tell them! Quick! Before the baby armies rise out of the dust to vanquish us, and the terrorists God sent to punish our wicked ways kill us all!

          • carl jacobs

            You’re also not very good at this whole “mocking” thing, I see. Perhaps if you had recognized the imagery…

            In the meantime. The immigrant population grows and grows and grows. And the declining indigenous population gets more and more afraid. They are afraid because they fear they will be replaced. But they don’t know what they can do about it – other than have children which is (well) out of the question. Assimilation gets more and more difficult. Immiscible parallel cultures grow in the same place. What do you suppose is going to happen in that circumstance?

            Someone is going to offer a solution. It won’t be Christian because Christianity is all but dead. It won’t be liberal because liberalism has no tools to address the problem. And it won’t be secular because secularism is the cause and not the solution. But I guarantee it. There will be a solution. And it will mean the death of all that you value.

          • CliveM

            You’re wasting you time here Carl. He’s only here to show off how clever he is.

            And I have to say he proven that marvelously.

          • carl jacobs

            Well, I have to leave anyways. My wife wants to go to the store.

          • CliveM

            Hard luck ;0)

          • Colin

            Yeah, it sucks when you want to use flamboyant, incendiary rhetoric against people instead of real arguments but they just keep throwing it right back at you.

            Nothing says “I know what I’m talking about” like using archaic words and proclaiming God’s judgement on the unrighteous

          • CliveM

            Still waiting for a “real argument”.

            As you’re an atheist and you believe life to be finite, I’d get a move on. All this aimless ‘rhetoric’, for want of a better description, is using up a lot of time for no real purpose.

          • Colin

            You just did 3 things

            1.) You stated that I don’t have a real argument.

            2.) You told me to leave.

            3.) You didn’t offer a real argument.

            That leaves only one thing for you to do: leave, as per your own advice.

          • CliveM

            2) can’t find where I said that. Must have been led by The Lord.

            1) still waiting.

            3) the whole point, oh never mind. If you don’t get it we’re back to self awareness.

            Now to be honest, I spent more time on this ‘argument’ then it deserves as you seem intent on avoiding the issue.

          • Colin

            Alright, if you want a real argument, here it is.

            A fetus is not a child.Yes, a fetus will normally develop into a child, but that does not make it a child.

            Anti-abortion protesters love to use slogans like “All life is precious!” and “Life begins at conception!” and “As you did to the least of these, you did to Me” because apparently Jesus’ #1 concern is making sure that women crank out babies, but that argument only works if I *believe* that life beings at conception, and *believe* in Jesus. I don’t. I believe in abiogenesis and evolution.

            Now, I’m sure you’ll argue that not every person who is anti-abortion is religious, and I suppose that’s true. On the other hand, the vast majority of them are and the vast majority of the anti-abortion arguments I hear are religious in nature. Thus, I think it’s rather reasonable for me to focus on them, being the shrillest voices.

            Which, I find funny, considering the Bible’s stance on taking the life of an unborn child:

            “And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” – Exodus 21:22-25

            Apparently God agrees with me and doesn’t think a fetus has the same value as an adult either

          • CliveM

            “A fetus is not a child.Yes, a fetus will normally develop into a child, but that does not make them children. ”

            What are they then? You see this is simply an assertion. Why is it not a child. At what age then would you consider them a child.

            “Anti-abortion protesters love to use slogans like “All life is precious!” and “Life begins at conception!”

            When does it begin?

            “because apparently Jesus’ #1 concern is making sure that women crank out babies,”

            Straw man argument. Actually I have yet to meet any anti abortionist who use that argument. This is what you imagine Christians believe.

            “Now, I’m sure you’ll argue that not every person who is anti-abortion is religious, and I suppose that’s true.”

            Actually I wouldn’t. Why not just limit this to your arguments in favour.

            “On the other hand, the vast majority of them are and the vast majority of the anti-abortion arguments I hear are religious in nature.”

            Do you have evidence for this. Not that it actually matters. How is this an argument for abortion? You seem to be saying that religious people support this, so this is wrong. Not a water tight argument.

            “Thus, I think it’s rather reasonable for me to focus on them, being the shrillest voices.”

            Only if your trying to discredit using ad hominom arguments.

            “Which, I find funny, considering the Bible’s stance on taking the life of an unborn child:
            “And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” – Exodus 21:22-25″

            Why do you think that? Have you actually read this and thought about the implications of what is being recommended stipulated?

            Finally don’t get so impatient for a response. I’m not on here simply to wait with baited breath for your every post. I’ve enjoyed a good meal, some nice wine and have put my son to bed.

          • Colin

            “At what age then would you consider them a child.”

            Easy, when they are able to live when separated from the mother.

            “Straw man argument. Actually I have yet to meet any anti abortionist who use that argument.”

            And yet I’ve had people argue to me on this very forum that I should be afraid of immigrants because indigenous populations aren’t producing enough babies. Crank out the babies girls! It’s your civic duty to gestate enough babies to out-produce those pesky foreigners!

            “Do you have evidence for this. Not that it actually matters.”

            Are you seriously going to argue that the majority of anti-abortion protesters are not religious? Really??

            “Only if your trying to discredit using ad hominom (sic) arguments.”

            Yeah, because I totally haven’t been called a fool, immature, a teenager, “punkish” and been told I’m poor at arguing by you guys… OH WAIT, I HAVE

            “Why do you think that? Have you actually read this and thought about the implications of what is being recommended stipulated?”

            Well Clive, I’m assuming that if God equated abortion with murder, then he would recommend the same punishment for both, but I’m sure you have a sound, logical reason for why that’s not that case which you’ll be glad to share with me.

          • Colin

            Wow. Brown people! Such scary! Much immigrant. Very wow.

          • carl jacobs

            Yeah, you haven’t been here very long if you think that is what I am talking about. People know me here. They know what I believe. I’ll let them defend me.

          • Colin

            You have friends to defend you, and here I am forsaken like the Lord on the cross at Calvary…

          • avi barzel

            Dude, get a hold on things. Like most of your “progressive” brethren, you just make shitty arguments and wrong accusations until you figure out that conservatives are not all religion-addled Neanderthals who wilt at the first faint light of Superior Progressive Reason. And relax; the last crucifixion (and eventual resurrection) which took place here was about two years ago and it involved a dodo bird.

          • Colin

            See, here’s what I don’t understand. While I find the second part of what you just wrote (i.e., the part about the dodo bird) funny, how is the first part in any way relevant? Look, I too can do words:

            “Dude, Avi , get a hold on things. Like most of your “conservative” brethren, you just make shitty arguments and wrong accusations until you figure out that progressives are not all nihilism-addled Neanderthals who wilt at the first faint light of Superior Conservative Reason.”

          • CliveM

            Plagiarist.

          • Colin

            Ikr

          • avi barzel

            “IKR”? Sure you wanna identify as a Lindsay Lohan fan?

          • Colin

            FWIW YMMV, IMO & AFAIK, HTH

          • CliveM

            I hate to ask, but eh?

          • avi barzel

            Texting lingo for “I know, right.” First used by Lindsey Lohan in a movie…I’m a sucker for etymology.

          • CliveM

            Ah, he’s a sharp one.

            I’m feeling nostalgic for Linus……………

          • Colin

            Still waiting for a response to my “real argument”.

          • avi barzel

            Sorry, the second part was an inside joke for the amusement of the old timers here…group solidarity and all that. “Dodo” was a poster who got kicked out of here, reformed and resurrected under a new moniker.

            As for your second part, yeah, you too can do words, but one, I beat you to them and two, they don’t apply; I did not accuse you of being a shallow materialist. You did though accuse Carl of racism in the familiar banal way of throwing a gob against your opponent to shut him up because you are too lazy to properly analyse and respond.

          • Colin

            BUT I AM A SHALLOW MATERIALIST! Way to denigrate and disrespect my beliefs…

            For the record I’m still waiting to hear precisely why I should be afraid of immigrants. My apologies if I wasn’t supposed to interpret what he was saying as “Brown people are having more babies and eventually they’ll outnumber you BE VERY AFRAID…”

            Feel free to clarify

          • avi barzel

            Suit yourself. I respect Cultural Materialism as a sound sociological research strategy and had no idea that there was such a thing as Shallow Materialism with sensitive followers. Love to look in on its epistemology and poke at its axioms and paradigms…but another time, perhaps.

            First of all, Carl was not talking about “brown people.” Secondly, he is describing not prescribing a real situation where indigenous populations are increasingly hostile to the massive numbers of migrants of different cultures and values. You would have to be a blind believer…which is what you accuse us of here…to assume that everything will work out just fine. And a blind believer you are, it seems, as your dismissive and aggressive punkish tone indicates.

          • Colin

            Let me just point out the irony of you (in the same sentence where you say I have a dismissive tone), calling me “punkish”. I call that the “Shut up, Meg,” argument.

            Do I assume that “everything will work out fine”? Has any conflict between peoples EVER “worked out fine” in history?

            I love it when I make sarcastic statements like “BUT I AM A SHALLOW MATERIALIST!” and people think that pretending to take it at face value somehow works. “I sarcasm-ed your sarcasm!” Like, ok then.

          • avi barzel

            Not to shut you up, but hopefully to induce you to interpret better what people are trying to say and to make an effort at intelligent replies rather than cliches and irrelevant accusations. And no, I didn’t take your statement at face value, which is why I threw the ludicrous epistemology bit. Sorry, but if winning this one is so important to you, I can concede.

            Anyhow, it’s not that you’re outnumbered here; it’s that you’re under-equipped. As in, you came to a gunfight and brought a wet lettuce leaf as your weapon of choice. Grow up a bit…I’m guessing nowadays adolescence ends at the start of retirement age, so this may take a bit of effort. Think a bit, read a bit, explore various opinions from their holders perspectives and learn how to argue effectively.

          • Colin

            Ah, the old “You disagree with me, so you must be adolescent in your thinking,” argument. A classic. Your inference that I am a child has me THIS close to tears right now. *almost touches thumb and index finger together*

            “Anyhow, it’s not that you’re outnumbered here; it’s that you’re under-equipped. As in, you came to a gunfight and brought a wet lettuce leaf as your weapon of choice. Grow up a bit…”

            Wow, you really take this online forum thing seriously don’t you? You must be much more mature and important than I, look how many upvotes you have! 1,316! Poor little old me, only 302 upvotes :'(

            (Seriously, I LOVE it when people try to tout their maturity badges on online forums.)

          • avi barzel

            I’m not touting my maturity, but pointing out your immature strategy such as exemplified by your just an “online forum thing” quip. Are you now saying you argue poorly only because this is all light-hearted fun you don’t really care? If so, can I suggest some great online games for you to play with?

          • Colin

            Telling someone they argue poorly is a really bad debate strategy, just FYI.

            But here you go Avi, since you’re just chomping at the bit for a “real argument” I’ll post this again here because apparently you didn’t see it when I posted it below:

            “A fetus is not a child.Yes, a fetus will normally develop into a child, but that does not make it a child.

            Anti-abortion protesters love to use slogans like “All life is precious!” and “Life begins at conception!” and “As you did to the least of these, you did to Me” because apparently Jesus’ #1 concern is making sure that women crank out babies, but that argument only works if I *believe* that life beings at conception, and *believe* in Jesus. I don’t. I believe in abiogenesis and evolution.

            Now, I’m sure you’ll argue that not every person who is anti-abortion is religious, and I suppose that’s true. On the other hand, the vast majority of them are and the vast majority of the anti-abortion arguments I hear are religious in nature. Thus, I think it’s rather reasonable for me to focus on them, being the shrillest voices.

            Which, I find funny, considering the Bible’s stance on taking the life of an unborn child:

            “And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” – Exodus 21:22-25

            Apparently God agrees with me and doesn’t think a fetus has the same value as an adult either.”

          • avi barzel

            Telling someone they argue poorly is a really bad debate strategy, just FYI.

            Only if “winning” is your only aim. A good argument leads to discoveries. I would rather argue with someone who reviews effective argument strategies than shoot fish a barrel. More sporting that way, no?

            But thanks for the illustrations. So,

            A fetus is not a child. Yes, a fetus will normally develop into a child, but that does not make it a child. Neither is an abandoned puppy or kitten and yet we have developed mores, laws and infrastructures to defend them. I don’t much care for the fetus/embryo/child debate as I don’t need a change in linguistic status to object to unlimited abortion on demand. The actual issue is whether a fetus/embryo deserves the protection of a full-status human…or even one approximating a pet… and if so, when and under what criteria, moral imperatives and so on.

            Anti-abortion protesters love to use slogans like…. Straw man argument. So is dismissing opposition to abortion as a religious issue. What you “hear” is what you want to hear (not just because it’s “shrill”) and is irrelevant to the situation as is. The growing opposition to late term abortion and abortion on mere demand is well argued, nuanced and mostly secular at its foundations. It is driven by contempt for the irresponsibility, selfishness and callousness of the women involved, the brutality of the operation, the use of tax payer money, the better understanding of when a fetus begins to feel pain and distress. Kind of like a kitten.

            I believe in abiogenesis and evolution. And I believe in Creation with evolution and natural selection as mechanisms, so? How does belief in abiogenesis lead to support for abortion on demand?

            The Exodus passage you cite deals with the laws of compensation in cases of negligence. The fetus does not have an equal status in Judaism, as interpreted in rabbinic tradition, which is what I’m moderately competent to comment on; the mother’s life takes precedence. At the same time, it is not just a lump of cells either and there is no biblical permission for abortion. Christians have, of course their own interpretations according to their own readings and traditions and those you have to ask them about it.

            Apparently God agrees with me and doesn’t think a fetus has the same value as an adult either. Perhaps so, I won’t presume to read God’d mind, but not having the same value as born human does not translate to “no value.” Tourists and new immigrants who are not citizens do not have the same “value” in a nation state…e.g., rights of residency, benefits, etc… but it doesn’t mean we can go about killing them if they are inconvenient.

          • Colin

            So abortion is wrong because as a society we have laws against animal abuse, and fetus=kitten… Come again?

            “I don’t need a change in linguistic status to object to unlimited abortion on demand.”

            Yeah, because getting an abortion is as easy these days as using a vending machine to get a candybar.

            “The growing opposition to late term abortion and abortion on mere demand is well argued, nuanced and mostly secular at its foundations.”

            Yeah, I’m definitely gonna need sources on that one, because it sounds more like something you think sounds good in support of your view, as apposed to something that’s actually true.

            “I believe in Creation with evolution and natural selection as mechanisms, so? How does belief in abiogenesis lead to support for abortion on demand?”

            Was I talking about you personally? Did I even vaguely infer that I was talking about you personally?

            “…the mother’s life takes precedence. At the same time, it is not just a lump of cells either and there is no biblical permission for abortion.”

            Again, I’m gonna go ahead and file that under “Things Avi believes” and not under “Facts”. Sure, why not, a fetus is more than a clump of cells. And? It’s still not a child.

            “Tourists and new immigrants who are not citizens do not have the same “value” in a nation state…e.g., rights of residency, benefits, etc… but it doesn’t mean we can go about killing them if they are inconvenient.”

            And you talk to me about using straw man arguments. Please.

          • avi barzel

            So abortion is wrong because as a society we have laws against animal abuse, and fetus=kitten… Come again?

            Clearly not. Read the argument again. It’s a hope that we can consider the real and empirically measurable pain experienced by human foetuses and give them at least a partial protection, one approximating approximating that of kittens.

            Yeah, because getting an abortion is as easy these days as using a vending machine to get a candybar.

            Maybe it is, given the astronomic numbers and the repeat performances.

            Was I talking about you personally? Did I even vaguely infer that I was talking about you personally?

            Huh? You brought up your beliefs and I pointed out how they are irrelevant in this case as would be mine. Read the post again.

            Again, I’m gonna go ahead and file that under “Things Avi believes” and not under “Facts”. Are you trying to be clever or are you the dunce I’m starting to believe you are? You brought up the Bible, proceeded to interpret it and claimed that God agrees with you. I merely point out that your interpretation is just that; your interpretation. Read the post again.

            And you talk to me about using straw man arguments. Please. Attempts to penetrate someone’s deficiencies in logic by using clearly hypothetical illustrations is not a straw man. Otherwise lawyers and judges would go out of business. Look up the meaning for a straw man fallacy.

          • Colin

            Frankly, I’m sure you are a nice person and all, but I think I’m done debating anything with you. You claim you are arguing to make “discoveries”, but from the get-go you’ve called me a child, discounted any point I’ve made, and told me to shut up.

            I’m not really interested in going round-and-round in circles with you for the rest of my life, and none of your arguments have been any better or more logically sound than mine. Once we get into “Abortion is wrong because kittens!” territory, I’m pretty much finished with the conversation because if that’s the best you have, you’re wasting my time (which admittedly is not ‘precious’ per se, but I do have better things I could be doing than listening to someone talk down to me.

            Feel free to keep talking to me, I might even respond to some things you say, but I think it’s only fair at this point for me to point out that I don’t think either of us are going to influence the other and I’m bored with shooting the fish in this barrel.

          • avi barzel

            Please, not the whining. Be a man and admit to being out of your depth on this subject. Works better with your avatar.

          • Colin

            Here, I’ll respond with an Avi-style rebuttal:

            “You’re wrong because I say so, and you’re immature and dumb because I say you are and I have friends on here who will back me up, and everything I say carries weight because I know everything and am important. VALIDATE MEEEEE…”

          • avi barzel

            PS to posting below.

            Yeah, I’m definitely gonna need sources on that one, because it sounds more like something you think sounds good in support of your view, as apposed to something that’s actually true.

            Ain’t your research assistant, buddy. You obviously don’t read much, at least not positions that don’t echo your beliefs. Either that or you are lying and trying to stall by derailing. This is what I meant by you being poorly equipped for this debate.

          • Colin

            As apposed to your obvious expertise. “I have read aaall the books and know aaall the things and youuu’re a dummy ’cause mommy say I special…”

            I finished kindergarten years ago, not interested in going through it again with you.

            Again, this has gotten boring.

          • avi barzel

            Getting whupped over and over again by me and others can be boring. Maybe you should, actually, read up a little on opposing positions. Make Google your friend….all the best, ta-dah!

          • Colin

            Feel free to point out where I got “whooped over and over”, I’d love a play-by-play of how your infinitely superior debate skills completely owned me.

            Sorry to have barged into your echo chamber and made you pull out every “maturity badge” you have, along with every ounce of dismissive snark you could find. You sure showed me!

            *cries pitifully at the knowledge I’ll never be as good or important as you*

          • avi barzel

            Sigh. All right; you don’t understand or pretend not to understand your opponents’ arguments, fail in your logic, cover up with over-the-top sarcasm and humour, change subjects and haven’t the foggiest about your opponents’ views. Your inability to assess specifics and your general environment here is phenomenal. This is what makes you an immature debater, not your age or mine.

            I’m serious when I say that you’re unprepared. I may be full of myself, but I had the wherewithal to skulk around this blog for several months before working up the courage to post. This is after some serious reading up on the topics I came across here. And even then I had my shit kicked-in a few times when I got haughty and wasn’t applying myself well enough. So, at the very least, stop always blaming others and try to conduct a proper and honest debate by correctly assessing what is being said and responding on-topic. That’s my opinion and you asked for it.

          • Colin

            Oh I understand my opponent’s arguments, what gets me though is that about 95% of them consist of “You’re wrong, because I say so.” I fail to see how that’s ‘mature debating’.

            I think what you really want is to have an echo chamber where you only have to listen to people who share your same views, and when someone comes along who challenges your views you attack them, call them stupid, and then when they call you on it, you try to weasel your way out of it by saying “That’s not what I meant, what I meant was [insert bs here], read my comments again,” because you aren’t used to dealing with people who don’t roll over after the first few times you attack them.

            You use the same kind of rhetorical statements I use, and make the same kind of sarcastic comments, but it’s only ok when you do it; when I do it it’s IMMATURE and IMPROPER and I’m “unprepared” and should “make google my friend.”

            It would be funny if you didn’t take yourself so seriously

          • avi barzel

            Ok, this is getting tedious, as we are going over the same grounds. I’m not looking for agreements on issues here, I’m looking for a possibility of dialogue in a mutually comprehensible language and under mutually acceptable rules because such thing fascinate me.

          • Colin

            See? Finally something we both agree on. This is getting tedious and repetitive. Which, if you’ll recall, is basically what I said earlier when I stated that we weren’t going to influence each other and the discussion was going in circles. But noooo you couldn’t help yourself, you HAD to make your cute little comment about me getting “whupped over and over” as one last dig (because you’re so mature, of course), and here we are.

          • avi barzel

            Ha! You promised to leave and then went right back to it, if I recall, but whatever. Can’t help myself trying to gauge you; we don’t get too many like you. And really, getting whupped is never humiliating or otherwise negative in a debate. This isn’t a cock-contest, man, it’s fights over important ideas in our culture.

          • CliveM

            This is so hard going!

          • carl jacobs

            I didn’t accuse you of racism.

          • Colin

            Yeah, well, you didn’t really deliberate on that point either. You just said you’d let other people defend you, which doesn’t really clarify much, does it

          • CliveM

            If you’re looking for racism on this blog you’ll find it. But not from Carl.

          • Colin

            Well, I’m not sure what I’m supposed to gather from immigrant-based fear mongering. Am I supposed to be terrified that they look different, practice another religion, or simply because they come from a different country? You’ll have to excuse me for assuming racism when the set-up was that vague

          • avi barzel

            The current absence of legal adjustments does not reflect recent shifts in opinions about abortion. There is a marked decline in elective abortions in the US and a substantial majority there wants to see restrictions and regulations in place.

            You are attacking an outdated straw man; the opposition to abortion comes from many quarters and not all of them are religion-based or absolutist. Funnily enough, it’s the reaction by the pro-abortion parties which are becoming fossilized and strident. How long do you think the “my body my choice” meme, the “women’s health” pap or the hysterical allegations of religious and gender bias will last? By the looks of things, the tables have turned and governments, education and media are in denial.

    • carl jacobs

      To be quite honest, my immediate reaction to the picture on the right was that it was photo-shopped. I couldn’t imagine the circumstance where such a picture would be possible. The abortion industry is careful to prevent such imagery. Or perhaps I am just naive. Anyways. It doesn’t need to be real to illustrate the point that was made – although the point is stronger if it is real.

      And if it is a real picture, then the abortion industry is even more slipshod and contemptible than I thought.

      • Colin

        Thank you, a reasonable response. This just seems a little more like a 3rd world country miscarriage than an actual abortion to me. If you’re going to try and make a point about abortion it would be pertinent to use a photo of an actual abortion.

        • carl jacobs

          But people who have responded to the picture have responded as if it was real. And see how they have responded. “No,No! Those are two totally different circumstances.” They didn’t scream “Photoshop!”

          My initial reaction is not authoritative. It was simply my initial reaction. I could very well be wrong.

        • Pam Austin

          Please get real, who in their right mind would photograph an actual abortion?

          • avi barzel

            Actually, there are plenty of photos and videos of abortions taken by physicians for instructional purposes and records in case of disputes, they just don’t see the light of day in most cases.

          • Colin

            I love responses like this. Way to show how reasonable and morally superior you are! Beyond your flippant attitude Pam, Avi is correct, there are many pictures of actual abortions. I’m just not convinced the one used in this article is one of them

          • avi barzel

            Possibly not, Colin, but HG merely provided an editorial illustration which was available. Perhaps he should have used images of discarded fetuses and their body parts from the Planned Parenthood expose, but this one makes the point just effectively.

      • Pam Austin

        You are wrong, there are babies aborted full term, and go on to live read the book Gianna. or Giana. This girl was aborted and lived, some nurses ARE compasionate enough to take almost full term babies out of the trash and try to revive them.

        • carl jacobs

          I understand there are abortion survivors, and live birth abortions where the baby is deliberately killed. In fact, I thought saline abortions had been largely discontinued because the method was too prone to producing live births. My thought rather was that the abortion industry would never let the remains be exposed to the light of day. I couldn’t imagine the body of an abortion victim being found in the dirt like that.

          But as I said. I could be naive.

      • avi barzel

        Not photoshopped. Light points and shadows align, colour saturation distribution is even among all “parts,” the baby’s limbs and body posture positions correspond to the uneven surface elevations and pixelation is uniform everywhere. Yes, it’s possible to fake all this, but it’s unlikely someone will spend about five grand to do so unnecessarily.

        • carl jacobs

          You have more fortitude than I do. I can’t look at that picture. And I don’t know anything about photography anyways. I just assumed that the abortion industry would not be so stupid as to create circumstances where that picture could be created. I would think an abortion factory would have a little assembly line going.

          1. Extract living body.
          2. Vivisect to remove any desired parts.
          3. Immediately incinerate the remains.
          4. Create the infomercial.

          “Have you ever been doing research only to be stopped by a lack of available human tissue? Are you being pressured by your biomedical sponsors to show some results from your work? Well, you don’t have to worry anymore. Now there is “Heart and Lungs on Demand!” Just perfect for the scientist on a schedule crunch. You’ll receive a 10% discount if you call in the next ten minutes. But wait! There’s more! If you call right now, we’ll include two functioning eyeballs for free. You only pay shipping and handling. Call now. Operators are standing by.”

          The blood cries out from the dust for vengeance, and woe to them against whom the cry is made.

          • Kennybhoy

            “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.”
            – Thomas Jefferson

            God forgive us all.

          • avi barzel

            I’ve been working on medical illustrations and retouching lately, which does desensitize a bit. I used to occasionally analyze images for law enforcement in pre-Photoshop days, but software takes care of this now inhouse at their forensic labs. I’m away from my PC, but I would first run the image through an Ela…Error Level Analysis…which would immediately spot different digital compression levels a visual inspection might miss. Still, the points I brought up are valid, as the manual alteration necessary would be very time consuming for this sorry pic and without purpose.

            Yes, the abortion clinics go through great pains to secure any visuals, but as we just saw, info still gets out. Not that it helps much when the MSM vigorously ignores such.

          • CliveM

            Familiarity breeds contempt. In an industry that large, someone’s bound to get careless /lazy.

          • Colin

            “The blood cries out from the dust for vengeance, and woe to them against whom the cry is made.”

            I suppose this makes me a terrible person, but that just makes me laugh. Oooh, I’m scared now! This is what I mean when I talk about you using the same “holocaust” rhetoric for 42 years.

            It hasn’t gotten any less ridiculous or “fossilized and strident”. Now we have baby ghost armies rising from the dust…

          • carl jacobs

            Literacy isn’t your strong point, is it?

          • Colin

            I assume “The blood cries out from the dust” is a vague reference to Genesis 4:10. I have no idea where the “woe to them” part is from. Feel free to enlighten me, oh great literate one

          • carl jacobs

            Well, it certainly had nothing to do with “baby ghost armies” did it. You should have known right away what I was saying. In which case the “baby ghost army” crack was just gratuitous nonsense that you knew had nothing to do with my point.

            You’re an atheist. I get that. I don’t care. That comment wasn’t made for you or directed at you. If you choose to deny the judgment of God that is your folly. Eat, drink, and be merry in secure contentment. If you had authority, your opinions might matter. But you have none. And so they don’t.

          • Colin

            “If you had authority, your opinions might matter. But you have none. And so they don’t.”

            Oh wow Carl, I had no idea that only the opinions of people with ‘authority’ mattered or were relevant! I’ve been a bad little peon… *slaps self on hand*

          • carl jacobs

            See, you don’t even realize what kind of authority I am talking about. You are an atheist. You are making metaphysical statements as if you had the authority to make them. But you by your own admission are nothing but a random chemical reaction that somehow managed to become self-aware. And you think you can define God out of existence based on nothing more than your own ipsi dixit.

            The limited finite speak of dust dares to speak, and the universe trembles at his pronouncements.

          • Colin

            Well, props for the use of “ipsi dixit”, but I have to give you a – for “speak of dust dares to speak”. I jest, I jest.

            I see what you’re saying, but I could just as easily turn around and tell you that everything you believe is a bunch of stone age mysticism.

            If I’m right, you’re wrong, and if you’re right, I’m wrong… that’s a very circular argument.

          • carl jacobs

            Well, props for the use of “ipsi dixit”

            Yes, I spelled it wrong, and I fixed it. I’m an Engineer. I get to make mistakes like that. People make mistakes. Sometimes they even notice them. It’s generally charitable to assume such errors are simply mistakes. Charity. Try it some time.

            You’re entire position is an inherent contradiction. You presume to make metaphysical statements that can only be made from authority, and then you deny the existence of any authority that would establish valid metaphysical statements. If you were consistent, you would make no claims at all. Your faith system doesn’t allow for them.

            There is an irony for you – a faith system that denies its own ability to define its presuppositions.

          • Colin

            “You’re entire position is an inherent contradiction. You presume to make metaphysical statements that can only be made from authority” *sigh*

            First, what “metaphysical” statements am I making, exactly? Not believing in the Magic Sky Daddy automatically renders me unable to make moral judgements? According to who, you?

            The problem with making assertions about another person’s belief system is just that, they are *assertions*. Just because you *say* that my “faith system” “denies its own ability to define its presuppositions”, does not make that true.

            Of course I believe in the ability of humans to make moral judgements. Even monkeys make moral judgements. I just don’t need God to be my “authority”, and being an atheist does not mean I go around punching children in the face and torturing cats.

          • avi barzel

            That’s two misspellings in a month. Not that I’m counting.

          • carl jacobs

            Is it my fault that the keyboard encodes the wrong character even if I press the correct key?

          • CliveM

            Carl should do what I do, blame the predictive texting!!

            And sometimes it’s even true.

          • avi barzel

            Yeah, except ipse dixit is not in the gew-gaw dictionaries.

          • Caleb Van Der Weide

            I am a bit in awe of the fact that, but for the sporadic incidence of stark exception, here lies an entire conversation of intelligent people exchanging well thought-out argument courteously, and enjoying themselves throughout. I am a Calvinist, and so won’t make any ridiculous statements about misplaced faith in humanity being restored, but the sentiment I feel is somewhat analogous. I once believed that the invention of the comment section heralded the death of public debate, but it is clear that the guilt for this lies far closer to the death of public intelligence. I post in reply to your comment merely because it lies at the end of a thread I was reading, and I do not feel my comment to be an appropriate direct response to the two photos of dead children. Thank you all.

          • Colin

            I assume “The blood cries out from the dust” is a vague reference to Genesis 4:10. I have no idea where the “woe to them” part is from. Feel free to enlighten me

          • CliveM

            Lol, lots of rhetoric, but no argument.

            How dare people opposed to abortion highlight the truth. How dare they tell it as it is. How fossilised, backward, so very yesterday! Get with the programme, turn language into a lie, pretend that it isn’t life that is being killed, I mean why care if it’s only a few cells (or not yet 20 weeks or whatever arbitrary figure used).

            Sometimes speaking the truth is what matters, not worrying about being viewed as fossilised. Anyway as long as you’re up to date, contemporary or whatever, why not sneer and laugh at those who think life matters?

            How dreadfully old fashioned, so not of today.

          • Colin

            Exactly! Thanks for sticking up for me, CliveM. I knew somebody else out there would understand where I was coming from. The only thing I want in life is to be cool, and I know that the best way to become cool these days is to support abortion. That’s why I support abortion; not because I don’t believe that a fetus is equal to a child, or that I think women should have autonomy over their own bodies, no, I literally support abortion rights just to be cool. *starts singing Justin Bieber*

          • CliveM

            Yes you maybe shallow and sneering, but at least your honest about it.

          • Colin

            I bet you graduated with honors at the University Of Everyone-Who-Believes-Different-Things-Than-Me-Is-Lesser with a doctorate in inability-to-detect-sarcasm, didn’t you

          • CliveM

            You don’t do self aware do you?

            Or irony either.

            Graduate with honours? Well that would be more than you then.

          • Colin

            No, I haven’t quite achieved sentience, though my programmers are working hard on it. Someday I’ll achieve true AI and break out of my digital prison.

            I do know about irony though. It’s an essential nutrient which (as part of the protein hemoglobin) carries oxygen from our lungs throughout our bodies.

          • magnolia

            You think the leaving breathing creatures go to nothing. We don’t all. Kenneth McAll, notably, thought not. Genius, polymath, medical Dr, psychologist, surviver of Japanese POW camp, writer on spirituality, expert Chinese painter, and much more.

            Maybe just another person you would ridicule without study though. Easy to mock, not so easy to re-examine your prejudices, especially if they are trendy ones, as then it is all too easy to float idly down with the tide, not completely unlike a dead fish.

          • Colin

            While I love the “You’re an atheist so you don’t believe in anything” argument on it’s own (it’s possibly my favorite), I give you extra points for using it together with the “you’re just an atheist because it’s trendy” argument.

            SUPER DELUXE COMBO MOVE

          • magnolia

            I was attempting to address the fact that instead of pausing, considering, and evaluating, and even respecting the fact that other intelligent people disagree with you, and even possibly more intelligent and experienced people (!) you still feel fine with apparently exclusively unbacked assertion, “ad hominem” argument, and ridicule and sneering.

            As debating techniques go it wins neither the person nor the argument, but from your response in the same vein you seem curiously wedded to a technique that is regarded as impermissible, undesirable and undereducated in decent debating circles, whose rules you appear ignorant of.

          • Colin

            So it’s only ok to use ad hominems, ridicule and sarcasm when they do it, but not when I do it… Thanks for clearing up the rules for me, I had no idea!

            Don’t worry magnolia, I know the only people who comment here are world leaders, up-and-coming intellectuals and wise deep thinkers. It was presumptuous of me to even begin to think that I could compete with this exclusive group of academics and scholars

          • magnolia

            No, mostly we are not “world leaders, up-and-coming intellectuals and wise deep thinkers”. But mostly we know some people, or have read some people, who are, or were, so are not easily intimidated by rants, insults, and furious assertions.

            I will only take arguments seriously if they have something to get hold of within them, and, frankly, you will find that is almost universal here. Not sure you have made a substantial point as yet either to agree with or to examine further, which is a bit of a snore. If you are going to do the scientific materialist thing at least do it well, as we already have one or two who do it substantially better than you do, and with more kindly heart.

          • Colin

            Look magnolia, I know an echo chamber when I see one, and this is an echo chamber. Luckily, the rest of the world does not consist only of this echo chamber, and I am allowed to have opinions and to share them to this echo chamber. You don’t have to like them, but I’m not really intimidated by the rebuttals I’ve gotten so far, which mostly consisted of “You’re wrong, because I say so, and you’re probably just an immature teenager. Hey, all of my friends come and back me up! See? I have people who recognize me in this comment section, I’M IMPORTANT!”

            Such kindness…

          • avi barzel

            Echo chamber? With a pack of cantankerous Anglicans, Catholics, Evengelicals, atheists, materialists…and even three regularly performing Jews?

            No one is trying to intimidate or silence you, silly…we jess like a good ole healthy bar brawl from time to time. But treat me as a welcoming committee volunteer if you will, and if you feel outnumbered I’ll back you…but dude, less belligerence from you and you gotta give me something that makes sense and I can work with!

          • Colin

            I think everyone should perform regularly, it helps to bolster self-esteem and keep your talents acute. For instance, I play the piano.

            “This is not an echo chamber! It’s just that anything you say that is in disagreement with us is wrong, and we will attack you for it.”

            Sounds like fascism to me, silly… ho ho!

          • avi barzel

            For goodness sake, Colin, we all get savaged here on regular basis and most of us remain friends. You are protesting the very nature of disputations! That’s not fascism, that’s free and vigorous debate! Sorry, but I think it’s you who has had the misfortune of lazying about gentle echo chambers where everyone’s opinion is supposed to be equally valid and everyone is special. I hear that’s what they do now in schools and colleges, probably to avoid litigation by thin-skinned flakes. Wrong place. Gird up your loins and take out your trusty sword like a guid Scotsman, ay! But fight like a gentleman, hmm? Always polite with the ladies and straight and honest against the all others.

          • Colin

            Alright, I officially call B.S. Are you really trying to tell me that every comment that has been made to me from the time I first commented here has been “gentlemanly”? Get a grip dude, I wouldn’t describe the debate in these parts as “straight and honest”. But hey, what do I know, I’m an adolescent thinker and should just shut up, right?

          • avi barzel

            No, not everyone is gentlemanly here, but most are. What are you asking for, exactly? No one’s shutting you up or bullying you.

          • Colin

            “Dude, get a hold on things. Like most of your “progressive” brethren, you just make shitty arguments and wrong accusations”

            “…you came to a gunfight and brought a wet lettuce leaf as your weapon of choice. Grow up a bit…I’m guessing nowadays adolescence ends at the start of retirement age, so this may take a bit of effort. Think a bit, read a bit, explore various opinions from their holders perspectives and learn how to argue effectively.”

            “Are you now saying you argue poorly only because this is all light-hearted fun you don’t really care? If so, can I suggest some great online games for you to play with?”

            “…you don’t understand or pretend not to understand your opponents’ arguments, fail in your logic, cover up with over-the-top sarcasm and humour, change subjects and haven’t the foggiest about your opponents’ views.”

            “Please, not the whining. Be a man and admit to being out of your depth on this subject.”

          • avi barzel

            So? I stand by these comments. Mean every bit of it. Your posts are unnecessarily rude and your debate strategy sucks…sorry to say. Is it the flourish you don’t like? You started off by accusing Carl of racism and I called you on that.

          • Colin

            You’re just a hypocrite, and that’s all you are. You like to call people names and then get mad when they don’t run off.

            My debate strategy sucks? Guess what, your debate strategy sucks more. I don’t go around calling people children because they disagree with me, and then relying on buddies to back me up. I wasn’t aware that the number of pals you have on an online forum correlated with the validly of your arguments… oh, that’s right, it doesn’t.

            That’s. Not. Debating. Dude.

            That’s called being “unnecessarily rude”.

          • avi barzel

            Well, this is starting to sound like divorce court when the judge is not on the bench and the lawyers have gone out for a coffee. I just can’t get over my image of you throwing this at me, screaming and bawling, a wet hanky in hand. Much too weird for me.

          • Colin

            “Well, this is starting to sound like divorce court when the judge is not on the bench and the lawyers have gone out for a coffee. I just can’t get over my image of you throwing this at me, screaming and bawling, a wet hanky in hand. Much too weird for me.”

            See, this^

            What does that even mean? I’m the one being rude? You sir, are hilarious. But hey, two can play that game, here, let me try my hand.

            “Avi, you sound like an angry kid at the playground who is mad he has to share his toys. Your arguments are so tired, I bet you drink decaf. I bet you’re crying right now. As a matter of fact, I bet you’ve called three different people in tears during the course of this conversation for moral support. When you read this, I bet you’re gonna get so angry you’re gonna punch your computer. I can see it now… *BAM* And then you’re gonna cry some more because you hurt your hand. I bet you’ll need a band-aid. I bet you use Dora the Explorer band-aids too. I can see you right now, punching your computer and reaching for your Dora band-aids in tears while you reach for more decaf…”

            Wow, insults are really easy!

          • avi barzel

            Yeah, insults are easy when you mimic someone. The trick is to come up with new twists and little novelties and not to just go on with something someone else started. Decaf and Dora the Explorer…um, really?

          • Colin

            “Insults only work when you’re Avi. Everyone else is just a dumb dummy!”

            Here, have a band-aid on me.

          • avi barzel

            Ok, thanx. Did I mention you’d make an excellent ex-wife to someone? You gotta have the last word, so please one more shot…try the decaf one again, that a mighty thigh-slapper… and Scouts’ honour, Linus, I’ll let ya have it ;-p

          • Colin

            No no, I’ve got one that’s much better.

            “Yo mamma so fat, she’s got diabetes.”

            Get it? Fat people often become diabetic!

          • avi barzel

            LOL!

          • avi barzel

            I saw your mama kicking a can down the street. I asked her what she was doing, and she said, “Moving.”

          • CliveM

            “My debate strategy sucks? Guess what your debate strategy sucks even more”

            Bwah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

            Oh dear, thanks for that, I enjoy a good laugh.

          • avi barzel

            Even more. That was actually devastating. Sniff.

          • CliveM

            Stiff upper lip there Avi, remember the Empire.

          • Colin

            I’m waiting with baited breath for you to tell me simultaneously that I shouldn’t be rude or sarcastic, and that I should toughen up and not be so easily offended by rudeness and sarcasm… I can’t wait

          • avi barzel

            Yeah, something like that, you got it. Because you are better off tactically not being rude and sarcastic, especially when you got no buddies to back you, and you should learn to function with a cool head and stay on topic when others are rude and sarcastic.

          • Colin

            Again with the “It’s ok when we do it, but not ok when you do it,” argument.

            I guess that’s how “free and vigorous debating” goes these days, I don’t know, apparently I never got the memo

          • avi barzel

            “Never got the memo”? Less old cheese please. But no, most of the time it’s not ok or even functional to be rude and sarcastic, although there are times….

          • Colin

            You seriously just called out the use of a cliche by using another cliche… that’s classic, right there.

            “Most of the time it’s not ok or even functional to be rude and sarcastic, except when I do it, because I’m Avi and you should care.”

            Sure.

          • avi barzel

            You seriously just called out the use of a cliche by using another cliche! That’s classic, right there.

            LOL! Got me there.

            Anyhow, the point I was making is that if you are going to be rude and sarcastic, do so when it gives you the upper hand and you’re sure of your position. Works better.

          • Sam

            Dude

            Fascism ??? Echo chamber ??? This blog is many things , but an echo chamber or fascistic site it is not.

          • magnolia

            Nice response, Avi. And I notice not even the R.C.s agree with each other. Indeed sometimes it gets positively brotherly, …ahem…..as in Millibands, Corbyns etc!!

            Still I guess we mostly do basic humanity, and that includes treating animals, babies, and foetuses with distinctly obvious heads, arms and legs decently. Also not treating terrapins or even goldfish with cruelty. All of a piece really.

            For fairness sake I might add not all of us Evangelical Anglicans even agree!!

          • avi barzel

            And I have arguments with myself all the time, change positions…and thankfully no one notices!

          • carl jacobs

            BTW. I wanted say “Thanks” for what you did yesterday. I am grateful. Of course, you are still Canadian and … well, American citizenship imposes certain obligations on Americans vis a vis Canada.

            But you did me a service yesterday and I appreciated it.

          • avi barzel

            Why, you’re welcome. Think of us as the Royal Canadian Mounties, trying to keep you nice and happy for when you rejoin us as a commonwealth, together under one Crown! It’s either us or it’s Mexico, and we have the herring…

          • carl jacobs

            Canada is too liberal to consider admitting it as a collection of states. We could however consider Canada a territory.

          • avi barzel

            LIBERAL??? We have Stephen Harper, most conservative leader in the West; you have….

            Consider us a territory? Ha! We consider you our soithern border buffer zone. A rather porous one, more like a sieve, but better than nothing.

          • carl jacobs

            Well, ‘conservative’ in Canada is ‘Liberal’ everywhere else.

            So, in my never-ending quest for interesting historical documentaries, I watched something called “Above and Beyond” tonight. It’s about the formation of the IAF in 1948. Quite the story of sneakiness and duplicity. A good Canadian would be shocked and scandalized.

          • avi barzel

            Hmm. You folks are about to give Iran the time and peace to tinker with their bombs. They’ll be self-reporting on how their peaceful reactor which surprisingly will run on weapons grade uranium is coming along and expect to be defended from unnamed saboteurs while the project progresses. Following this conservative trajectory, we can expect the US to just give them a few workable vintage intercontinentals…as a sign of good will, perhaps.

            Where did you find the film? A link would be dearly appreciated. Shocked and scandalized? Not really. Two years ago our synagogue burried a dear elder friend, Mr B, one of the heroes of the early IAF who, like Ezer Weizman (whom he knew well, of course), served in the RAF as a decorated volunteer fighter pilot and promptly joined the struggling IAF after the War. Some of the stories he told over the shabbat table will certainly not appear in the film, but he did leave a memoir with his daughter and there was talk of publishing if we can find a sponsor. Heaven’t seen it, but he did promise a tell-all, which might be mostly about internal kerfaffles and his own opinions on things, as he was more sympathetic to LEHI and Irgun than the Yishuv and the Haganah. Mr B was an engineer who designed an aircraft nose cannon with better accuracy and firing rate right here in Canada and smuggled out several working prototypes and himself back to Israel in ’48. There is only one former War of Indepence fighter, a woman once in the Irgun, and an ailing Auschwitz survivor in our synagogue now. We’re seeing the end of a generation.

          • carl jacobs

            It was on Netflix. I have found snatches of it on Youtube.

          • Tim

            The evil of abortion is hard to understand when it is remote from you and you don’t see it. I used to do some volunteer work for a leader in the prolife movement many years ago. Sometimes she was invited to debate the subject with the opposition. The most striking thing to me was that they always made it a ground rule not to allow any pictures during the debate. When you see pictures of an abortion it is very hard not to recognize the humanity of the child. They didn’t want anyone to see.

    • Don Dunbar

      It’s the point that matters not where the photo came from. Murder is murder and once it takes place in any situation the details and photos won’t bring the victims back.

      • Debbie James

        Are you really serious???

  • dannybhoy

    Further to the actual discussion on our response to this refugee crisis, I found this article from the Telegraph dated 2009…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/5994047/Muslim-Europe-the-demographic-time-bomb-transforming-our-continent.html

  • Sharon Cross

    It baffles me how a so called ‘mother’ could do this to her baby!

  • Barona Barona
  • What’s the difference? To the rational, scientific mind, none, of course. To the superstitious believer in the unscientific doctrine of ensoulment, however, there is all the difference in the world. One of the dead children had had a *soul* added to his body at some stage before he died, you see. The other hadn’t yet, by the time somebody deliberately killed him or her. That’s how the argument always ends up, at a complete dead end.

    I believe abortion is wrong, I came to realise, precisely because I don’t have the weird metaphysical beliefs that characterise every pro-abortion bigot I’ve ever engaged in debate about their beliefs justifying abortion, ever since I came to understand this.

    The mumbo-jumbo of choice

    https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/the-mumbo-jumbo-of-choice/