Yahoo & Google join ranks of Holocaust deniers

Liveaction reports that Yahoo and Google are joining forces with the abortionists to decry pro-Life ads, because they show up at the top of searches for abortion. However, it’s interesting that they aren’t opposed to the pro-abortion ads that show up when women search on the web for help with pregnancy:

“To call a pregnancy resource center misleading but not remove ads such as this one, which any woman who was scared and looking for help might call since it’s a top ad hit, is, at best, tunnel vision. More likely, however, it’s a bow to pressure from the squeakiest wheel, the abortion industry.

The tactics of the abortion industry have always been to lure women in with a promise of help, which ushering them toward the promise of death. Internet searches to this all the time. A search for “adoption pregnant help” on brings up Planned Parenthood on the first page of results.

Screen Shot 2014-05-08 at 10.28.45 PM

The ads are placed, search words targeted, all by those who know media and marketing. Now pro-abortion groups have decided to advance their cause of death by attacking those who promote life.”

Godfather of Abortion Inc. Converted to Pro-Life

At Catholic Education.org, the godfather of American abortion, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, confesses he’s had a change of heart:

“I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions. This legitimizes my credentials to speak to you with some authority on the issue. I was one of the founders of the National Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Laws in the U.S. in 1968.

A truthful poll of opinion then would have found that most Americans were against permissive abortion. Yet within five years we had convinced the Supreme Court to issue the decision which legalized abortion throughout America in 1973 and produced virtual abortion on demand up to birth.

How did we do this? It is important to understand the tactics involved because these tactics have been used throughout the western world with one permutation or another, in order to change abortion law

The First Key Tactic was to capture the media

We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority.

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public.

The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law.

Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization.

[Lila: Again, concealed from the public is the fact that the US has an abortion policy far more radical than many socialist countries, like India, where late-term abortions would be considered murder. Here, they are perfectly legal, and, as the Kermit Gosnell story shows, they are far more prevalent than the media admits.

Moreover, the Emily Letts  abortion snuff video shows that abortion is used instead of contraception or responsible prevention.

Indeed, the video was most likely disseminated to normalize and promote the practice of abortion as contraception. There is no doubt in my mind that the intention is not to sever and destroy the “stigma of abortion,” as the media claimed, but to sear and cauterize the mother’s conscience, to cut the umbilical cord of maternal affection, to pervert the energetic bond between mother and child.

In that sense, and in many others, the video was filled with “occult” religious clues, but it was the religion of black witchcraft, not Christianity or Judaism.]

The Second Key Tactic was to Play the Catholic Card

We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its “socially backward ideas” and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as “we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics” and “Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform.”

And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favour of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were (and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists’ opinions.

[Lila: A key element in this strategy was to infiltrate and subvert the Catholic church from within. Thus, the church was first demonized for excluding gays; then when the gays in the church contributed to the pedophilic abuse, the blame was shifted onto celibacy and Catholic teaching on celibacy, rather than onto the proclivities of the priests.

Celibacy was thus associated with a so-called pedophilic hierarchy of conservative males, thus discrediting it.]

The Third Key Tactic was the Denigration and Suppression of all Scientific Evidence that Life Begins at Conception

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions?

Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion.

[Lila: Actually, because of the trade in organs and fetal tissue, abortion is probably far more lucrative than that.  Kermit Gosnell apparently made something like $1500, not $300, from each abortion performed. That means roughly five times the figure above, or over $2 billion. This is just an extrapolation from media figures, of course.

The largest advocate of family planning services and the biggest provider of them, Planned Parenthood, relies largely on providing abortion to the public, not “other family services”:

“According to Planned Parenthood’s own apologist, Media Matters, its “total revenue from abortion services was approximately $164,154,000,” a year. Accordingly, over 51 percent of Planned Parenthood’s clinic income comes from abortion.

In addition to its $320.1 million in clinic income and $223.8 million in private donations, Planned Parenthood receives $487.4 million dollars a year from taxpayers.

Lila (continued): The liberal-left darling, Planned Parenthood, dispenses abortion pills in addition to abortion procedures, making the outfit the killer of over 300,000 children every year.

It is not coincidental that those children are mostly black, brown, and from the underclass, given that the mother of family-planning, Margaret Sanger, was a devoted eugenicist who wanted to control the birth-rate of the population and weed out “undesirables.”

Bernard Nathanson (cont):

It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.”

As a scientist I know, not believe,  that human life begins at conception. Although I am not a formal religionist, I believe with all my heart that there is a divinity of existence which commands us to declare a final and irreversible halt to this infinitely sad and shameful crime against humanity.”

Police-State Chronicles: Gay mafia forces Christians off TV

From Brutally honest:

The new tolerance… it’s spreading faster:

HGTV has canceled a pilot hosted by twin brothers with a history of preaching against homosexuality, abortion and divorce following backlash from fans.

“HGTV has decided not to move forward with the Benham Brothers’ series,” the network wrote on its Facebook page Wednesday.

Twins David and Jason Benham were scheduled to premiere “Flip It Forward” in October, which would have focused on a new deserving family every episode transforming a fixer-upper into their dream home.

But the devout Christian brothers have a history of supporting their church’s views against gay rights and reproductive choice. In 2012, the Benhams rallied in Charlotte, N.C. to support a constitutional amendment within the state to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The brothers have responded with this statement:

The first and last thought on our minds as we begin and end each day is; have we shined Christ’s light today? Our faith is the fundamental calling in our lives, and the centerpiece of who we are. As Christians we are called to love our fellow man. Anyone who suggests that we hate homosexuals or people of other faiths is either misinformed or lying.

Over the last decade, we’ve sold thousands of homes with the guiding principle of producing value and breathing life into each family that has crossed our path, and we do not, nor will we ever discriminate against people who do not share our views.

We were saddened to hear HGTV’s decision. With all of the grotesque things that can be seen and heard on television today you would think there would be room for two twin brothers who are faithful to our families, committed to biblical principles, and dedicated professionals. If our faith costs us a television show then so be it.

– David & Jason Benham

I used to say, after things like this, that it’s hard to believe it’s happening in this country.

I don’t say that anymore.

This sort of thing is becoming the norm.  A little faster than I originally thought.

Carry on.

Virgin Birth – the product of Kriyashakthi

UPDATE

The long excerpt I posted below, supposedly about a woman who had the experience of virgin birth, is intended to bolster my argument that such things have been recorded throughout history and that religious texts outside Christianity have described them.

However, I don’t subscribe to the author’s eco-feminism and gnosticism.  I should add that I’ve noticed not a few blogs recently that are essentially Gnostic, not Christian,  advocating radical celibacy. They might have been around all along, of course.

There is a strong radical celibacy movement that derides human sexuality, originating from Putin’s Russia (more on that later).

Caveat lector, as always.

ORIGINAL POST

The Virgin birth is the central mystery of Christianity, inseparable from the Cross and the Resurrection.

Nor -in a more generic form –  is it unique to Christianity.

From the pregnancy of Kunti with Karna (in Hinduism) to the birth of the Buddha from Maya, virgin birth has been described and sanctified across cultures.

Moreover, any study of yoga will tell you that such a thing is not an impossibility, within the frame of reference of yoga.

Shakti (energy) creates spontaneously, when the attention is powerful.

That observation is the basis for the popular “Law of Attraction” but it is a foundation of Hindu belief, finding its confirmation in Christian doctrine. On the other hand, Incarnation is denied both in Islam and  some forms of Judaism.

HInduism  affirms both incarnation (avatar) and the Trinity (the law of three – creation, preservation, and destruction).

One reason I came to Hinduism spontaneously while quite young and while in a thoroughly Christian atmosphere was my experience of Kriyashakthi, which until then I thought was my personal secret.

I experienced spontaneous precognitive experiences, as well as experiences of repeated synchronicity and “attraction,” which made me doubt the “scientism” around me.

The explanation for these experiences I found only in yoga texts, which is what drew me to a syncretist Hindu-Christian belief I retain to this day.

It was in Hinduism that I found the teaching that let me understand and accept the doctrines of Christianity unproblematically and without the sterile speculations of modern deist and atheist Christians like Tillich and Kung.

This understanding differs from the mainstream teachings of both Judaism and Judaism’s cousin, Islam.

More below about Kriyashakthi and Virgin Birth (I don’t subscribe to the blogger’s feminist theories):

“In the early 70’s I read and wrote a review for a book about the Ojibwa or Chippewa people. (Sorry, I can’t remember the title.) The author spent a decade re-searching oral stories from the Ojibwa’s old traditional speakers that existed before the coming of the Whiteman. One story was that wise-women of the tribe looked for certain young maidens that possessed grace, intelligence and compassion. Sometimes a candidate for conceiving and giving birth this way wouldn’t show up for a generation or two. Nevertheless, these wise-women kept an eagle-eye open for her. When found, men were not allowed to court her. When she reached the age of fertility, her first period, she was instructed to fast for several days and, if willing, was required to dance around a fire in a sacred women’s lodge built far away from the village. This ceremony occurred while she was ovulating. Ideally a state of bliss or ecstasy was reached during which, according to hidden wise women knowledge, it would be possible for her to conceive and give birth in the “old Way”. They also knew that a child born this way would be blessed with gifts of healing, clairvoyance or leadership. The Great Spirit would give to the child whatever tools the tribe might be in need of. I believe this is what happened among The Essenes along The Dead Sea over 2,000 years ago. Jesus was the result. It’s my guess that they planned it. Also, I might venture to say that this “old way” of conceiving and giving birth was considered a no-no during a time when patriarchy was firmly established. Was this why King Herod felt so threatened, enough to try and have all the new born males put to death in his kingdom?

It’s assumed that the law of parthenogenesis results in the birth of females only. This has been shown to occur in animal, insect and microscopic species but it may operate differently among humans, for there is a visionary power us humans possess. The Sanskrit term for it is Kriyashakti or, in short, Shakti; the mysterious power of thought which enables us to produce external, perceptible, phenomenal results by its own inherent energy. Any idea will manifest itself externally if one’s attention is deeply concentrated. If a woman envisions a boy it’s quite possible she will give birth to one. “In the Mother Cell begins all living things. The Creative Principle is feminine. The highest divine mystery is Brahamana, the feminine of Brahma.” (according to Hindu mythology) If I haven’t scared the reader off by dipping into religious lore, one might ask the biological reason for the presence of the hymen in women. I believe only one species of whale has a hymen but it is to keep sea-water out. Among us humans the hymen remains a “medical mystery”. Some folks think it’s there merely as fodder for comedians. Is it there because Nature, the great conservative, has a higher form of conception and birth in mind for women? One might also inquire about dermoid cysts—-or certain types of them.

Looking up dermoid cysts in Chambers Medical Dictionary, under Medio-logical Records, one finds; “dermoid cystic growths; embryonic growths or tumor-like formations found in women which are of congenital origin, containing evidence of being dejecta membra, or the remains of pregnant growths, in the embryonic fetal period of gestation, somewhat akin to the primary state of being with child.” Some of these dermoid cysts, sometimes mistaken by surgeons for tumors, but really are embryos, are similar in all respects to the products of female gestation, containing bones, hair, teeth, flesh, glands, portions of the scalp, face, eyes, ribs,—–in short, all the organs of the human body—what else could they be but virgin embryos in the process of development? The following is from a recent news item (as of Oct.’09) : A dermoid cyst, also known as benign cystic teratoma, which develops “from germ cells which are primitive cells that are capable of producing eggs and all human tissues,” Dr. Judith Reichman says on MSNBC’s Web site, www.msnbc.msn.com. “A dermoid cyst is formed if the germ cells multiply bizarrely without fertilization, forming an encapsulated tumor that contains hair, sebaceous or oil materials, cartilage, bone, neural tissue and teeth.”
In a lecture delivered before the New York Academy of Medicine in 1933, on “Immaculate Conception—a Scientific Possibility”, Dr. Walter Timme, eminent endocrinologist, presented evidence to prove that Immaculate Conception is physiologically possible. The parovarium of the female reproductive organs, he claims, in some cases can produce living spermatozoa capable of impregnating eggs in the same body, causing them to develop without male fertilization.
They’ve been known to appear in young girls from 8 to 16 that have their hymens intact. Unbeknownst to them, one of their eggs had parthenogenetically been fertilized and then had stopped developing and, typically getting trapped in their fallopian tube, had to be removed, as the failed embryo had become toxic. There is reason to believe that parthenogenesis was the primordial form of re-production for all life, while sexual generation (epigenesist) arose later as a result of inferior environmental and nutritive conditions resulting in diminished fertility. In other words, males develop in order to insure the survival of the species. [Lila You could also say that sex developed after the Fall, which created an “inferior environmental and nutritive condition….”]

Anthropoid apes, our closest biological cousins, have a monthly period while in captivity and on a artificial diet.

[Lila: By restricting the diet, for instance, menstruation can be controlled.]

“When returned to their natural habitat and diet they will bleed in the Spring and Fall like most mammals. Back in 1969 I used to live at Hippocrates Health Institute, in Boston, where everyone drank wheatgrass juice, ate raw sprouts, fruits, nuts and vegetables and nothing else. That means, no bread, grains, meats, or dairy products. The root philosophy at Hippocrates is that “Life Comes Only From Life”. After a month or two on this living food diet some women would have their periods lessen in the amount of blood-loss; and the overall discomfort and cramps they usually experience practically vanished. One woman in particular, who I got to know as a sister, lost her period completely and enjoyed total health. I also met several women who experienced extended fasts of one month or more. They had no periods as well. It’s also quite common that many women athletes lose their periods. Non-menstruating women, providing they are on a (super)-natural diet, faithfully practicing yoga or getting lots of vigorous exercise, like women athletes, enjoy a superior, overall health with a robust vitality. They’re able to re-absorb vitamins, minerals and hormones otherwise lost during menstruation. I should say that women on a normal, civilized diet should have their period. This is nature’s way of cleaning house. We can’t all be raw-fooders. Frankly, most of us can’t even imagine wanting to be a super-natural-health-nut. I do not encourage going in this raw-food direction unless one truly studies the subject in depth with experienced teachers. A commitment to this lifestyle is taxing—-at least until one eliminates the accumulations of a toxic, civilized diet. There are artistic depictions of Mary standing on the Crescent Moon. Did our ancestors know that women had to rise above the moon (menstruation) in order to immaculately conceive? Indeed it seems obvious, from what we’ve observed thus far, that a clean, living food diet is necessary for eliminating wasteful monthly menstruation and is the foundation for the process of parthenogenesis. Part of the condition required for a virgin birth is alkalinity. A proper raw-food diet alkalizes the blood. In a way we are like alkaline batteries—80% alkaline, 20% acid—which allows us to hold our life-force completely. If this balance is upset, as in a “civilized” diet, the life-force fails to fill the body and illness results.

It’s obvious that the human race is over-sexed. The earth has amassed way too many bodies that don’t know how to get along with each other and are straining the earth’s resources.

[Lila: Here the author’s eco-feminism is unnecessarily tacked on.]

This is old news. But sex is beautiful and deemed necessary by almost everyone I know. I’m the last person to say it is wrong or evil. Still, 50% of marriages end in divorce. Think of rape, disease, un-planned pregnancies, over-population and the endless battle of the sexes. Oh well, we must pay the fiddler for our modern lifestyles. I do. In almost every culture on earth and in almost every major religion stories of The Virgin Birth abide. The following is an old Fijian legend: “There was a great chief in Tonga who had an exceedingly beautiful daughter. He hid her from the eyes of men, for he had never seen one worthy to be her husband. Down on the sea-beach he built a fence, thick, strong and high. Here she used to bathe after which it was her custom to lie down for a time upon the clean white sand within the fence, that she might rest a while, and that her body might dry. So it came to pass that the Sun looked down upon her, and saw her and loved her; and in the course of time a child was born to her, whose name she called Sun-child”.

My uplifting video about murdering a disabled man

A commenter at AngryWhiteDude gets it:

“I’m thinking of posting a video I made of me beating a disabled man to death!

I want to help assaulters everywhere release their guilt by showing how happy punching that guy made me!

It was almost as satisfying as defending another person’s life would be!

As I beat him, I hummed along with a smile on my face, it was so much fun, releasing all that pent up rage and putting him out of his misery!

After all, it IS better to be dead then disabled! I’m sure his wife, children, and grandchildren all thank me, and believe it would have been better for him to be aborted then to have to go through DECADES of life with a disability.

Every time I watch the video, I love it. I love how positive it is. I feel that there are just no positive assault stories on video for everyone to see. But mine is. I even took a picture of him before I killed him, it’s my MOST cherished possession! I’m hoping this will inspire assaulters everywhere to never show remorse! After all, it’s your body, and you can do whatever you want with it! No remorse, no repercussions, no restraint!”

Men obsolete? Science proves parthenogenesis…

So, now it seems that a virgin could indeed bear child, which all these years was taken as a sign of the insanity of religious belief. Perhaps what we call mythology is simply science ahead of its time:

Daily Mail:

“Fertility specialists have found a way for women to have babies without men.
It involves a cocktail of chemicals acting as an ‘artificial sperm’
to trick a human egg into forming an embryo.

The stunning discovery has alarmed medical ethics campaigners, who described it as turning nature on its head. Researchers say the groundbreaking technology could be used to help women whose husbands are infertile but who do not want to use donor sperm.

Any babies born from the process would be female and genetically identical to their mother.

The news also creates a legal minefield for UK authorities which govern fertility treatments, because British laws do not cover the creation of an embryo without sperm.  The discovery was made by researchers from the Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Genetics in Los Angeles.

They were investigating new ways of genetically modifying embryos to grow into brain nerve cells, in order to give transplants to patients with Parkinson’s Disease. Their experiments with mice triggered a form of asexual reproduction called parthenogenisis, which until now has happened only in creatures such as insects and frogs.

In normal human reproduction, an egg carrying 23 pairs of chromosomes, the building blocks of life, is fertilised by a sperm, which also carries 23 sets.

This crucial binding, creating 46 pairs of chromosomes, opens the way for cell division, the very beginning of human life.

But researchers Dr Jerry Hall and Dr Yan-Ling Feng managed to make eggs duplicate their own chromosomes to create the number needed to start cell division.

Several embryos were transferred to mouse ‘foster mothers’ where they developed successfully before being destroyed after 13 days.

Though the process has yet to be tested on human eggs, studies have already shown that they behave in a similar way to those of mice. The findings are due to be unveiled today at the annual meeting of the respected American Society of Reproductive Medicine in Florida.

They have been hailed as a new way of producing different kinds of cells for medical use.

Dr Michael Soules, president of the ASRM, said: ‘If this works with human eggs, there could be tremendous opportunities for clinical applications. I think everyone is going to find this work to be very exciting.’

But Dr Jacqueline Laing, expert in medical ethics from London’s Guild Hall University, said last night: ‘This is alarming. Just because scientists can do something, it does not mean that they should.

‘This process does not respect human life, in seeking either to procreate without the male or to use human eggs to turn them into some other part of the body for transplants.

‘It doesn’t respect reproduction and ordinary relations between men and women and the natural functions we have to protect human beings from arbitary creation. What are we expecting that any children born of this process will feel? If we go down this avenue, what else will be permissible?’

Paul Tully, of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said: ‘Parthenogenisis is akin to cloning in a sense. It is the way lower orders of animals such as frogs and insects are able to reproduce.

‘It is entirely unknown for this to happen in humans and this is a very disturbing discovery. Apart from the ethical concerns of what was happening to these embryos without their consent, it could mean that, theoretically, it would be possible to eradicate men.’

He added: ‘What we are seeing here is the technological imperative – they are doing it just because they can. Is society going to curb this or are we going to see even more outlandish discoveries?

‘My fear is that, as with cloning, there will be horrific developmental abnormalities and accelerated ageing of these embryos. One dreads to think what they may suffer in the name of science.’
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which governs IVF research in Britain, said a new law on parthenogenic embryos may be needed.
A spokesman said: ‘The view would probably be that no research could be carried out without permission and it certainly would not be licensed for clinical use unless it was proven safe and there were no ethical concerns.’

Taken to its extreme, it could lead to the science fiction nightmare of a female-dominated society where men have little or no role.

Comment:

Yes, that last line comes with no irony alert at all.  As for creating laws to stop technology, good luck with that.

Irish pro-abort laws built on lies, like US pro-abort laws

Catholic Culture exposes the lies behind the media campaign to expand Ireland’s abortion laws, a replay of earlier fraudulent campaigns to institute legal abortion, campaigns against which the plaintiffs in the two landmark American cases later turned:

“In Ireland, as in the US, the legalization of abortion was accomplished by means of falsehoods. Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, was not raped, as she originally claimed. Sandra Cano, the named plaintiff in the companion Doe v. Bolton case, never even sought an abortion. Both women testify that they were manipulated by their lawyers. “Not only did I lie, but I was lied to,” McCorvey has stated.

In Ireland the event that triggered an avalanche of pro-abortion propaganda was the death of Savita Halappanavar. She died of septicemia, which her doctors did not detect in time. There is no record that she requested an abortion, let alone that doctors declined that request. If an abortion had been necessary in order to save her life, doctors could have performed it legally under existing Irish law. Nevertheless her death became the rallying-point for a massive campaign to end Ireland’s ban on abortion.

Writing in the Irish Independent, the perceptive David Quinn underlines the importance of this case:

A few days ago Justice Minister Alan Shatter perpetuated the myth. He said that Savita might well have been saved had the law been like the one they are about to pass.

But I would like to know what law would have caused Savita’s medical team to spot the signs of sepsis on time?For months Quinn and other pro-life voices in Ireland have been begging the media to publicize the facts of the Halappanavar case. To no avail. The myth—that she died because of restrictions on abortion—has prevailed, and strengthened support for the new law allowing abortion in cases when the mother’s life is in danger.

But, you might ask, didn’t Ireland’s laws already allow abortion if the mother’s life was in danger? Yes. There, too, the myth has prevailed over the facts. However the new law expands access to abortion by specifying that if a woman threatens suicide, her life is in danger. This policy invites abuse; it opens the way to legal abortion for any woman willing to claim that she is suicidal.

And by the way, if a woman really is suicidal, is there any evidence at all that abortion will be an appropriate medical intervention? Common sense suggests that the sudden and unnatural termination of a pregnancy—with the physical and psychological stress, the feelings of guilt and of separation, the disruption of bodily functions—would put additional burdens on a woman already in emotional distress. Many studies have shown a link between abortion and subsequent depression. True, proponents of abortion deny the validity of those studies. But here, without any supporting evidence, they make the far more ambitious claim that abortion is a cure for psychological problems!

As Ireland’s legislators moved toward the vote that would legalize abortion, journalists reported that the country’s Catholic bishops had threatened to excommunicate politicians who supported the bill. No such threat has been issued; that story, too, is simply false.

Still there were a few “excommunications” in this story line, as Quinn points out. Prime Minister Enda Kenny announced that he would not tolerate opposition to the abortion bill among his colleagues in the Fine Gael party. Lawmakers who opposed the bill were ousted from the party; a junior government minister, Lucinda Creighton, resigned her post to join the opposition.

So it was Kenny, not the Catholic bishops, who issued heavy-handed threats; it was Kenny who took reprisals against lawmakers who followed their consciences. Just a few years earlier, as a political candidate, Kenny had promised that his government would not legalize abortion in Ireland: one more in a long series of falsehoods.”

Why the left loves Twitter

James Delingpole distinguishes between being controversial because you have insight and truth on your side and being obnoxious because you’re more willing to call people foul names:

“But surely someone like James Delingpole, someone who writes so contentiously, ought to delight in a bit of Twitter argy-­bargy — no? It’s what lots of people assume. But the reason what I write is so provocative is not because I’ve set out to annoy as many people as possible. It’s provocative only because it fails to coincide with what Dr Johnson called ‘the Clamour of the Times’.

Which is to say that, as it says at the top of my Twitter account, I’m right about everything. My problem — shared with almost every other halfway decent libertarian/conservative commentator — is that most people are incapable of appreciating I’m right because their Weltanschauung has been so warped by the post-war, cultural Marxist consensus.

And with people like that there’s really no point arguing. Especially not in 140 characters, as I learned to my cost early on. Some minor comedian, a chap I’d never heard of before but who had accidentally become my Twitter friend, tweeted me to ask what it was that had first led me to doubt man-made global warming. This requires more than a sentence, but I did my best: ‘I guess I’ve always been quite good at sniffing out cant.’

Next thing I knew, what I thought had been a private reply had been incorporated into his stand-up set. It turned out that this comedian was an ardent believer in the AGW religion, as were his audience. So he worked up this routine where he imagined Newton basing his discoveries on his sense of smell. Sniffing, get it? Apparently it has them all in stitches every time.

Last week, I had more local difficulty over some new research from a Berkeley professor purportedly showing that the ‘sceptics’ are wrong and that the evidence for ‘global warming’ is stronger than ever. Actually it showed nothing of the kind. But again, there is not a plausible counterargument you can express in the space of 140 characters. That’s why anyone who goadingly tweeted me in the expectation that there was was rewarded with an instant block.

It’s not that I can’t fight my corner. I can and I very much enjoy doing so — but only on the terrain of my choosing. That terrain is usually an article or a blog where there is proper space to develop an argument, supported with evidence. Try to do the same on Twitter and all you achieve is to sound petulant, defensive, desperate: you can assert all you like but why should anyone believe what you’re saying is true?

This also, I think, goes some way towards explaining Twitter’s pronounced left-wing bias. As Rush Limbaugh and others have noted, the left doesn’t much like to engage in rational, fact-based arguments it knows it’s going to lose. That’s why it’s always so much more comfortable in the realm of the emotive slogan, the glib one-liner, the cheap shot, the ad hominem. Twitter is the ideal medium for all this, in a way that wordier parts of the internet just aren’t. The blog, for example, vastly favours the right because there’s so much more space for all that stuff that ­liberal-lefties so loathe and fear, such as logic and evidence and cross-references.”

The insanity of public debate in America

Consider the following,:

1. A woman has the absolute right to kill her baby until the moment it exits her uterus. She can also dismember it and torture it by burning it with saline fluid, plucking off its limbs, crushing its bones, or sucking its brains out.

These actions are guarded ferociously as her “right to privacy” by the entire intellectual establishment that silently blacks out or distorts descriptions of these killings. Some 50 million babies have been killed in the past few decades but this holocaust is left to private conscience only. Women or their doctors are not punished for it at all. In fact, they’re applauded and public funding is used to pay for it, even while that part of the public that doesn’t go along with abortion is demonized.

2. An eighty-year-old man makes a few untoward remarks to a girlfriend in the privacy of their bedroom. The tapes are recorded. and published. He is denounced as a disgusting racist with no right to his opinions and he is deprived of his property rights.

Leading “libertarian” activists  say nothing or defend the media’s position. They tell people they ought not to say anything in private they can’t say in public.  This is a thought-control much greater than that under Sharia law, which all these activists would denounce, correctly. None of them sees the contradiction.

No one thinks of simply ignoring and not linking the Sterling material. Instead, they all follow the media’s cue automatically, as though pulled by invisible strings. Then they call themselves “fiercely independent” and talk about “freedom,:” “free speech,” “free choice,” “self-ownership” and other flattering mythologies with a straight face.

Meanwhile, so-called “evil statists” are the only ones arguing that the the recordings are on their face illegal and should not be distributed in the public realm.

The parameters of debate in the much-vaunted “free press” are set by media barons who profit from cheap gossip and extortion (which lowers the cost of running a paper, since the public does the reporting for free or for small sums), pornographers, and paid operatives of the government posing as private actors.

No one considers this a gross conflict of interest. The media barons are presumed not to have political agendas and presumed not to manipulate in collusion.

Nor is this manipulation termed what it is – an extension of the state into the private sphere. It is all deemed “free market” unproblematically.

3. The same people attack anyone who criticizes a paid porn performer for her consciously public acts. They argue that she has a right to privacy even though she sold her porn pictures to a public company voluntarily.

I actually agree with that argument, but those who deny a Donald Sterling his privacy can surely have no justification for giving a Belle Knox hers.

With equal confusion, recording the private sexual behavior of Tyler Clementi (the gay Rutgers freshman who committed suicide)  is a vicious assault on his privacy and dignity (it is), but recording the speech of a Donald Sterling is a righteous act of public policing (it is not).

4. The same people who attack Donald Sterling’s private speech and hold it to an arbitrarily decided public standard also denounce theocracy (with its logically entailed blasphemy laws) as an insupportable and “medieval” intrusion into free speech and thought. And they declare themselves the embodiment of “reason” against the “irrationality” of the religious.

5. The same critics of Sterling who believe it is legitimate for him to lose his livelihood over private speech within his bedroom have a fit over the most minor constraint placed on their right to use speech in public to degrade, inflame, incite, defraud, mislead, or titillate. They even object to any constraint placed on their right to disseminate for commercial profit the vilest images, even where they would be accessible by minors.

They defend their right to view violent child pornography, even though that right supplies the demand that drives a global market of child abuse and murder and though the act of viewing itself has been deemed criminal.

But while the act of viewing child-porn is criminal, the act of dismembering a child is deemed “private” and protected.

The left also defends without any nuance or moderation the right to publish “art”  that inflames the public, even where major violence could result  as in the Danish cartoons of Mohammed, which, as it turns out, were a deliberate provocation from a neo-con flack.